GOP Hollers at Plan to Limit House Speeches : Politics: Rep. Dornan and others predict parliamentary war if Democrats try to curb late-night addresses, a C-SPAN staple.

Orange County Republicans are fuming over a plan by House Democrats to cut short the lengthy, late-night floor speeches, televised on C-SPAN, that have become popular with Rep. Robert K. Dornan (R-Garden Grove) and others as tools to savage political opponents.

The dispute over so-called “special order” speeches is shaping up as a potentially bitter confrontation between the House’s Democratic leaders, flush with their party’s presidential victory, and minority Republicans who can no longer count on White House support in their battles on Capitol Hill.

In a blistering letter written last week, House Minority Leader Robert H. Michel (R-Ill.) said the plan to limit the after-hours speeches “represents an outrageous attempt to suppress the voice of the Minority Party.” Democrats outnumber Republicans in the House 258-176.

House Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.), to whom Michel addressed the letter, has not yet responded. But in a televised interview, Foley said, “We ought to maintain (special orders); it’s an important tool of communication . . . but there needs to be some limits.”

In an interview, Michel suggested that the change in administrations prompted the Democrats’ action. “Now that the shoe is on the other foot, they want to have as little dissent as they can,” Michel said.

The criticism was echoed by other House Republicans, including Dornan, who predicted parliamentary warfare if the Democrats carry out their plan.

“We’ve heard the Democrats use the term ‘gag rule’ referring to . . . abortion clinics,” Dornan said. “This truly is a much fairer application of the term. They want to muzzle and censor the loyal opposition.”

If Democrats impose the restrictions, Dornan added, “believe me, we’ll begin every day with a preferential motion to adjourn,” which would consume considerable time. “Tom Foley will truly be impressed with the imaginative powers of the minority.”

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Huntington Beach) said the Democrats’ plan shows only that “the arrogance of power is beginning to shine through. . . . If they pass this rule, they’ll have to live with the image of being bullies, as well as Democrats.”

The popularity of special-order speechmaking has grown steadily since 1979, when the Cable Satellite Public Affairs Network, known more commonly as C-SPAN, began broadcasting House proceedings to cable television viewers across the country. Nearly 60 million households now have access to the programming.

As long as there is a still a member standing on the floor, C-SPAN will carry his or her remarks, said network senior vice president Susan Swain. “We made a commitment way back when that we would just carry the House without making any decision about what (proceedings) are more newsworthy than others,” she said.

According to a study conducted by Stephen E. Frantzich, a professor of political science at the U.S. Naval Academy, the number of special orders in the House more than doubled after the introduction of the television cameras.

House Democrats contend that Dornan and other Republicans have abused the speech-making privilege by making wild charges, often picked up the next day by newspapers or network news programs, in the early hours of the morning when few members are present to challenge the accusations.

“There is clearly a . . . demagogic quality to this,” said one senior Democratic aide, who asked not to be named. “Members are protected in what they say in debate on the House floor. It can lead to pretty intemperate, if not irresponsible, language. . . . If you limited the time, then you might get people from both sides of the aisle who are prepared to stick around” and answer whatever charges are made.

The restrictions would apply equally to Democrats, the aide noted, including maverick Rep. Henry B. Gonzalez of Texas, who often makes use of the special-order format.

But another Democratic aide, who also demanded anonymity, said Republicans see the late-night speeches “as their forum. They have captured the C-SPAN crowd. They see this as their way to communicate. That’s what it’s all about.”

Several Democrats said all-night speech-making sessions in an empty House chamber unnecessarily burden the taxpayers. According to the House clerk’s office, the principal cost of extending House hours does not involve overtime pay for House staff members, who are on salary. Instead, the added expense is the approximately $500 a page that it costs to memorialize the often long-winded speeches in the next day’s Congressional Record.

A Sept. 23 Dornan speech, in which he attacked then-candidate Bill Clinton’s character, filled slightly more than three pages.

Special orders are a tradition in the House. Under rules, a member of either party can request up to an hour to speak on any subject at the close of legislative business.

For instance, if five members of each party request special order time on a given day, the House could stay in session for as long as 10 additional hours, until all have completed their remarks. The only limit is the time set for the House to convene the next day.

According to top congressional aides, Democrats are looking at several plans to restrict late-night speeches.

Under one being considered by a Democratic Caucus study committee, special orders would be limited to three hours each day--1 1/2 hours for each party. A second plan would cut off special orders at a prescribed time, perhaps 10 or 11 p.m., regardless of when the House concludes its regular business.

The Democratic Caucus is to meet next month to consider the rules that will govern the 103rd Congress. Officially, they must be adopted by the entire House after it convenes Jan. 3. But the Democrats’ lopsided majority ensures that rules they endorse will be the rules that govern the House.

Members have learned that a late-night speech to an empty House chamber can still catapult them into the news, even if reporters are not there to cover the speech. A prime example was the series of lengthy, late-night attacks on Clinton mounted last summer by Dornan and Reps. Randy (Duke) Cunningham (R-San Diego), Duncan Hunter (R-Coronado) and Sam Johnson (R-Tex.).

Their speeches prompted C-SPAN viewers to deluge news organizations with telephone calls, and ultimately resulted in a White House meeting between the congressmen and President Bush, whose campaign for a time appropriated the attack strategy.