Beilenson Launches Salvo at House’s 1-Minute Speeches

The House of Representatives begins every business day on a solemn note: House Chaplain James David Ford steps to the head of the august chamber and, head bowed, delivers an opening prayer.

“At the beginning of each day we give thanks to you, O God, for all the gifts and blessings and hopes that we receive,” he said one recent morning.

From there, the verbiage from the podium often goes downhill fast. Democrats and Republicans are given one minute each to speak their minds unfettered by the tight constraints of congressional courtesy.

In these “one minutes,” as they are known, lawmakers frequently launch rhetorical bombs and lash out at colleagues they will address as “gentleman” and “gentlewoman” later in the day.

Rep. Anthony C. Beilenson (D-Woodland Hills) has had enough of the early morning tirades. He says all the high-voltage rhetoric makes him sick and embarrasses the entire institution.

Although Beilenson is leaving the House at year’s end, he is pushing to move the one-minute speeches to the close of the day, a simple change that he says would do much to improve the atmosphere of debates long after he is gone.

Congressional representatives already have an opportunity to deliver evening speeches for up to an hour. But the House frequently finishes its business late in the evening or in the wee hours of the morning, leaving those night owl speakers to address an empty chamber and whatever C-SPAN viewers are still tuned in.

Beilenson, known for his scholarly demeanor, says he does not recall ever delivering a one-minute address during his 10 terms in the House. He acknowledges that many of his colleagues who do take the microphone use the addresses for benign purposes, such as announcing the introduction of a bill or praising a hometown football team that has won a championship.

Many, however, come out swinging with their tongues.

“Increasingly, these brief speeches have become a series of sound-bite assaults often prepared not by members themselves, but by Republican and Democratic political staff who have found this format to be highly conducive to the kind of attacks that used to be reserved for campaign commercials,” Beilenson wrote in a letter to House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.).

The one-minute speeches range from the silly to the serious, the amusing to the angry. Lawmakers have recited poetry, sung songs and engaged in discourse with only the most tenuous link to legislative business.

One day last week, Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) used his minute to praise the recently retired F-111 aircraft, which set a record for the longest low-level supersonic flight. Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) recalled a neighbor who died in the crash of TWA Flight 800. Rep. Nita M. Lowey (D-N.Y.) spent 60 seconds accusing the GOP leadership of following the orders of the National Rifle Assn. in not immediately strengthening the anti-terrorism law.

Other topics over the years: One congressman suggested the minimum age for service in the House be lowered from 25 to 15 years to “get America’s kids out of the home and into the House.” Lawmakers have praised constituents for winning honors ranging from Miss America to “truck driver of the year.” Former California Rep. William E. Dannemeyer recited a poem on offshore oil drilling that he titled “Oil’s well that ends well.”

It is the personal attacks, however, that cause Beilenson’s blood to boil.

“The behavior on display during the one-minutes stands in stark contrast to the very decent demeanor that is in evidence when we actually engage in legislative work,” Beilenson wrote in his request to Gingrich.

“Once we get down to business, we usually speak reasonably and treat each other with respect, portraying to the C-SPAN audience a legislative body composed of thoughtful, intelligent people who are able to debate issues and express disagreement in a dignified and polite manner.”

Beilenson’s proposal has already won over some colleagues. Rep.Bill Archer (R-Texas), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, signed onto the letter as a coauthor. And so far, 44 others, including Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Panorama City), have supported the scheduling change.

Although Gingrich himself has not yet responded, there are many who contend that the one-minute speeches, hard-edged or not, serve an important purpose in the morning.

“What are we going to do, shut off debate?” Rep. Pat Schroeder (D-Colo.), a regular at the podium, told a reporter from Roll Call, the Capitol Hill weekly. “I just don’t understand. C-SPAN viewers are probably the most sophisticated in the country. . . . To say we have to cut off debate to protect C-SPAN viewers from 10 to 20 minutes of free speech in the beginning of the day is ridiculous.”