[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 82 (Friday, June 24, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 24, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED 
  AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1995, AND SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS, 
                                  1994

  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into 
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the 
further consideration of the bill (H.R. 4603) making appropriations for 
the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and 
related agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1995, and making supplemental appropriations for these departments and 
agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, and for other 
purposes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Mollohan].
  The motion was agreed to.

                              {time}  1129


                     in the committee of the whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of 
the bill, H.R. 4603, with Mr. Brown of California in the chair.
  The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. Schiff] has 
been disposed of, and the bill had been read through page 12, line 22.

                              {time}  1130

  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I know of no amendment until page 23, 
line 1. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the 
bill through page 22, line 22, be considered as read, printed in the 
Record, and open to amendment at any point.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
West Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the bill through page 22, line 22, is as follows:

             SALARIES AND EXPENSES, UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the United States, 
     Attorneys, including intergovernmental agreements, 
     $820,177,000, of which not to exceed $2,500,000 shall be 
     available until September 30, 1996 for the purposes of (1) 
     providing training of personnel of the Department of Justice 
     in debt collection, (2) providing services to the Department 
     of Justice related to locating debtors and their property, 
     such as title searches, debtor skiptracing, asset searches, 
     credit reports and other investigations, (3) paying the costs 
     of the Department of Justice for the sale of property not 
     covered by the sale proceeds, such as auctioneers' fees and 
     expenses, maintenance and protection of property and 
     businesses, advertising and title search and surveying costs, 
     and (4) paying the costs of processing and tracking debts 
     owed to the United States Government: Provided, That of the 
     total amount appropriated, not to exceed $8,000 shall be 
     available for official reception and representation expenses: 
     Provided further, That not to exceed $10,000,000 of those 
     funds available for automated litigation support contracts 
     shall remain available until expended: Provided further, That 
     of the offsetting collections credited to this account, 
     $180,000 are permanently canceled.
       In addition, for expenses necessary to implement the 
     President's Immigration Initiative as authorized in H.R. 
     3355, the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 
     1994, or similar legislation, $6,799,000, of which not to 
     exceed $2,000,000 shall remain available until September 
     30, 1996.


                   united states trustee system fund

       For the necessary expenses of the United States Trustee 
     Program,, $100,469,000, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 589a(a), 
     to remain available until expended, for activities authorized 
     by section 115 of the Bankruptcy Judges, United States 
     Trustees, and Family Farmer Bankruptcy Act of 1986 (Public 
     Law 99-554), of which $61,593,000 shall be derived from the 
     United States Trustee System Fund: Provided, That deposits to 
     the Fund are available in such amounts as may be necessary to 
     pay refunds due depositors: Provided further, That, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, not to exceed 
     $38,876,000 of offsetting collections derived from fees 
     collected pursuant to section 589a(f) of title 28, United 
     States Code, as amended by section 111 of Public Law 102-140 
     (105 Stat. 795), shall be retained and used for necessary 
     expenses in this appropriation: Provided further, That the 
     $100,469,000 herein appropriated shall be reduced as such 
     offsetting collections are received during fiscal year 1995, 
     so as to result in a final fiscal year 1995 appropriation 
     estimated at not more than $61,593,000: Provided further, 
     That any of the aforementioned fees collected in excess of 
     $38,876,000 in fiscal year 1995 shall remain available until 
     expended, but shall not be available for obligation until 
     October 1, 1995, Provided further, That of the offsetting 
     collections credited to this account, $218,000 are 
     permanently canceled.


      salaries and expenses, foreign claims settlement commission

       For expenses necessary to carry out the activities of the 
     Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, including services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $830,000.


         salaries and expenses, united states marshals service

       For necessary expenses of the United States Marshals 
     Service; including the acquisition, lease, maintenance, and 
     operation of vehicles and aircraft, and the purchase of 
     passenger motor vehicles for police-type use without regard 
     to the general purchase price limitation for the current 
     fiscal year; $390,185,000, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 561(i), 
     of which not to exceed $6,000 shall be available for official 
     reception and representation expenses: Provided, That of the 
     offsetting collections credited to this account, $95,000 are 
     permanently canceled.


                   support of united states prisoners

       For support of United States prisoners in the custody of 
     the United States Marshals Service as authorized in 18 U.S.C. 
     4013, but not including expenses otherwise provided for in 
     appropriations available to the Attorney General ; 
     $299,465,000, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 561(i), to remain 
     available until expended.


                     fees and expenses of witnesses

       For expenses, mileage, compensation, and per diems of 
     witnesses, for expenses of contracts for the procurement and 
     supervision of expert witnesses, for private counsel 
     expenses, and for per diems in lieu of subsistence, as 
     authorized by law, including advances, $78,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended; of which not to exceed $4,750,000 
     may be made available for planning, construction, renovation, 
     maintenance, remodeling, and repair of buildings and the 
     purchase of equipment incident thereto for protected witness 
     safesites: of which not to exceed $1,000,000 may be made 
     available for the purchase and maintenance of armored 
     vehicles for transportation of protected witnesses; and of 
     which not to exceed $4,000,000 may be made available for the 
     purchase, installation and maintenance of a secure automated 
     information network to store and retrieve the identities and 
     locations of protected witnesses.


           salaries and expenses, community relations service

       For necessary expenses of the Community Relations Service, 
     established by title X of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 
     $20,379,000, of which not to exceed $10,001,000 shall remain 
     available until expended to make payments in advance for 
     grants, contracts and reimbursable agreements and other 
     expenses necessary under section 501(c) of the Refugee 
     Education Assistance Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-422; 94 Stat. 
     1809) for the processing, care, maintenance, security, 
     transportation and reception and placement in the United 
     States of Cuban and Haitian entrants: Provided, That 
     notwithstanding section 501(e)(2)(B) of the Refugee Education 
     Assistance Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-422; 94 Stat. 1810), 
     funds may be expended for assistance with respect to Cuban 
     and Haitian entrants as authorized under section 501(c) of 
     such Act.


                         assets forfeiture fund

       For expenses authorized by 28 U.S.C. 524(c)(1)(A)(ii), (B), 
     (C), (F), and (G), as amended, $55,000,000 to be derived from 
     the Department of Justice Assets Forfeiture Fund.
       Amounts otherwise available for obligation in fiscal year 
     1995 are reduced by $92,000.

                    Radiation Exposure Compensation


                        administrative expenses

       For necessary administrative expenses in accordance with 
     the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, $2,655,000.

                      Interagency Law Enforcement


                    organized crime drug enforcement

       For necessary expenses for the detection, investigation, 
     and prosecution of individuals involved in organized crime 
     drug trafficking not otherwise provided for, to include 
     intergovernmental agreements with State and local law 
     enforcement agencies engaged in the investigation and 
     prosecution of individuals involved in organized crime drug 
     trafficking, $383,250,000, of which $50,000,000 shall remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That any amounts 
     obligated from appropriations under this heading may be used 
     under authorities available to the organizations reimbursed 
     from this appropriation: Provided further, That any 
     unobligated balances remaining available at the end of the 
     fiscal year shall revert to the Attorney General for 
     reallocation among participating organizations in succeeding 
     fiscal years, subject to the reprogramming procedures 
     described in section 605 of this Act.

                    Federal Bureau of Investigation


                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses necessary for detection, investigation, and 
     prosecution of crimes against the United States; including 
     purchase for police-type use of not to exceed 1,815 passenger 
     motor vehicles of which 1,300 will be for replacement only, 
     without regard to the general purchase price limitation for 
     the current fiscal year, and hire of passenger motor 
     vehicles; acquisition, lease, maintenance and operation of 
     aircraft; and not to exceed $70,000 to meet unforeseen 
     emergencies of a confidential character, to be expended under 
     the direction of, and to be accounted for solely under the 
     certificate of, the Attorney General; $2,178,218,000, of 
     which not to exceed $35,000,000 for automated data processing 
     and telecommunications and technical investigative equipment 
     and $1,000,000 for undercover operations shall remain 
     available until September 30, 1996; of which not to exceed 
     $14,000,000 for research and development related to 
     investigative activities shall remain available until 
     expended; of which not to exceed $10,000,000 is authorized to 
     be made available for making payments or advances for 
     expenses arising out of contractual or reimbursable 
     agreements with State and local law enforcement agencies 
     while engaged in cooperative activities related to violent 
     crime, terrorism, organized crime, and drug investigations; 
     of which $84,400,000, to remain available until expended, 
     shall only be available to defray expenses for the automation 
     of fingerprint identification services and related costs; and 
     of which $1,500,000 shall be available to maintain an 
     independent program office dedicated solely to the relocation 
     of the Criminal Justice Information Services Division and the 
     automation of fingerprint identification services: Provided, 
     That not to exceed $45,000 shall be available for official 
     reception and representation expenses: Provided further, That 
     of the offsetting collections credited to this account, 
     $572,000 are permanently canceled.

                    Drug Enforcement Administration


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Drug Enforcement 
     Administration, including not to exceed $70,000 to meet 
     unforeseen emergencies of a confidential character, to be 
     expended under the direction of, and to be accounted for 
     solely under the certificate of, the Attorney General; 
     expenses for conducting drug education and training programs, 
     including travel and related expenses for participants in 
     such programs and the distribution of items of token value 
     that promote the goals of such programs; purchase of not to 
     exceed 1,265 passenger motor vehicles, of which 1,115 will be 
     for replacement only, for police-type use without regard to 
     the general purchase price limitation for the current fiscal 
     year; and acquisition, lease, maintenance, and operation of 
     aircraft; $742,497,000, of which not to exceed $1,800,000 for 
     research shall remain available until expended, and of which 
     not to exceed $4,000,000 for purchase of evidence and 
     payments for information, not to exceed $4,000,000 for 
     contracting for ADP and telecommunications equipment, and not 
     to exceed $2,000,000 for technical and laboratory equipment 
     shall remain available until September 30, 1996, and of which 
     not to exceed $50,000 shall be available for official 
     reception and representation expenses: Provided, That of the 
     offsetting collections credited to this account, $439,000 are 
     permanently canceled.

                 Immigration and Naturalization Service


                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     administration and enforcement of the laws relating to 
     immigration, naturalization, and alien registration, 
     including not to exceed $50,000 to meet unforeseen 
     emergencies of a confidential character, to be expended under 
     the direction of, and to be accounted for solely under the 
     certificate of, the Attorney General; purchase for police-
     type use (not to exceed 346 of which 177 are for replacement 
     only) without regard to the general purchase price limitation 
     for the current fiscal year, and hire of passenger motor 
     vehicles; acquisition, lease, maintenance and operation of 
     aircraft; and research related to immigration enforcement; 
     $1,098,602,000, of which not to exceed $400,000 for research 
     shall remain available until expended, and of which not to 
     exceed $10,000,000 shall be available for costs associated 
     with the Training program for basic officer training: 
     Provided, That none of the funds available to the 
     Immigration and Naturalization Service shall be available 
     for administrative expenses to pay any employee overtime 
     pay in an amount in excess of $25,000: Provided further, 
     That uniforms may be purchased without regard to the 
     general purchase price limitation for the current fiscal 
     year: Provided further, That not to exceed $5,000 shall be 
     available for official reception and representation 
     expenses: Provided further, That of the offsetting 
     collections credited to this account, $1,240,000 are 
     permanently canceled.
       In addition, for expenses, not otherwise provided for, 
     necessary to implement the President's Immigration Initiative 
     as authorized in H.R. 3355, the Violent Crime Control and Law 
     Enforcement Act of 1994, or similar legislation, to include 
     purchase of uniforms and not to exceed 467 passenger motor 
     vehicles for police-type use without regard to the general 
     purchase price limitation for the current fiscal year, 
     $251,157,000, of which not to exceed $116,842,000 for 
     procuring automation, communications and technical systems 
     and equipment shall remain available until expended.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to the bill through page 22, 
line 22?
  If not, the Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                         Federal Prison System


                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses necessary for the administration, operation, 
     and maintenance of Federal penal and correctional 
     institutions, including purchase (not to exceed 736 of which 
     383 are for replacement only) and hire of law enforcement and 
     passenger motor vehicles; and for the provision of technical 
     assistance and advice on corrections related issues to 
     foreign governments; $2,356,404,000: Provided, That there may 
     be transferred to the Health Resources and Services 
     Administration such amounts as may be necessary, in the 
     discretion of the Attorney General, for direct expenditures 
     by that Administration for medical relief for inmates of 
     Federal penal and correctional institutions: Provided 
     further, That the Director of the Federal Prison System 
     (FPS), where necessary, may enter into contracts with a 
     fiscal agent/fiscal intermediary claims processor to 
     determine the amounts payable to persons who, on behalf of 
     the FPS, furnish health services to individuals committed to 
     the custody of the FPS: Provided further, That uniforms may 
     be purchased without regard to the general purchase price 
     limitation for the current fiscal year: Provided further, 
     That not to exceed $6,000 shall be available for official 
     reception and representation expenses: Provided further, That 
     not to exceed $50,000,000 for the activation of new 
     facilities shall remain available until September 30, 1996: 
     Provided further, That of the amounts provided for Contract 
     Confinement, not to exceed $20,000,000 shall remain available 
     until expended to make payments in advance for grants, 
     contracts and reimbursable agreements and other expenses 
     authorized by section 501(c) of the Refugee Education 
     Assistance Act of 1980 for the care and security in the 
     United States of Cuban and Haitian entrants: Provided 
     further, That any unobligated balances available for the care 
     of Mariel Cuban detainees under the heading, ``Salaries and 
     Expenses, Community Relations Service'' are transferred to 
     this heading, and shall remain available until expended.


                amendment offered by mr. smith of texas

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Smith of Texas: Page 23, line 9, 
     strike ``$2,356,404,000'' and insert ``$2,355,404,000''.

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment 
to the Commerce-Justice-State appropriations bill that makes a $1 
million cut in the Bureau of Prisons' appropriation level. This small 
cut is designed to make a large point: It is past time that the Federal 
Government cease to allow unnecessary, unjustified, and in this case, 
downright unusual spending to continue merely because it occurs in the 
dark recesses of the Federal budget.
  My amendment cutting $1 million is designed to equal the difference 
in the cost of new Public Health Service Commissioned Corps hires and 
general schedule hires in the next fiscal year. This amendment will not 
affect a single individual now serving in the corps, nor will it even 
affect any person who will join the corps before October 1 of this 
year. What the amendment will do is to send a direct and indisputable 
signal that it is time the corps shipped out of the Bureau of Prisons.
  Why is this necessary? First, let me provide some background on the 
corps itself. The Public Health Service Commissioned Corps was founded 
in 1798, back when John Adams was President, to treat disabled seamen. 
Today, there are about 6,500 total individuals in the corps and it is 
the 449 in the Bureau of Prisons that this amendment addresses.
  The Commissioned Corps is one of the seven uniformed services and 
they receive the exact same benefits as the military. The section of 
the Public Health Service Act that deals with the corps states:

       Commissioned officers of the Service or their surviving 
     beneficiaries are entitled to all rights, benefits, 
     privileges, and immunities now or hereafter provided for 
     commissioned officers of the Army * * *.

  While the corps are equal to the military in their benefits, they are 
not in their duties. Corps officers are not subject to the uniform 
military code of conduct, which means they have the option of refusing 
an assignment or transfer simply by exiting the corps. In addition, the 
corps has not been activated for military service for a generation.
  In the testimony of then-Assistant Secretary for HHS, James O. Mason, 
before the Energy and Commerce's Subcommittee on Health and the 
Environment, he explained the reason that none of the of corps' 
officers were activated or called up for Desert Storm as follows:

       The last time the Commissioned Corps was ``militarized'' 
     was during the Korean conflict. Historically, this power has 
     been used very sparingly by the President. It was not done 
     during the Vietnam war even though the draft was in effect at 
     the time * * *

  So we have the Federal Government paying military-equal benefits for 
civilian-type service. And what is this unnecessary cost? As is usually 
the case with Government slip-ups, it is not cheap. A corps officer 
with 6 years of service receives approximately $15,000 more annually 
than a GS-13. This is neither fair to the military officers who make 
the military sacrifices for the same benefits, nor is it fair to the 
Bureau of Prisons' 23,000 civilian and 2,200 medical employees who do 
the same work as the Bureau of Prisons' 449 Commissioned Corps 
officers, but at much less cost.
  Even if this basic unfairness between Federal employees did not 
exist, the basic unfairness to the American taxpayer would still 
remain. They are the ones required to pick up the tab for the day-to-
day discrepancy of paying military benefits for a civilian job. In 
addition, the cost of retirement is not set-aside now; it adds up to a 
huge unfunded liability that the corps is accumulating through their 
officers' retirement benefits. The Commissioned Corps is rewriting the 
old commercial phrase of ``you can pay me now, or pay me later,'' into 
``you can pay me now and pay me later.''
  Unlike either the military or civilian employees they resemble, 
Commissioned Corps officers' retirement benefits are not prefunded as 
are other Federal workers. Instead, we rely on an antiquated accounting 
system, whereby we pay the current year's retiree costs while refusing 
to set anything aside for the future costs. This same ostrich approach 
virtually bankrupted the Social Security Trust Fund and is one we have 
wisely abandoned for all current Federal employees.
  Except for the corps, that is. As a result, according to the 
independent audit of the corps' retirement system, the unfunded accrued 
liability for the corps was $3.6 billion as of September 1, 1992. Every 
day we do nothing to correct this, it increases. This amendment says 
that day has come today.
  This amendment is about small money but big principles. It is time to 
get rid of patent unfairness. It is time we get rid of the 
pointlessness of two personnel systems doing one job. It is time to 
abandon an antiquated anachronism that racks up costs we do not need to 
be paying today, and makes no plans to pay them tomorrow.
  We can correct this now by passing this amendment and we can do it 
without unfairly hitting anyone in the corps.
  I urge Members of this House, who have supported government-wide 
reforms, to support this one today and vote to pass this amendment.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I 
rise in opposition to the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe that the gentleman is trying to make a point 
here that there is an unfunded liability that is in the Civilian Health 
Corps as they work in the Bureau of Prisons. He is expressing that 
concern. He is offering an amendment to cut a million dollars out of 
the account that funds the salaries and expenses account of the Federal 
Prison System.
  I do not really see how his amendment gets to the problem that he is 
concerned with. As a matter of fact, as I read the statute and 
understand the funding of the retirement fund, this would not even be 
the appropriate appropriations bill to address the issue, if the $1 
million cut had any impact on it at all. The gentleman's amendment does 
reduce the amount provided, however, in the bill for the activation of 
new Federal prisons.
  I would refer the gentleman to page 33 of the committee report, which 
describes how the Federal Prison System is funded under this bill, 
under the salaries and expenses account.

                              {time}  1140

  Mr. Chairman, I would point out to the gentleman that his amendment 
would reduce that account by $1 million, and to that extent, in some 
way affect the activation of new prisons.
  In this bill, as part of the crime fighting effort, we are activating 
11 new Federal prisons. They are located all across the country, and it 
is very possible, and I think it is even true, that one of these 
prisons is being activated in the gentleman's home State.
  Mr. Chairman, I just think the amendment is misdirected, and however 
sincerely concerned he is about this unfunded liability, I would 
suggest to him that it is an issue that he might better be advised to 
take up with the authorization committee, and not reduce funding that 
we have worked very hard to find to activate new prisons, to help in 
the President's and every Member of this body's efforts to fight crime.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would like to reply to the points 
made. I understand the sincerity with which they have been made.
  I would simply respond to two points, first by saying that if funds 
are taken out of prison construction, that is certainly not the intent 
of the amendment. I would expect that the appropriators, if this 
amendment would pass, would certainly honor the intent with which the 
amendment was offered.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. If I may reclaim my time, it is not prison 
construction, it is the salaries and expenses account that the 
gentleman is reducing. It is not prison construction. Out of that money 
is the activation of our prisons.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Will the gentleman yield further?
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. I am happy to yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. The intent of the amendment is clear. If the 
intent of the amendment is followed by the appropriators, then the 
money will be taken from the area that I have suggested.
  Second, if the gentleman objects to the withdrawal of funds as being 
misdirected or too large or whatever, I would be happy to offer a 
limitation amendment with his support, if I was able to do so before 
the preferential motion.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I would say to the gentleman, I just 
cannot do that.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment of the gentleman 
from Texas [Mr. Smith], although I sympathize with what he is trying to 
do, and I wish him success in that. I just think the appropriate place 
for this is in the authorizing committee. This is the first we have 
heard of this. We have had no hearings or no information about this.
  Mr. Chairman, frankly, we do not know a lot about it. For that 
reason, among others, Mr. Chairman, I would hope the gentleman would 
take it to the authorizing committee, and I would be willing to help 
the gentleman in that respect, if I could. But to take the money, as 
this amendment does, from the ability of us to open up 11 new or 
expanded prison facilities should not be allowed. For that reason, I 
oppose the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, we are already $50 million below what was requested in 
this account, salaries and expenses, to open up those new prison 
facilities, 11 new or expanded facilities. So while this is not a huge 
amendment, it would take further from that account. We have scrimped 
and saved in every corner that we could in order to find the monies to 
put into this account so we could activate these prisons, which are 
desperately needed.
  Mr. Chairman, in addition to that, this account also pays for the 
closing of the Federal prison facility at Tindall Air Force Base in 
Florida. We have a huge increase in inmate population, and we have to 
increase personnel to accommodate that, so this account is one of the 
most squeezed and imperative accounts in the whole Justice Department.
  Mr. Chairman, therefore, I would hope we could defeat this amendment. 
I will be happy to work with the gentleman to correct the inequities 
that he has so eloquently described.
  Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  (Mr. HUGHES asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I will not take the full time.
  I just want to say to my colleagues, who I serve with on the 
Committee on the Judiciary, that I understand what the gentleman is 
trying to do. However, I think, as both the ranking Republican and the 
chairman have indicated, the gentleman misses the mark. We have had 
difficulty opening up new prisons.
  Can the Members imagine building new prisons, which is the clamor 
throughout the country, and then not having sufficient resources to 
open them? Last year the Bureau of Prisons came to us, and they were 
concerned because they did not have sufficient resources to open up a 
prison that had been completed. They had to do some reallocation within 
the Bureau of Prisons' budget to open up some new prisons.
  On the second score, I understand the gentleman's point about 
unfunded liability. I think that is his major point in the Public 
Health Service, but I say to my colleague, as he knows, the entire 
military budget is unfunded. Much of our Federal retiree, civilian 
retiree budget is underfunded. It is underfunded.
  Mr. Chairman, that is one point that I want to clear up.
  Second, without the Public Health Service, as my colleague must know, 
we would have an awful time attempting to staff with medical personnel 
the prisons around the country. Mr. Chairman, we have some institutions 
where we have no physician. We are actually contracting out in many 
instances because we do not have sufficient personnel.
  We have seen an increase in litigation over health care in the prison 
system, and without the Public Health Service, that dual system that 
enables us to operate these prisons, we could not operate the prisons. 
We would be subject to tremendous litigation, tremendous costs, and 
right now we are having an awful time trying to recruit physicians.
  The gentleman says that the Public Health Service is not really the 
military. I want to tell the gentleman, a lot of the members of the 
Public Health Service believe they are on the front line when they 
accept duty in the prison system. It is tough duty. It is not the most 
attractive duty. Thank goodness we have a lot of Public Health Service 
personnel that are willing to serve in our prison system.
  Take a look at the data that exists, I would say to the Members. We 
were criticized just within the past year or so by the General 
Accounting Office because of the lack of adequate health care 
facilities and adequate health personnel in our prison system. We are 
going to expand that system by 11 prisons, with the activation money 
that is in this particular budget.

  We do not have the personnel, the health care personnel, to staff 
that, Mr. Chairman. We cannot recruit the health care personnel we 
have. If the gentleman made it impossible for the Public Health Service 
to operate in our prison system, we would have chaos in the system.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Would my friend, the gentleman from New Jersey 
[Mr. Hughes], yield?
  Mr. HUGHES. I am happy to yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I just want to repeat the points of 
this amendment, and make it very, very clear that the cut that this 
amendment proposes does not adversely affect one current commissioned 
corps individual nor anyone that might be hired by October.
  The cut that I had proposed is the difference in salary between 
commissioned corps individuals and all other general service, GS 
Federal employees. They do the same work, they ought to get the same 
pay, and my cut amendment is designed to do just that, cut the 
difference in salary. They have not been militarized in generations 
since the Korean war, they do not do anything more or less than other 
civilian employees, so they should not be paid any more.
  Mr. HUGHES. To recapture my time, I would say that the gentleman's 
amendment misses the mark, however. The Bureau of Prisons has to 
reimburse Labor-HHS for the services of the Public Health Service, for 
their work in the prisons. Does the gentleman believe his amendment is 
going to stop that reimbursement?
  The gentleman is not attempting to stop the deployment of personnel 
from the Public Health Service, but I am saying, if the gentleman is 
only attempting to send a signal, I think he should be sending the 
signal to the authorizing committee, not to the Committee on 
Appropriations. This misses the mark.
  The $1 million the gentleman wants to cut will not do anything except 
to deny $1 million to a very important part of the budget, that part of 
the budget that assists us in opening up new prisons around the 
country. If the gentleman wants to restructure the Public Health 
Service, the gentleman ought to be talking to the authorizing 
committee.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Will the gentleman yield once again?
  Mr. HUGHES. I am happy to yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Let me just repeat that this amendment and the 
cut that I proposed is not going to cut one individual from the 
commissioned corps. It is not going to adversely impact them, but the 
point is, we need to know the true cost of the Public Health 
Commissioned Corps.
  That unfunded liability of $3.8 million is real, it is there, and 
this is the only group of individuals in the entire Federal Government 
who get that special consideration. We need to know as taxpayers what 
it is going to cost us up front, have the cost of the retirement set-
asides up front, just like all the other employees. There is no reason 
for this unfunded liability.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. HUGHES. The gentleman has made his point. I think he will agree 
that this misses the mark. I hope the gentleman will withdraw the 
amendment. I think he has sent a signal.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Smith].
  The amendment was rejected.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.

                              {time}  1150

  The Clerk read as follows:


                  national institution of corrections

       For carrying out the provisions of sections 4351-4353 of 
     title 18, United States Code, which established a National 
     Institute of Corrections, and for the provision of technical 
     assistance and advice on corrections related issues to 
     foreign governments, $10,344,000, to remain available until 
     expended.


                        buildings and facilities

       For planning, acquisition of sites and construction of new 
     facilities; leasing the Oklahoma City Airport Trust Facility; 
     purchase and acquisition of facilities and remodeling and 
     equipping of such facilities for penal and correctional use, 
     including all necessary expenses incident thereto, by 
     contract or force account; and constructing, remodeling, and 
     equipped necessary buildings and facilities at existing penal 
     and correctional institutions, including all necessary 
     expenses incident thereto, by contract or force account; 
     $238,094,000, to remain available until expended, of which 
     not to exceed $14,074,000 shall be available to construct 
     areas for inmate work programs: Provided, That labor of 
     United States prisoners may be used for work performed under 
     this appropriation: Provided further, That not to exceed 10 
     per centum of the funds appropriated to ``Buildings and 
     Facilities'' in this Act or any other Act may be transferred 
     to ``Salaries and Expenses'', Federal Prison System upon 
     notification by the Attorney General to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate 
     in compliance with provisions set forth in section 605 of 
     this Act: Provided further, That unless a notification as 
     required under section 605 of this Act is submitted to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate, none of 
     the funds in this Act for the Cooperative Agreement Program 
     shall be available for a cooperative agreement with a State 
     or local government for the housing of Federal prisoners and 
     detainees when the cost per bed space for such cooperative 
     agreement exceeds $50,000, and in addition, any cooperative 
     agreement with a cost per bed space that exceeds $25,000 must 
     remain in effect for no less than 15 years: Provided 
     further, That of the total amount appropriated, not to 
     exceed $9,903,000 shall be available for the renovation 
     and construction of United States Marshals Service 
     prisoner holding facilities.


                federal prison industries, incorporated

       The Federal Prison Industries, Incorporated, is hereby 
     authorized to make such expenditures, within the limits of 
     funds and borrowing authority available, and in accord with 
     the law, and to make such contracts and commitments, without 
     regard to fiscal year limitations as provided by section 104 
     of the Government Corporation Control Act, as amended, as may 
     be necessary in carrying out the program set forth in the 
     budget for the current fiscal year for such corporation, 
     including purchase of (not to exceed five for replacement 
     only) and hire of passenger motor vehicles.


   Limitation on administrative expenses, federal prison industries, 
                              incorporated

       Not to exceed $3,463,000 of the funds of the corporation 
     shall be available for its administrative expenses, and for 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, to be computed on an 
     accrual basis to be determined in accordance with the 
     corporation's current prescribed accounting system, and such 
     amounts shall be exclusive of depreciation, payment of 
     claims, and expenditures which the said accounting system 
     requires to be capitalized or charged to cost of commodities 
     acquired or produced, including selling and shipping 
     expenses, and expenses in connection with acquisition, 
     construction, operation, maintenance, improvement, 
     protection, or disposition of facilities and other property 
     belonging to the corporation or in which it has an interest.

               General Provisions--Department of Justice

       Sec. 101. In addition to amounts otherwise made available 
     in this title for official reception and representation 
     expenses, a total of not to exceed $45,000 from funds 
     appropriated to the Department of Justice in this title shall 
     be available to the Attorney General for official reception 
     and representation expenses in accordance with distributions, 
     procedures, and regulations established by the Attorney 
     General.
       Sec. 102. Subject to subsection (b) of section 102 of the 
     Department of Justice and Related Agencies Appropriations 
     Act, 1993, authorities contained in Public Law 96-132, ``The 
     Department of Justice Appropriation Authorization Act, Fiscal 
     Year 1980'', shall remain in effect until the termination 
     date of this Act or until the effective date of a Department 
     of Justice Appropriation Authorization Act, whichever is 
     earlier.
       Sec. 103. None of the funds appropriated under this title 
     shall be used to require any person to perform, or facilitate 
     in any way the performance of, any abortion.
       Sec. 104. Nothing in the preceding section shall remove the 
     obligation of the Director of the Bureau of Prisons to 
     provide escort services necessary for a female inmate to 
     receive such service outside the Federal facility: Provided, 
     That nothing in this section in any way diminishes the effect 
     of section 103 intended to address the philosophical beliefs 
     of individual employees of the Bureau of Prisons.
       Sec. 105. Pursuant to the provisions of law set forth in 18 
     U.S.C. 3071-3077, not to exceed $5,000,000 of the funds 
     appropriated to the Department of Justice in this title shall 
     be available for rewards to individuals who furnish 
     information regarding acts of terrorism against a United 
     States person or property.
       Sec. 106. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made 
     available for the current fiscal year for the Department of 
     Justice in this Act may be transferred between such 
     appropriations, but no such appropriation, except as 
     otherwise specifically provided, shall be increased by more 
     than 10 percent by any such transfers: Provided, That this 
     section shall not apply to any appropriation made available 
     in title I of this Act under the heading, ``Office of Justice 
     Programs, Justice Assistance'': Provided further, That any 
     transfer pursuant to this section shall be treated as a 
     reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this Act and 
     shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except 
     in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section.
       Sec. 107. In fiscal year 1995 and thereafter, amounts in 
     the Federal Prison System's Commissary Fund, Federal Prisons, 
     which are not currently needed for operations, shall be kept 
     on deposit or invested in obligations of, or guaranteed by, 
     the United States and all earnings on such investments shall 
     be deposited in the Commissary Fund.
       Sec. 108. (a) Of the budgetary resources available to the 
     Department of Justice during fiscal year 1995, $23,830,000 
     are permanently canceled.
       (b) The Attorney General shall allocate the amount of 
     budgetary resources canceled among the Department's accounts 
     available for procurement and procurement-related expenses. 
     Amounts available for procurement and procurement-related 
     expenses in each such account shall be reduced by the amount 
     allocated to such account.
       (c) For the purposes of this section, the definition of 
     ``procurement'' includes all stages of the process of 
     acquiring property or services, beginning with the process of 
     determining a need for a product or services and ending 
     with contract completion and closeout, as specified in 41 
     U.S.C. 403(2).

                            RELATED AGENCIES

                       Commission on Civil Rights


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Commission on Civil Rights, 
     including hire of passenger motor vehicles, $9,500,000: 
     Provided, That not to exceed $50,000 may be used to employ 
     consultants: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated in this paragraph shall be used to employ in 
     excess of four full-time individuals under Schedule C of the 
     Excepted Service exclusive of one special assistant for each 
     Commissioner whose compensation shall not exceed the 
     equivalent of 150 billable days at the daily rate of a level 
     13 salary under the General Schedule: Provided further, That 
     none of the funds appropriated in this paragraph shall be 
     used to reimburse Commissioners for more than 75 billable 
     days, with the exception of the Chairman who is permitted 125 
     billable days.

                Equal Employment Opportunity Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission as authorized by title VII of the Civil Rights Act 
     of 1964, as amended (29 U.S.C. 206(d) and 621-634), the 
     Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Civil Rights 
     Act of 1991, including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 
     3109; hire of passenger motor vehicles as authorized by 31 
     U.S.C. 1343(b); nonmonetary awards to private citizens; not 
     to exceed $26,500,000, for payments to State and local 
     enforcement agencies for services to the Commission pursuant 
     to title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 
     sections 6 and 14 of the Age Discrimination in Employment 
     Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the 
     Civil Rights Act of 1991; $238,000,000: Provided, That the 
     Commission is authorized to make available for official 
     reception and representation expenses not to exceed $2,500 
     from available funds: Provided further, That of the budgetary 
     resources available in fiscal year 1995 in this account, 
     $242,000 are permanently canceled: Provided further, That 
     amounts available for procurement and procurement-related 
     expenses in this account are reduced by such amount: Provided 
     further, That as used herein, ``procurement'' includes all 
     stages of the process of acquiring property or services, 
     beginning with the process of determining a need for a 
     product or services and ending with contract completion and 
     closeout, as specified in 41 U.S.C. 403(2).

                   Federal Communications Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Communications 
     Commission, as authorized by law, including uniforms and 
     allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-02; not 
     to exceed $600,000 for land and structures; not to exceed 
     $500,000 for improvement and care of grounds and repair to 
     buildings; not to exceed $4,000 for official reception and 
     representation expenses; purchase (not to exceed sixteen) and 
     hire of motor vehicles; special counsel fees; and services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; $166,832,000, of which not to 
     exceed $300,000 shall remain available until September 30, 
     1996, for research and policy studies: Provided, That 
     $116,400,000 of offsetting collections shall be assessed and 
     collected pursuant to section 9 of title I of the 
     Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and shall be retained 
     and used for necessary expenses in this appropriation, and 
     shall remain available until expended: Provided further, That 
     the sum herein appropriated shall be reduced as such 
     offsetting collections are received during fiscal year 1995, 
     so as to result in a final fiscal year 1995 appropriation 
     estimated at $50,432,000: Provided further, That any 
     offsetting collections received in excess of $116,400,000 in 
     fiscal year 1995 shall remain available until expended, but 
     shall not be available for obligation until October 1, 1995: 
     Provided further, That of the budgetary resources available 
     in fiscal year 1995 in this account, $197,000 are permanently 
     canceled: Provided further, That amounts available for 
     procurement and procurement-related expenses in this account 
     are reduced by such amount: Provided further, That as used 
     herein, ``procurement'' includes all stages of the process of 
     acquiring property or services, beginning with the process of 
     determining a need for a product or services and ending with 
     contract completion and closeout, as specified in 41 U.S.C. 
     403(2).

                      Federal Maritime Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Maritime Commission 
     as authorized by section 201(d) of the Merchant Marine Act of 
     1936, as amended (46 App. U.S.C. 1111), including services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; hire of passenger motor vehicles 
     as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343(b); and uniforms or 
     allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-02; 
     $18,569,000: Provided, That not to exceed $2,000 shall be 
     available for official reception and representation expenses.

                        Federal Trade Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Trade Commission, 
     including uniforms or allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 5901-5902; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles; and not to exceed $2,000 
     for official reception and representation expenses; 
     $95,428,000: Provided, That notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, not to exceed $35,460,000 of offsetting 
     collections derived from fees collected for premerger 
     notification filings under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust 
     Improvements Act of 1976 (15 U.S.C. 18(a)) shall be retained 
     and used for necessary expenses in this appropriation, and 
     shall remain available until expended: Provided further, That 
     the sum herein appropriated shall be reduced as such 
     offsetting collections are received during fiscal year 1995, 
     so as to result in a final fiscal year 1995 appropriation 
     estimated at not more than $59,968,000: Provided further, 
     That any fees received in excess of $35,460,000 in fiscal 
     year 1995 shall remain available until expended, but shall 
     not be available for obligation until October 1, 1995: 
     Provided further, That section 605 of Public Law 101-162 (103 
     Stat. 1031), as amended, is further amended by striking 
     ``$25,000'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``$45,000'': 
     Provided further, That none of the funds made available to 
     the Federal Trade Commission shall be available for 
     obligation for expenses authorized by section 151 of the 
     Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 
     (Public Law 102-242, 105 Stat. 2282-2285): Provided further, 
     That of the budgetary resources available in fiscal year 1995 
     in this account, $145,000 are permanently canceled: Provided 
     further, That amounts available for procurement and 
     procurement-related expenses in this account are reduced by 
     such amount: Provided further, That as used herein, 
     ``procurement'' includes all stages of the process of 
     acquiring property or services, beginning with the process of 
     determining a need for a product or services and ending with 
     contract completion and closeout, as specified in 41 U.S.C. 
     403(2).

                   Securities and Exchange Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for the Securities and Exchange 
     Commission, including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 
     3109, the rental of space (to include multiple year leases) 
     in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, and not to exceed 
     $3,000 for official reception and representation expenses, 
     $238,131,000, of which not to exceed $10,000 may be used 
     toward funding a permanent secretariat for the International 
     Organization of Securities Commissions, and of which not to 
     exceed $100,000 shall be available for expenses for 
     consultations and meetings hosted by the Commission with 
     foreign governmental and other regulatory officials, 
     members of their delegations, appropriate representatives 
     and staff to exchange views concerning developments 
     relating to securities matters, development and 
     implementation of cooperation agreements concerning 
     securities matters and provision of technical assistance 
     for the development of foreign securities markets, such 
     expenses to include necessary logistic and administrative 
     expenses and the expenses of Commission staff and foreign 
     invitees in attendance at such consultations and meetings 
     including: (i) such incidental expenses as meals taken in 
     the course of such attendance, (ii) any travel or 
     transportation to or from such meetings, and (iii) any 
     other related lodging or subsistence: Provided, That 
     immediately upon enactment of this Act, the rate of fees 
     under section 6(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 (15 
     U.S.C. 77f(b)) shall increase from one-fiftieth of 1 per 
     centum to one twenty-ninth of 1 per centum and such 
     increase shall be deposited as an offsetting collection to 
     this appropriation, to remain available until expended, to 
     recover costs of services of the securities registration 
     process: Provided further, That the sum herein 
     appropriated shall be reduced as such offsetting 
     collections are received during fiscal year 1995, so as to 
     result in a final fiscal year 1995 appropriation estimated 
     at $0: Provided further, That any section 6(b) offsetting 
     fee collections received in excess of $238,131,000 in 
     fiscal year 1995 shall remain available until expended, 
     but shall not be available for obligation until October 1, 
     1995: Provided further, That of the budgetary resources 
     available in fiscal year 1995 in this account, $902,000 
     are permanently canceled: Provided further, That amounts 
     available for procurement and procurement-related expenses 
     in this account are reduced by such amount: Provided 
     further, That as used herein, ``procurement'' includes all 
     stages of the process of acquiring property or services, 
     beginning with the process of determining a need for a 
     product or services and ending with contract completion 
     and closeout, as specified in 41 U.S.C. 403(2).


                             point of order

  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his point of order.
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I am making a point of order to 
the fee provisions in this paragraph for lack of authorization.
  The CHAIRMAN. Would the gentleman specify the page and line?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against 
the series of provisos commencing on page 36, line 16 and continuing 
through page 37, line 6 on the ground these provisions violate rule 
XXI, clause 2 on the ground of legislating in an appropriations bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Mollohan] 
desire to be heard on the point of order?
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I concede the point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from West Virginia concedes the point of 
order and the point of order is sustained. The provisions specified 
will be stricken.


                   amendment offered by mr. mollohan

  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Mollohan: On page 35, line 23, 
     strike ``$238,131,000'' and insert ``$900,000''.

  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, as a result of the point of order just 
offered and sustained by the Chair, the amounts in the bill now exceed 
the subcommittee 602(b) allocation for discretionary budget authority 
by $237,591,000. The provision stricken by the point of order, 
identical to the one that was included in the 1994 Appropriations Act, 
would have offset the appropriation for the Securities and Exchange 
Commission through collection of additional fees. This amendment 
reduces that budget authority for the SEC to $900,000 in order to 
conform the bill to the 602(b) allocation.
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Very briefly, Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman has indicated, this 
amendment is necessary now that the moneys have been stricken as has 
just been done. This amendment is necessary in order to bridge the bill 
back under 602(b) allocation due to the previous point of order. I 
regret that we have to do this, but we will continue to work in 
conference hopefully to try and resolve the issue.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Mollohan].
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read:
  The Clerk read as follows:

       In addition, upon enactment of legislation amending the 
     Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-1 et seq.), 
     and subject to the schedule of fees contained in such 
     legislation, such fees may be collected and shall be 
     deposited as an offsetting collection to this appropriation 
     to recover the cost of registration, supervision, and 
     regulation of investment advisers and their activities: 
     Provided, That such fees shall remain available until 
     expended: Provided further, That any such fees collected in 
     excess of $8,595,000 shall not be available for obligation 
     until October 1, 1995.

                        State Justice Institute


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the State Justice Institute, as 
     authorized by The State Justice Institute Authorization Act 
     of 1992 (Public Law 102-572 (106 Stat. 4515-4516)), 
     $13,550,000 to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That not to exceed $2,500 shall be available for official 
     reception and representation expenses.
       This title may be cited as the ``Department of Justice and 
     Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1995''.

                    TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

             National Institute of Standards and Technology


             scientific and technical research and services

       For necessary expenses of the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology, $279,420,000, to remain available 
     until expended, of which not to exceed $8,500,000 may be 
     transferred to the ``Working Capital Fund.''


                     industrial technology services

       For necessary expenses of the Manufacturing Extension 
     Partnership, the Advanced Technology Program and the Quality 
     Program of the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology, $495,960,000, to remain available until expended, 
     of which $315,000,000 shall not be available for obligation 
     until May 1, 1995; and of which not to exceed $1,600,000 may 
     be transferred to the ``Working Capital Fund''.


                  construction of research facilities

       For construction of new research facilities, including 
     architectural and engineering design, not otherwise provided 
     for the National Institute of Standards and Technology, as 
     authorized by 15 U.S.C. 278c-278e, $64,686,000, to remain 
     available until expended.

            National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration


                  operations, research, and facilities

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses of activities authorized by law for 
     the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 
     including acquisition, maintenance, operation, and hire of 
     aircraft; not to exceed 439 commissioned officers on the 
     active list; as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343 and 1344; 
     construction of facilities, including initial equipment as 
     authorized by 33 U.S.C. 883i; grants, contracts, or other 
     payments to nonprofit organizations for the purposes of 
     conducting activities pursuant to cooperative agreements; and 
     alteration, modernization, and relocation of facilities as 
     authorized by 33 U.S.C. 883i; $1,792,978,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That notwithstanding 31 
     U.S.C. 3302 but consistent with other existing law, in 
     addition to fees currently being assessed and collected, 
     additional fees shall be assessed, collected, and credited 
     to this appropriation as offsetting collections to be 
     available until expended, to recover the costs of 
     administering living marine resources, marine sanctuary, 
     and aeronautical charting programs: Provided further, That 
     the sum herein appropriated from the general fund shall be 
     reduced as such additional fees are received during fiscal 
     year 1995, so as to result in a final general fund 
     appropriation estimated at not more than $1,751,978,000: 
     Provided further, That any such additional fees received 
     in excess of $41,000,000 in fiscal year 1995 shall not be 
     available for obligation until October 1, 1995: Provided 
     further, That in addition, $55,500,000 shall be derived by 
     transfer from the fund entitled ``Promote and Develop 
     Fishery Products and Research Pertaining to American 
     Fisheries'': Provided further, That hereafter all receipts 
     received from the sale of aeronautical charts that result 
     from an increase in the price of individual charts above 
     the level in effect for such charts on September 30, 1993, 
     shall be deposited in this account as an offsetting 
     collection and shall be available for obligation: Provided 
     further, That of the offsetting collections credited to 
     this account, $123,000 are permanently canceled.


                amendment offered by mr. fields of texas

  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Fields of Texas:
       Page 39, line 24, strike ``$1,792,978,000'' and insert 
     ``$1,785,978,000''.
       Page 40, line 10, strike ``$1,751,978,000'' and insert 
     ``$1,744,978,000''.

  (Mr. FIELDS of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, the simple explanation for this 
amendment is that it reduces the appropriation for NOAA by $7 million. 
That is the simple explanation. It is very important for this House to 
understand why $7 million. For me to answer the question, what is this 
amendment directed toward? This amendment is directed toward a program 
that goes by the acronym GLOBE. I have great respect and friendship 
with our Vice President, Al Gore. However, I disagree with a program 
that is a result of something that Mr. Gore wants us to enact today. It 
is a program that would be hosted by NOAA. It is a new interagency 
program which is designed to enhance the collective awareness of 
individuals throughout the world concerning the environment and the 
impacts of human activities on the environment. Second, it is to 
increase scientific understanding of the Earth by using the dense 
worldwide network of schools to collect environmental observations.
  On its face, there appears to be nothing wrong with those particular 
goals until we get into the specifics and until we look at not only 
what is being requested this year in terms of appropriations but what 
will be requested in the following years.
  Mr. Chairman, this program proposes to have school children around 
the world monitor the entire Earth daily by collecting observations of 
global climate change of dubious scientific value. For example, seventh 
graders will be taking air chemistry measurements. The majority of the 
measurements will be taken in foreign countries. In fiscal year 1995, 
NOAA projects that 30 schools in 20 countries will be involved. 
Although they cannot tell us exactly which particular schools or which 
particular countries, we do have an idea of who some of these countries 
are.
  Mr. Chairman, a question for all of us sitting here today is why 
should the United States be funding foreign countries to participate in 
this particular project? Funds will be used to buy solar-powered 
television sets, to train foreign teachers, to buy satellite time, 
computers and software according to a White House briefing. The Vice 
President even suggests in his book an annual tree census. I think we 
have a better use for this particular money.
  Mr. Chairman, let me give some examples:
  In NOAA the money could be used for nautical charting, for fisheries 
enhancements, for fleet repair. For that matter, we could use the money 
for other existing programs such as national drug interdiction which 
has been cut by $95 million.

                              {time}  1200

  The boat safety account, which the administration has zeroed out, to 
keep open 14 Coast Guard search and rescue stations around the country, 
and to provide funds for U.S. shipbuilding; the projected expenditures 
for the GLOBE Program are frightening, as much as $100 million in the 
year 2000 with 100,000 schools participating, and in 2010, the goal is 
to have over 2 million schools participating in every nation. This 
means the United States investment, if you extrapolate, could be as 
much as $2 billion.
  NOAA's GLOBE Program authorizes an initial 8 staff positions in 
fiscal year 1995 at a time when the agency is asked to reduce personnel 
to meet budget targets. The program's financial needs almost double in 
fiscal year 1996, because NOAA is estimating $12 million. And we have 
to ask, will those personnel requirements double also.
  Some White House personnel have suggested corporate sponsorships with 
a 20-to-one matching ratio could be used to fund some of the programs, 
but as of this date, no names have been supplied.
  NOAA is not proposing to reduce its budget for global climate change 
research or to cut back on its own observations in light of this new 
program. NOAA this year reprogrammed $500,000 in fiscal year 1994, to 
start this program without any notice to Congress until just a few days 
ago. We now have received notice after the fact and after objection has 
been raised.
  But we also found that GLOBE already has an office, already has a 
director at NOAA. Other agencies are also expected to chip in, EPA, 
NASA, but it is unclear if the funds are included in the fiscal year 
1995 budget for these agencies.
  The countries that we think are interested in GLOBE and which would 
have the program directed toward them, countries like the Bahamas, 
Benin, Croatia, El Salvador, Gambia, Kurdistan, Latvia, Mauritania, and 
I just have to ask myself, Mr. Chairman, at a time when we have limited 
financial resources at our disposal, should we start a brandnew 
program, a foreign aid expenditure that has dubious value. I think the 
compelling answer is that we should not, and there is no question in 
this gentleman's mind that this $7 million should be reduced from NOAA. 
And that is what I am asking this House to do today.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Fields] has 
expired.
  (At the request of Mr. Rogers and by unanimous consent, Mr. Fields of 
Texas was allowed to proceed for 5 additional minutes.)
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I assume, this being a brandnew and 
potentially a large entitlement program, surely there have been 
hearings on this and we have aired out all of the pros and cons of this 
matter? Is that correct or not?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. There have not been hearings. We had a markup 
but we have not completed the authorization process.
  Mr. ROGERS. You mean there have been no hearings on this matter 
before any committee of the Congress?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. No.
  Mr. ROGERS. Has it been authorized by any of the authorizing 
committees of the House?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. The Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries 
has voted on this particular program.
  Mr. ROGERS. That was the authorization?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. We have not gone through the House of 
Representatives and completed the authorization process.
  Mr. ROGERS. So at this stage of the game, the House has not been 
allowed to act on whether or not we want to authorize such a program?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. The gentleman is absolutely correct. Again, I 
want to state I have a great friendship for our Vice President, who has 
been very proactive on environmental matters. We have had discussions 
on this particular program. We certainly have a disagreement, not only 
as to process, but also as to Federal expenditures. I think in concept 
the idea is noble, but I think this is a perfect example where the 
private sector, if there is a good scientific value, should step 
forward and participate. We should not ask the taxpayers to shoulder 
this burden.
  Mr. ROGERS. If the gentleman would yield further, this is basically 
an education program of sorts, is it not?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. That is absolutely true, the way I understand 
it. The gentleman has to understand there are a lot of questions that 
have not be answered, that have not be fleshed out.
  Mr. ROGERS. Has the Education Committee of the House had a chance to 
hold hearings on this and to flesh out whether or not it is a good 
expenditure of dollars?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. My understanding is the Education Committee has 
not had hearings on this, and the Department of Education is not 
involved.
  Mr. ROGERS. So the Merchant Marine Committee, which is the 
authorizing committee for NOAA, although it may have passed out a bill, 
it has not been acted on on the floor?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. That is absolutely correct.
  Mr. ROGERS. Authorizing or not authorizing this program? The 
Education Committee of the House has not had hearings and has made no 
recommendation on it?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. This is the first floor activity for this 
particular program, the appropriation, but it is also important to 
point out to the gentleman that $500,000 has already been spent out of 
NOAA's budget in creating an office that has a director. Now, we just 
in the past several days have received that reprogramming notice after 
the fact and after we had raised objection.
  Mr. ROGERS. If the gentleman will continue to yield, do I understand 
you that the projections are this program could cost up to $100 million 
a year in just a few short years?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. That is absolutely correct.
  Mr. ROGERS. Where would this money come from, from the NOAA budget?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. It would be, I assume, additional 
appropriations, because NOAA is not planning to cut its functions for 
this particular program.
  Mr. ROGERS. The gentleman has indicated that he has been in touch 
with the administration about this program. Is that correct?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. I have talked with the Vice President.
  Mr. ROGERS. Have you tried to work something out?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. I told the Vice President I would be amenable if 
we could find some cost effective way to implement this particular 
program, and I will share with the gentleman the first response that we 
got was that this program would cost $7 million in fiscal year 1995, 
$25 million in fiscal year 1996, and $40 million per year thereafter. 
That was the first suggestion. The second suggestion was $7 million, in 
fiscal year 1995, $15 million in 1996, and $25 million in 1997. So I 
have to ask myself, is this one of those programs that is the 
bottomless pit where expenditures are going to continue, and again you 
have to come back and ask, is this a viable, productive program.
  It is thought that much of what would be done would have dubious, 
questionable scientific value.
  Mr. ROGERS. If the gentleman will yield further now, we have had to 
cut funds for everything from the FBI to the courts to U.S. attorneys 
to the State Department in our bill, and we have not done a lot of 
things we would have loved to have done in hundreds of agencies.
  Is the gentleman saying here that we are being asked to appropriate 
some of those hard-saved dollars so that kids in Europe can go out and 
count trees?
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Not just Europe. I gave a list of the countries 
just a moment ago, the 40 countries that we think would most likely 
have an interest in participating in the program, but it is important 
to point out to the gentleman we are not suggesting cutting some of the 
vital functions of NOAA. We are talking about reducing the level of 
funding for this brand-new program that had not gone through the 
authorization process.
  Mr. ROGERS. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I do rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Fields].
  I think that he strikes funding for a program that has great merit 
and really looks in a couple of different directions.
  We might look at this funding as having a couple of advantages; in 
one direction, this funding will provide a program to educate young 
people as to the importance of the environment, to make them concerned 
and aware about their environment. On the other hand, the program will 
provide very useful scientific information for our scientists and for 
agencies that are monitoring and evaluating global and climate change. 
This program, I think, conceptually is very useful.
  We are providing funds that will establish a worldwide system where 
young people all around the globe will be able to go out and collect 
environmental information and feed it back into a system electronically 
through computers, and thus contribute to a global initiative.
  Now there are some concerns being raised about why the United States 
should fund such a program around the world. Well, indeed, very little 
funding will come from the United States. Foreign governments, who have 
signed up for this program, will pay for their own country's 
participation to the extent that they are able. There may be in this 
program some U.S. Government funding used to pay for a small number of 
pilot sites overseas to demonstrate and to test the technologies, but 
it is not anticipated that we would fund the global initiative. We 
anticipate that countries around the world would fund their own 
participation.
  The scientific data that is to be collected will be extremely useful. 
The student-acquired information will be used for environmental 
research activities globally. It will complement information which is 
retrieved with remote sensing by our satellites and aircraft data 
gathering mechanisms.

                              {time}  1210

  And it will provide a detailed complement to that remote data by an 
on-the-ground, if you will, and probably very cheap and inexpensive 
way. For the purpose of involving scientists at the beginning--and 
scientists are going to be involved at the beginning of the program--is 
to make the program substantive, to insure that it is not simply an 
information-field-trip kind of exercise for youngsters. It will be 
designed with scientists involved in the beginning to insure that the 
kind of measurements made are meaningful, accurate, and that they will 
indeed be useful for scientific purposes.
  The program involves youngsters from kindergarten up through 
graduation and high school. I think that is a marvelous concept that we 
involve these young people at an early age and involve them 
increasingly, as they mature and become increasingly sophisticated, the 
information they are allowed to retrieve and participate in and 
manipulate will be increasingly sophisticated.
  Mr. Chairman, there are a number of countries already expressing an 
interest in GLOBE, some 40 countries I am advised. There are at least 
200 schools and maybe as many as 500 that will participate in GLOBE in 
1995 with the implementation of the program and the support of this 
funding.

  Now it is important to ensure that individuals throughout the world 
understand the concern for our environment. I can think of no better 
way than to begin educating young people through this kind of program 
that makes them technologically and computer literate, that allows them 
to participate in a worldwide effort that they know other young people 
around the world are participating in and allows them to gather good 
quality information.
  There is some concern expressed about the agencies which are involved 
in this program. I would advise the committee that the National Science 
Foundation is actively involved with this program as is the Department 
of Education, the Department of State, NASA, and NOAA.
  So I would hope that this amendment would be defeated, Mr. Chairman, 
and that this very worthy program would receive this funding.
  I might add that in the future the amount of funding requested for 
the program will always be reviewed by this committee and to the extent 
that funding is unreasonable it certainly will not be approved.
  Mr. BATEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  (Mr. BATEMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BATEMAN. Mr. Chairman and Members of the House, I rise in support 
of my colleague Mr. Fields' amendment to strike funding for the GLOBE 
Program. I do so reluctantly, but I think here we have a classic case 
of where good intentions take us on a path that leads to some very 
undesirable consequences which I am not sure are being adequately 
foreseen.
  To spend $7 million to have schoolchildren around the world taking 
environmental measurements is to my mind something that would only 
occur to people inside the beltway. If this is a valid educational 
program we do not need to spend $7 million in fiscal year 1995 to 
accomplish it; we certainly do not need to spend the projected $100 
million by the year 2000 to achieve it. All it takes is for the people 
in charge of the educational systems of this country and other 
countries to determine that this is a valid educational exercise that 
students and their school systems should go through. And almost without 
funds you have created it, if it is a valid educational exercise.
  If you are trying to argue the case that these expenditures and this 
program are necessary or desirable because of its scientific and 
technical merit I would question the judgment that says if you want 
scientific technical data to enlarge the scope of human knowledge and 
our ability to deal with problems, do you really think you are going to 
get that data by sending kindergarten children or even seventh graders 
out to collect that data?

  This is logic run amuck.
  I know the good intentions which underlie it. I do not dispute the 
good intentions. But to the extent there are valid things to make our 
young people sensitive to environmental concerns you simply do not need 
the this program and these expenditures in order to do it.
  It may be a bit in the way of hyperbole but I would suggest that 
during the Middle Ages zealots recruited and dispatched a Children's 
Crusade to make war on those they regarded as infidels in the Holy 
Land. Here again I think we are at risk of launching another Children's 
Crusade. I do not think this is a justifiable project. The budget and 
concerns of NOAA for other legitimate projects and activities are being 
stretched beyond the proper limit and we certainly should not distract 
from them by a new, untried, and to my mind unnecessary program whose 
lawful and proper objectives can be attained without the action of 
Congress in appropriating this kind of money now and the kinds of money 
that have been projected for the future.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge a vote for the Fields amendment.
  The account which is being diluted by the GLOBE appropriation 
provides funds for important regional research programs supported by 
many Members of the House. These programs have by and large not seen 
any increases in several years. The account also funds NOAA's mapping 
and charting efforts, an area where we are in some cases decades behind 
in work that needs to be updated. The Sea Grant Program which 
translates marine research into valuable real world applications is 
funded out of this account, as is long-term climate change research and 
oceanic observation and prediction work. All these programs are 
important in the here and now, and cannot afford to compete with a new 
education program that will consume $100 million a year by the year 
2000. If you analyze the costs relative to the merits of this program, 
it is dramatically deficient. It is an idea whose time has not come.
  Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment and 
move to strike the requisite number of words.
  Colleagues, if anyone thinks it is somehow a luxury to develop a 
worldwide understanding and appreciation of exactly what are the 
dimensions of the risk that this planet is in, I hope that they can be 
disabused of that notion because it is absolutely essential and 
important to this country, to our leadership in the world and to the 
planet as a whole that we be taking this kind of initiative.
  I was visiting recently with some of this Nation's premier 
atmospheric scientists and they made a startling observation which was 
basically this: We do not know whether we may have already pushed the 
planet's ecosystems, its atmosphere, its other ecology past the point 
of no return. We do not know exactly what degree of peril the future of 
the planet may be in. It is clearly in the interests of the developed 
world with the United States in the leadership to induce, particularly, 
the underdeveloped world, the Third World, to get a stake in the 
solution to this problem. It is not going to be solved simply by the 
United States and Europe and those countries with high GDP doing their 
share. We have got to bring along the rest of the world.

  So a program that deals with education in this area is critical. For 
us to sow the seeds around the world for schoolkids to start to get it, 
to start to understand their stake in the future of the planet and the 
measurements that inform judgments about what we do to make sure that 
we survive as a race and as a planet, could not be anything more 
profoundly in our national interest and in the international interest 
than helping move that process along.
  So I hope that my colleagues, for all of the points on process and 
otherwise that have been raised in support of this amendment, I hope 
they will keep their eye on the ball, the GLOBE, and defeat this 
amendment.
  Mr. STUDDS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SKAGGS. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. STUDDS. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to associate myself with the gentleman's 
remarks. He I think very eloquently put his finger on what is at stake 
here. I of course am shocked at the distinguished gentleman from Texas 
[Mr. Fields] who is right an astonishing proportion of the time on 
these matters. This is most out of character for him. This is a very 
important, very inexpensive, very symbolic and I think very rewarding 
program. To raise consciousness around the world and achieve some 
scientific benefits simultaneously for a relatively small price, to 
bring forth a generation, not just in our country but in all the 
countries of the world who are aware of and are committed to 
environmental progress, I think is a pretty sound investment.
  So I commend the gentleman [Mr. Skaggs] for his eloquent defense of 
the program. I think this is something which I think Members know is 
personally dear to the heart of the Vice President who I suspect has 
made that abundantly clear even to the gentleman from Texas, whose 
phone must have been out of order. I hope very much with all due 
respect and affection for my ranking member this amendment ought to be 
rejected.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SKAGGS. I yield to the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller].
  Mr. MILLER of California. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to associate myself with the gentleman's remarks 
and just say when we look at many of these Third World countries where 
we believe we still have an opportunity, if we can help them choose the 
right environmental path that they will be able to secure a future of 
great economic independence should they make that choice. But that 
choice is going to come through education.
  What we now see, unfortunately, is because of the lack of data, 
because of the lack of education on these issues of environmental 
concern, of environmental sustainability, economic sustainability, many 
of these countries are headed down the same path that other countries 
have gone, that end up being very, very costly for them in the long 
term, and then coming back with remediation, with trying efforts at 
mitigation. We have an opportunity in this program to take young 
children, make them environmentally aware, have them participate in 
understanding not only the environment of their own country but the 
environments of the other countries of the world and the 
interconnectiveness of those environments.

                              {time}  1220

  We know, that as hard as we try in this country to clean up the air, 
to clean up the waters, to protect the oceans, that that can be swamped 
by what can take place in terms of environmental degradation in the 
Third World. If China does not choose the right path in terms of energy 
production, it can overwhelm everything we are doing here in terms of 
clean air. If other countries do not choose the right path in terms of 
ocean pollution, it can overwhelm what we are doing in this country. 
So, we can end up spending billions and billions of dollars, billions 
of dollars for remediation in this country, to have it be for naught if 
other countries do not start to take and choose those paths.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Skaggs] 
has expired.
  (On request of Mr. Fields of Texas and by unanimous consent, Mr. 
Skaggs was allowed to proceed for 3 additional minutes.)
  Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SKAGGS. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I would just say that that is 
the option that this program provides us in some small way and to try 
to provide some seed money so we can encourage others to participate in 
this, and I would hope that we would reject the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Fields] to the bill.
  Mrs. FOWLER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Fields amendment. This 
amendment would cut $7 million from the Commerce appropriations bill. 
This money is earmarked for GLOBE, the Global Learning and Observation 
to Benefit the Environment Program. This program is part of Vice 
President Gore's book, ``Earth in the Balance.'' The program calls for 
a worldwide system in which schoolchildren and their teachers would 
monitor the global environment.
  Included in this is a tree census to monitor the worldwide tree 
population. In addition to the $7 million appropriation in this 
legislation, EPA and NASA are expected to contribute another $6 million 
for a total of $13 million in fiscal year 1995 funds. Mr. Chairman, I 
oppose funding this program for several reasons.
  First, the program has never been authorized. In fact there have 
never even been hearings on this proposal. While we can think of many 
questions to ask of this program, there has never been an opportunity 
to do so.
  Second, we simply cannot afford to begin funding yet another new 
program. Appropriations for the GLOBE program for fiscal year 1995 
total $13 million. These costs soar to $100 million in the year 2000. 
This is money we could be using on drug interdiction, U.S. 
shipbuilding, crime, or welfare reform. Instead, the GLOBE program will 
force us to spend these funds on tree counting.
  Finally, I oppose the program because it puts the United States in a 
position of funding schools and teachers in foreign countries to 
participate in this program. Given our Federal deficit and the need to 
wisely use Federal resources, it makes no sense to send our limit 
Federal tax dollars to unnamed foreign countries to use on their 
educational systems.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Fields amendment and eliminate 
funding for the GLOBE Program.
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Mrs. FOWLER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would like to respond for just a 
moment to some of the thoughtful statements that have been made by my 
friends from West Virginia, Colorado, Massachusetts, and California.
  Conceptually we think this has much merit. We have a real problem, 
however, with process, that we did not complete the authorization 
process. We have heard some very good statements today. As my 
colleagues know, it would be nice to hear these statements at the 
subcommittees, the full committee level, and then finally here on the 
floor, before we rush to an appropriation. So, there is a process 
problem.
  Second, Mr. Chairman, we have a real concern about the amount of 
Federal tax dollars that will not only be spent in this fiscal year, 
but what will be spent in years in the future. We are getting 
conflicting numbers from a number of different people. We know what it 
is this year, but we also have to remind the House that $500,000 was 
reprogrammed without any notice to this body until after the fact. That 
is a great concern to the minority.
  Mr. Chairman, those are the reasons that we are standing here today 
saying that this is a program that should not be funded, it is a 
program that should be zeroed out, and this the opportunity.
  Mrs. UNSOELD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to associate myself with the remarks of the 
chairman, and the gentleman from Colorado, and the gentleman from 
Massachusetts in opposition to this amendment.
  We adults tend to overlook the real value that children and students 
can bring, not only to their own learning, but to the contribution they 
can make to the world's knowledge. In my own community we have a 
businessman, the Saturn dealer to be exact, who has had such a program 
as this where students are gathering information on the water quality, 
on fish-spawning habitat, supplying it to the Department of Natural 
Resources, actually doing the valuable work toward the improvement of 
the quality of the environment in their community and in the State. It 
not only enthuses them for what needs to be done and makes them 
potentially so much more likely to be leaders in their communities when 
they are adults on addressing some of these issues, but it translates 
also into greater action and involvement by their parents. This is an 
opportunity with a very small United States match to spread that 
concept around the globe and to give young people real opportunity to 
contribute to scientific knowledge and to contribute to benefiting this 
globe on which we share.
  As the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller] mentioned earlier, if 
we take inordinate measures to protect the environment in this country, 
if some other country has a totally different standard because the 
people are not enthusiastic about the protection, our efforts are in 
vain. The expenditures that our businesses and our people will make 
will be in vain. So, involving these young people while they are 
students, while they can become world citizens for the protection of 
the globe, now is the time to do it, and I oppose this amendment.
  Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Fields] to remove the funding for the GLOBE 
Program.
  This appropriation bill appropriates $7 million for GLOBE--an 
unauthorized new Federal foreign aid program. I am very concerned about 
the projection that this new program may cost the American taxpayer as 
much as $2 billion by the year 2010.
  Though I believe it is important that we should all work to take 
steps to preserve and protect the environment, this project is clearly 
the wrong approach.
  The information gathered by these untrained foreign students will 
have dubious scientific value. In addition, the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] has indicated to the Merchant Marine 
and Fisheries Committee, in which I serve, that they are not sure how 
they are going to use this information was it is collected.
  Mr. Chairman, it is clear this program is a highly questionable 
expenditure of our scarce Federal dollars.
  In these tight fiscal times--choice is the key word. NOAA is facing a 
reduced budget and could better use the money for such things as 
nautical charting or fleet repair. Or even better, my fellow colleagues 
can support the Fields amendment which will allow this Congress to 
direct this savings to job creation or fighting crime, a much higher 
priority for the American people.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. POMBO. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's remarks, and I 
think the gentleman is right on in supporting the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Fields]. I would just like to add a few 
things to what the gentleman from California has said.
  As my colleagues know, the Democrats have the President and the White 
House and all that that implies, and I know that the Democrats have a 
vast majority in the House, and they have a majority in the Senate. But 
I just think it is really unfortunate that we now have a new process of 
government. If the Vice President of the United States wants a new 
program, we just slide it into a bill and kick it off, no hearings, 
nothing. We are just going to do it. No accountability is there, no 
real airing of what is going on here.

                              {time}  1230

  I take one issue with the gentlewoman from Washington, who has seemed 
to be very enthusiastic, and I think laudable, in the fact she wants to 
create world citizens to do this kind of work using school children.
  I might tell the gentlewoman that I have a degree, a bachelor of 
science degree in biology. I have had a lot of work in sampling 
programs and sampling courses, and I have got to admit to the 
gentlewoman that college students that have been taught to do sampling 
and use sampling methods provide terrible data. College students, 
people over the age of 18. Yet what this proposal is is to have seventh 
graders out there collecting data.
  Now, what that suggests to me is that you do not care what the data 
says. In fact, NOAA does not know how to use the data if you did 
collect it correctly.
  But you do not care what the data says, and that has been shown to me 
time and time again in the Clean Air Act. I can remember vividly that 
we had a $100 million program that spent 10 years investigating acid 
rain. Yet we made sure that we passed the Clean Air Act before they 
published the conclusions on acid rain. And the conclusion was, by good 
scientists, Ph.D's out there collecting data, that acid rain was not 
the crisis that people on this floor wanted to portray.
  I even asked Carol Browner, the Administrator of EPA, in our 
subcommittee, if she saw that science got in the way of her agenda on 
policy, what would she do? She virtually, and I am paraphrasing, said, 
that if science gets in the way, we will push it aside, because good 
policy is more important than good science.
  That is what is happening here. And I think Members really ought to 
understand. We are going to spend millions of dollars collecting faulty 
data that will be assimilated so that we can prove a conclusion that 
has already been written in a book called ``Earth In The Balance.'' 
That is the book that Vice President Gore wrote as a campaign piece. 
That is what is happening here, using taxpayer money, paying for a 
program that has not even been looked at and authorized by this House, 
to substantiate a conclusion written in a campaign book. That is what 
is happening here.
  If you vote against the Fields amendment, you are supporting such 
nonsense.
  Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, in conclusion I would 
just like to say I am personally offended that we would use this 
process to further the unproven-by-scientists agenda of the Vice 
President, and try not only to inject that into the schools of America, 
but to inject that into schools worldwide, in order to further an 
agenda that scientists cannot even reach consensus on.
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number 
of words.
  Mr. Chairman, it is important to stress a worldwide awareness that 
the ecosystems of the planet are being destroyed. Our oceans are being 
polluted, our rain forests are being destroyed, and I would think that 
foreign countries need to put an emphasis on us protecting those areas.
  But to take $700 million away from NOAA, $6 million from NASA, with 
EPA contributing an amount of up to $2 billion, for kids to collect 
scientific data, we have got to draw the line.
  Let us let NOAA and the scientists that have the responsibilities for 
doing these things do it. It is also important, I think I would rather 
have $7 million go for a tax cut for middle-class Americans.
  We are trying to find a lot of dollars right now to fund a health 
care bill. We cannot do that right now. We have got a health care bill 
coming on the floor shortly that is underfunded. But yet we are going 
to spend up to $2 billion on this. We are going to spend over 5 years, 
$1 billion on the National Endowment for the Arts. We are going to have 
a California desert plan that is going to cost us billions of dollars. 
There is 336,000 acres. We do not have the money to pay for it, but it 
is OK, we will put it on the national debt, we will increase the 
deficit.
  My constituents are telling me, ``Duke, do not raise my taxes and cut 
spending.'' Yet we continually find new ways to spend money. Nearly $5 
trillion, that equates to $1.3 billion a day we pay on the national 
debt. That is just for the interest. That does not even include the 
principal.
  Let us blame defense. We have cut defense $177 billion, but we still 
increase the national deficit, through programs like I just have spoken 
about.
  $700 million, $6 million request from NASA, the EPA contributing, for 
kids collecting scientific data.
  Mr. Chairman, if we are going to be serious in Congress about 
reducing spending, the President said he wants to reduce the deficit, 
we are not going to do it by adding and adding and adding for all these 
different programs for new spending. We have environmental programs. 
One of the good things that the President has done is focused on the 
environment.
  A lot of our military bases today have dumped fuel oil and polluted 
the Earth, and a large part of it is companies that did not look ahead, 
and now it is costing us millions and millions of dollars to clean it 
up. Let us take the $700 million or the $2 billion and put it in 
something worthwhile, that is, a tax reduction, that is, for something 
that will help the environment. But to have foreign kids collect 
scientific data is not good for the American people.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, today I rise in support of Mr. Fields' amendment and 
urge my colleagues to join me.
  The Fields amendment strikes $7 million from the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration appropriations for fiscal year 1995. This 
amount is equivalent to the funding level proposed for the GLOBE, the 
Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the Environment Program.
  GLOBE was proposed by Vice President Al Gore in his book, ``Earth in 
the Balance.'' NOAA would run the program to enhance the awareness of 
individuals throughout the world concerning humanity's impact on the 
environment.
  Under this program, the United States would pay for schoolchildren 
around the world to take temperature, wind, and air chemistry 
measurements as well as to conduct an annual tree census.
  But, one thing is certain--no matter how many trees are counted, the 
Vice President's program will not locate an oak, pine, or bamboo tree 
that has dollar bills as foliage. Money simply does not grow on trees.
  While the concept of encouraging schoolchildren to take part in 
scientific experiments may be meritorious, this program is a highly 
questionable expenditure of our scarce Federal dollars.
  In fact, GLOBE is so questionable that it has not been authorized by 
this Congress. Once again, however, the Appropriations Committee has 
adopted an elitist attitude and disregarded the decisions of the 
authorizing committee. This is an outrageous disregard for the rules of 
this body.
  The authorizing committee is clearly in the best position to weigh 
the merits of the program and decide if it is worthy of Federal 
funding. I am confident that they had very good reasons for denying 
this program authorization.
  For example, this year's requested funding for GLOBE is only $7 
million in fiscal year 1995, but projections indicate that spending 
will skyrocket to $100 million in the year 2000. This means that the 
U.S. cumulative investment could total more than $2 billion.
  Not only is this program an enormous expense, most of this money will 
be spent on other nations to train foreign teachers, buy satellite 
time, computers, and solar TV's.
  With a ballooning national debt, Congress can hardly justify spending 
hard-working American taxpayers dollars on foreign schools.
  Despite the expensive data to be collected by GLOBE, NOAA does not 
intend to reduce its budget for global climate research. This is a 
clear indication that the data obtained through GLOBE will be of 
dubious scientific value and that it is duplicative of other NOAA 
observations. In either case, it is obviously not worth the expenditure 
in a time when we should be pinching pennies.
  Mr. Chairman, in addition to eliminating the $7 million, the Fields 
amendment prohibits the use of any dollars appropriated to NOAA for the 
GLOBE Program. This is clearly necessary because last year NOAA 
blatantly ignored and violated Public Law 102-567, which requires that 
notice be given to the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries 
before the agency reprogrammed $500,000 of its fiscal year 1994 funds 
to start this program.
  This is another example of the Congress disregarding its own rules of 
procedure. The GLOBE Program is unnecessary and wasteful and was denied 
authorization by the appropriate committee for very good reasons. I 
urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Fields amendment.

                              {time}  1240

  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  I have to rise in support of this amendment. There have been no 
hearings on this potentially very large project that eventually is 
supposed to reach every nation on Earth. This program has not been 
authorized by the House. The Committee on Education and Labor has not 
had hearings on the matter and by and large this is, if anything, an 
educational program. But the Committee on Education and Labor has had 
no hearings and has certainly not authorized this very new project.
  No. 2, the money is being taken from the NOAA account.
  NOAA is very precise in their mission. That is to make very 
scientific measurements of the environment, of research matters that 
are precise and that people depend upon even with their very lives in 
the case of the National Weather Service. No one is saying that the 
data to be collected worldwide by children will be anything near 
reliable scientific and research quality items. And yet, the money to 
be taken by this dubious project from the NOAA account would take money 
that we had to skimp to find from such things as the Modernization 
Program and the National Weather Service. We are underfunding that 
account by less than the money in this bill. We are underfunding the 
polar spacecraft and the geostationary spacecraft that the National 
Weather Service has to have for the safety of every single American. If 
we want to find the money from some other agency, go to the Education 
bill, go to the Committee on Education and Labor, that is where this 
belongs, if anywhere. It does not belong in the NOAA account, Mr. 
Chairman, because we are underfunding critical programs in the NOAA 
account to fund this very dubious tree-counting mission in Argentina.
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROGERS. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, $59 million has been cut from drug 
interdiction. Fourteen Coast Guard search and rescue stations around 
the country have been eliminated. The Boat Safety Act has been zeroed 
out, and we will be coming before this body, as we have already, asking 
for funds for U.S. shipbuilding which is a high priority.
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I wish that we would pass this over for the 
time being. Vote for the Fields amendment. Let us eliminate this money 
so we can put it back in the National Weather Service to complete the 
Modernization Program and be able to launch the weather satellites in 
an appropriate way to fund them as we have. And let us pass the Fields 
amendment and have the Committee on Education and Labor, the 
authorizing committee, where this belongs, hold a couple of days of 
hearings, maybe 1 day of hearings. Let us know what we are dealing 
with. We are buying a pig in a poke here. The poke has some holes in 
it, because we have had to cut the NOAA account in so many other ways. 
I urge a vote for the Fields amendment.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROGERS. I yield to the gentleman from West Virginia.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished ranking 
minority member for yielding to me.
  I just wanted to clarify, I believe the gentleman from Virginia that 
preceded the distinguished ranking minority member, the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Goodlatte], probably misspoke and indicated that the 
authorization for this program had been denied. I am advised that the 
authorizing committee or one of the committees that would have 
jurisdiction, the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, has 
reported the bill and recommended an authorization of $7 million. So 
there obviously has been very serious consideration by the authorizing 
committee.
  Also I would like to point out that this program was the subject in 
one of our hearings in which Dr. Baker, who is head of NOAA, indicated 
that the GLOBE Program, ``is an opportunity for us to respond, to have 
a better educated public on environmental issues and also to engage our 
science and technology base in some educational activity.'' And then 
finally, ``We see a real value-added activity here in terms of the data 
that will be produced.''
  So it obviously has the support of NOAA. It has had considerable 
consideration of the authorizing side while at the same time it has not 
gone completely through that process.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers] 
has expired.
  (By unanimous consent, Mr. Rogers was allowed to proceed for 1 
additional minute.)
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROGERS. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, just to clarify very quickly, 
there were no hearings in the Committee on Merchant Marine and 
Fisheries. There was a subcommittee vote. There was a full committee 
vote.
  Under a normal set of circumstances, this would now got to the 
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
  That has not even taken up this particular piece of legislation. This 
is not completed, the normal authorization process wherein we have 
debate, wherein we can flush out issues and Members have an opportunity 
to act on a particular piece of legislation.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROGERS. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Kentucky for 
yielding to me and to clarify my remarks, which were what I gave in the 
Record, I stated that this House had not authorized this program. I 
stand by those remarks.
  Mrs. BENTLEY. I rise in support of the amendment offered by Mr. 
Fields which eliminates the $7 million from the unauthorized GLOBE 
Program.
  Under GLOBE, the American taxpayer soon will pay for a worldwide 
education program under which schoolchildren from 20 foreign countries 
will monitor the earth daily by taking air chemistry measurements and 
conduct an annual global tree census.
  Further, the $7 million will be used, in part, to purchase solar-
powered television sets, buy satellite time so children around the 
planet can compare data, train foreign teachers, and establish a new 
office under NOAA.
  Mr. Chairman, why should the U.S. taxpayer provide the funding for 
foreign schools to participate in such a program? I am sure the 
American people would much rather see this money used for schools and 
schoolchildren here in the United States.
  During a time of skyrocketing debt and when illiteracy is running 
rampant among our school-age children, we should not be spending $7 
million on GLOBE.
  GLOBE may be a good concept; however, the private sector should 
finance it, not the cash-strapped American Government.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Fields].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             recorded vote

  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 190, 
noes 192, not voting 57, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 277]

                               AYES--190

     Allard
     Andrews (NJ)
     Applegate
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus (AL)
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barca
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bentley
     Bereuter
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Brewster
     Bunning
     Burton
     Byrne
     Callahan
     Camp
     Canady
     Castle
     Chapman
     Clinger
     Coble
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Coppersmith
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cunningham
     DeLay
     Dickey
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emerson
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Fowler
     Franks (NJ)
     Gallo
     Gekas
     Geren
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrich
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Grandy
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hayes
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Holden
     Horn
     Huffington
     Hunter
     Hutto
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Inhofe
     Inslee
     Istook
     Johnson, Sam
     Kasich
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kyl
     Lambert
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lehman
     Levy
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Livingston
     Lucas
     Mann
     Manzullo
     Margolies-Mezvinsky
     McCandless
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McMillan
     Meyers
     Mfume
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Molinari
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Morella
     Myers
     Neal (NC)
     Nussle
     Orton
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Paxon
     Payne (VA)
     Penny
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Roberts
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Roth
     Santorum
     Saxton
     Schiff
     Sensenbrenner
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Snowe
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Swett
     Talent
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas (CA)
     Thomas (WY)
     Thurman
     Torkildsen
     Traficant
     Upton
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Walsh
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zimmer

                               NOES--192

     Abercrombie
     Andrews (ME)
     Andrews (TX)
     Bacchus (FL)
     Barcia
     Barlow
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bishop
     Blackwell
     Bonior
     Borski
     Brooks
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carr
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Danner
     Darden
     de la Garza
     de Lugo (VI)
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Derrick
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dixon
     Durbin
     Edwards (CA)
     Edwards (TX)
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Fingerhut
     Fish
     Foglietta
     Ford (TN)
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gibbons
     Gilman
     Glickman
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green
     Hamburg
     Hastings
     Hefner
     Hinchey
     Hoagland
     Hochbrueckner
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hughes
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E.B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klein
     Kopetski
     Kreidler
     LaFalce
     Lancaster
     Lantos
     LaRocco
     Levin
     Long
     Lowey
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mazzoli
     McCloskey
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Pickle
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Rangel
     Ravenel
     Reed
     Richardson
     Romero-Barcelo (PR)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Rostenkowski
     Rowland
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sangmeister
     Sarpalius
     Sawyer
     Schenk
     Schroeder
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sharp
     Shepherd
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Smith (IA)
     Stark
     Strickland
     Studds
     Stupak
     Swift
     Synar
     Tanner
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Tucker
     Underwood (GU)
     Unsoeld
     Valentine
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walker
     Watt
     Weldon
     Whitten
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--57

     Ackerman
     Berman
     Boucher
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Clay
     Collins (MI)
     Costello
     Deal
     Dingell
     Ehlers
     Faleomavaega (AS)
     Flake
     Ford (MI)
     Franks (CT)
     Gallegly
     Gephardt
     Grams
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hilliard
     Hutchinson
     Jacobs
     Klink
     Kolbe
     Lewis (FL)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lightfoot
     Lipinski
     Lloyd
     Machtley
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McCurdy
     Mica
     Michel
     Norton (DC)
     Quillen
     Rahall
     Reynolds
     Ridge
     Roukema
     Royce
     Schaefer
     Schumer
     Slattery
     Smith (OR)
     Solomon
     Stokes
     Sundquist
     Taylor (MS)
     Towns
     Washington
     Waters
     Waxman
     Wheat
     Zeliff

                              {time}  1310

  Messrs. GLICKMAN, EDWARDS of Texas, and STRICKLAND changed their vote 
from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. GOODLING, SPRATT, POMEROY, and WALSH changed their vote from 
``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                              {time}  1310


                         parliamentary inquiry

  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, did the Delegates to this body make the 
difference in this vote in the Committee?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is correct.
  The Chair was just about to address that matter.
  Mr. ROGERS. I thank the Chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 2(d) of rule XXIII the Committee 
rises.
  Pursuant to clause 2(d) of rule XXIII the Committee rose; and the 
Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Hutto) having assumed the chair, Mr. Brown of 
California, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the State 
of the Union, reported that the Committee, having had under 
consideration the bill (H.R. 4603) making appropriations for the 
Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related 
agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1995, and 
making supplemental appropriations for these departments and agencies 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, and for other purposes, 
directs him to report that on a recorded vote on an amendment the votes 
of the Delegates and of the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico were 
decisive.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Fields of Texas: Page 39, line 24, 
     strike ``$1,792,978,000'' and insert ``$1,785,978,000''.
       Page 40, line 10, strike ``$1,751,978,000'' and insert 
     ``$1,744,978,000''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 2(d) of rule XXIII, the 
Chair will now put the question de novo on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Fields].
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             recorded vote

  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 184, 
noes 184 not voting 66, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 278]

                               AYES--184

     Allard
     Andrews (NJ)
     Applegate
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus (AL)
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Barca
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bentley
     Bereuter
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Brewster
     Bunning
     Burton
     Byrne
     Callahan
     Camp
     Canady
     Castle
     Chapman
     Clinger
     Coble
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Coppersmith
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cunningham
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emerson
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Fish
     Fowler
     Franks (NJ)
     Gallo
     Geren
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrich
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Grandy
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hayes
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Holden
     Horn
     Huffington
     Hunter
     Hutto
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Inhofe
     Inslee
     Istook
     Johnson, Sam
     Kasich
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kyl
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lehman
     Levy
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Livingston
     Lucas
     Mann
     Manzullo
     Margolies-Mezvinsky
     McCandless
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     Meyers
     Mfume
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Molinari
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Morella
     Myers
     Neal (NC)
     Nussle
     Orton
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Paxon
     Payne (VA)
     Penny
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Ramstad
     Ravenel
     Regula
     Roberts
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Royce
     Santorum
     Saxton
     Schiff
     Sensenbrenner
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Snowe
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Swett
     Talent
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas (CA)
     Thomas (WY)
     Thurman
     Torkildsen
     Traficant
     Upton
     Vucanovich
     Walsh
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Zimmer

                               NOES--184

     Abercrombie
     Andrews (ME)
     Andrews (TX)
     Bacchus (FL)
     Baesler
     Barcia
     Barlow
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bishop
     Blackwell
     Bonior
     Borski
     Brooks
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carr
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Danner
     Darden
     de la Garza
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Derrick
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dixon
     Durbin
     Edwards (CA)
     Edwards (TX)
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Fingerhut
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford (TN)
     Frank (MA)
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilman
     Glickman
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green
     Hall (OH)
     Hamburg
     Hefner
     Hinchey
     Hoagland
     Hochbrueckner
     Houghton
     Hughes
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E.B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klein
     Kopetski
     Kreidler
     LaFalce
     Lancaster
     Lantos
     LaRocco
     Levin
     Long
     Lowey
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mazzoli
     McCloskey
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Pickle
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Rangel
     Reed
     Richardson
     Rose
     Rostenkowski
     Rowland
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sangmeister
     Sarpalius
     Sawyer
     Schenk
     Schroeder
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sharp
     Shepherd
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Smith (IA)
     Spratt
     Stark
     Strickland
     Studds
     Stupak
     Swift
     Synar
     Tanner
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Tucker
     Unsoeld
     Valentine
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Walker
     Waters
     Watt
     Whitten
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--66

     Ackerman
     Ballenger
     Berman
     Bilirakis
     Boucher
     Brown (FL)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Clay
     Collins (MI)
     Costello
     Deal
     Dingell
     Ehlers
     Ford (MI)
     Franks (CT)
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Gephardt
     Grams
     Gutierrez
     Hastings
     Hilliard
     Hoyer
     Hutchinson
     Jacobs
     Klink
     Kolbe
     Lambert
     Lewis (FL)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lightfoot
     Lipinski
     Lloyd
     Machtley
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McCurdy
     McMillan
     Mica
     Michel
     Owens
     Quillen
     Rahall
     Reynolds
     Ridge
     Roukema
     Schaefer
     Schumer
     Slattery
     Smith (OR)
     Solomon
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stokes
     Sundquist
     Taylor (MS)
     Thornton
     Towns
     Washington
     Waxman
     Weldon
     Wheat
     Woolsey
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff

                              {time}  1332

  The Clerk announced the following pairs:
  On this vote:

       Mr. Deal for, with Mr. Ackerman against.
       McCollum for, with Mr. Berman against.
       Mr. Calvert for, with Miss Collins of Michigan against.
       Mr. Grams for, with Mr. Dingell against.
       Mrs. Roukema for, with Mr. Hilliard against.
       Mr. Schaefer for, with Mr. Mica against.

  Mr. VOLKMER and Mr. GEKAS changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                          ____________________