Advertisement

Roll Call

The House : Daylight-Saving Time

November 03, 1985

A bill (HR 2095) adding five weeks to Daylight-Saving Time was passed by the House and sent to the Senate on a vote of 240 for and 157 against. Daylight time would begin four weeks earlier, on the first Sunday in April, and end one week later, on the first Sunday in November. Supporter Edward Markey (D-Mass.) said this would save energy, cut crime, spur commerce, reduce highway deaths, benefit persons afflicted with night blindness, and make "trick or treating . . . a little safer for children."

Opponent Harold Rogers (R-Ky.) said that to shorten morning daylight hours would cause hardship for farmers doing their chores and prove hazardous to rural children who "will be forced to walk to the school bus in the dark."

Members voting yes wanted to extend Daylight-Saving Time by five weeks.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Anderson (D) x Rep. Dornan (R) x Rep. Dreier (R) x Rep. Dymally (D) x Rep. Hawkins (D) x Rep. Martinez (D) x Rep. Torres (D) x

Budget Reconciliation

By a vote of 228 for and 199 against, the House passed and sent to conference with the Senate a "budget reconciliation" bill (HR 3500) putting into effect some of the massive deficit reduction that Congress promised when it adopted the fiscal 1986-88 budget resolution last August.

Under the August resolution, projected deficit spending is to be lowered by $276 billion between 1986 and 1988, leaving $438 billion or more in projected new debt to be incurred during the three years.

By changing existing law in a host of federal programs, this sweeping reconciliation bill accounts for $61.1 billion of the $276 billion in estimated savings. Most of the remaining cuts are to be achieved during the normal authorization and appropriations process.

Among the bill's most visible cuts are those affecting revenue sharing, federal civilian pay levels, and certain veterans, housing, small business and student loan programs.

Slightly offsetting the deep cuts in HR 3500 were a few programs requiring increased spending. Among them were a renewal of the basic federal housing program and pay raises for members of Congress.

House members and senators, who now earn $75,100, would get two annual raises of 5% under the bill, pushing their pay above $82,000, according to Robert Walker (R-Pa.).

Members voting yes wanted to enact the budget reconciliation bill.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Anderson (D) x Rep. Dornan (R) x Rep. Dreier (R) x Rep. Dymally (D) x Rep. Hawkins (D) x Rep. Martinez (D) x Rep. Torres (D) x

GOP Amendment Rejected

The House rejected a Republican amendment to rid the reconciliation bill (above) of $3.5 billion in spending increases, primarily for new federal programs dealing with housing, the homeless and child care. The vote was 209 for and 219 against.

Even with its smattering of new programs and spending hikes, the bill meets the deficit-reduction requirements of the fiscal 1986-88 budget resolution. But supporters of the amendment said it was wrong to use such a vehicle to authorize additional spending.

Sponsor Delbert Latta (R-Ohio) said, "We're concerned with reducing the deficit by $3.5 billion. Vote against the Latta amendment and you're saying, 'I want to go $3.5 billion further in the red. That's the question.' "

Opponent Jim Wright (D-Tex.) said the purpose of the amendment is "to second-guess the committees of the House . . . and substitute the judgment of one individual for the judgment of the committees that have been appointed to make these individual choices."

Members voting yes supported the amendment.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Anderson (D) x Rep. Dornan (R) x Rep. Dreier (R) x Rep. Dymally (D) x Rep. Hawkins (D) x Rep. Martinez (D) x Rep. Torres (D) x

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|