The House

Committee Budgets

By a 280-117 vote, the House authorized a $47.9-million budget (H Res 108) for some of its committee operations in 1987. This is an increase of nearly $4 million, or 9%, over the same authorization for 1986.

The $47.9 million will fund about half of the cost of the 27 House committees this year. This “investigations and studies” budget covers travel, consultants, investigations and miscellany, as well as salaries for nearly half of the approximately 2,000 committee employes.

Supporter William M. Thomas (R-Bakersfield) said the House has done “a remarkable job of trying to hold the line” in 1987 committee spending.

Opponent Robert S. Walker (R-Pa.) said it will take “about 1,300 American working families paying every dime in taxes” to raise the $4 million in additional committee spending.

Members voting yes wanted to spend 9% more this year on certain House committee operations.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Beilenson (D) x Rep. Berman (D) x Rep. Dixon (D) x Rep. Levine (D) x Rep. Waxman (D) x

Committee Freeze

By a 127-268 vote, the House rejected an attempt to freeze the 1987 authorization for certain committee operations at the 1986 level of $44 million. This occurred as the House debated a measure (H Res 108; above) setting its committee “investigations and expenditures” budget at nearly $48 million, up 9% over 1986. The vote was on a motion to send the budget back to the Administration Committee for trimming.

Freeze supporter Joel Hefley (R-Colo.) said it was wrong for the House to increase its committee spending by more than twice the rate of inflation.

Opponent Dan Rostenkowski (D-Ill.) said the resolution “strikes the proper balance” between fiscal restraint and meeting committee needs.

Members voting yes favored a committee spending freeze.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Beilenson (D) x Rep. Berman (D) x Rep. Dixon (D) x Rep. Levine (D) x Rep. Waxman (D) x

65-M.P.H. Speed Limit

The House voted 217-206 to enable states to raise the speed limit on rural interstates from 55 m.p.h. to 65 m.p.h. The resolution (H Con Res 77) was sent to the Senate. Although it potentially could legalize 65-m.p.h. driving on three-fourths of the 42,500-mile interstate system, its impact is uncertain because many states would retain the 55 m.p.h. limit.

Supporter Richard H. Stallings (D-Idaho) called the 55-m.p.h. mandate “an unnecessary and unreasonable intrusion into states’ rights.”

Opponent William Lehman (D-Fla.) said backing the faster speed “is like casting a vote in favor of crashing one or two Boeing 747’s every year.”

Members voting yes wanted states to be able to permit 65-m.p.h. driving.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Beilenson (D) x Rep. Berman (D) x Rep. Dixon (D) x Rep. Levine (D) x Rep. Waxman (D) x