OFFICIALS LEGISLATION INTEREST GROUPS PUBLIC STATEMENTS COMMITTEES VETOES

Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 2892, Financial Services And General Government Appropriations Act, 2008

Floor Speech

Date: June 27, 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Issues: National Security


PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2829, FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008 -- (House of Representatives - June 27, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my fellow Members to oppose the previous question, and I welcome my colleague from Nebraska. It has been a lonely exercise for me the last few years, and I am glad to have someone else join me on the floor and make this request, because I do think having some transparency and having accountability and having an up-or-down vote on the COLA makes a lot of sense.

These are difficult times in our Nation. We are fighting terrorism on so many fronts, our economy faces some challenges, and our future budget deficits continues to be projected in the future at great levels.

So I don't think this is the right time for Members of Congress to be allowing a pay raise to go through without even an up-or-down vote. We need to show the American people we are willing to make some sacrifices. We need to budget and live within our means and make careful spending decisions based on our most pressing priorities.

So, Mr. Speaker, let us send a signal to the American people that we recognize there is a struggle today for some in today's economy. Vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can have an opportunity to block the automatic cost-of-living adjustment to Members of Congress. Regardless of how Members feel about this issue, they should all be willing to make their position public and on the record. A ``no'' vote will allow Members to vote up or down on the COLA.

If the previous question is defeated, I also would intend to offer an amendment to the rule, and my amendment would block the fiscal year 2008 automatic cost-of-living pay raise for Members of Congress. Because this amendment requires a waiver, the only way to get to this issue is to defeat the previous question. So therefore I urge Members to vote no on the previous question.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT


Source
arrow_upward