[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 63 (Wednesday, April 5, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H4192-H4212]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


  PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1215, CONTRACT WITH AMERICA TAX 
                           RELIEF ACT OF 1995

  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 128, and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 128

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule 
     XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 1215) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 to strengthen the American family and create jobs. The 
     first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points 
     of order against consideration of the bill are waived. 
     General debate shall be confined to the bill and the 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute made in order as 
     original text and shall not exceed four hours, with two hours 
     equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means and two 
     hours equally divided among and controlled by the chairman 
     and ranking minority members of the Committee on the Budget 
     and the Committee on Commerce. After general debate the bill 
     shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. 
     It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the 
     purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment 
     in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of H.R. 
     1327, modified by the amendment printed in part 1 of the 
     report of the Committee on rules accompanying this 
     resolution. That amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     shall be considered as read. All points of order against that 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. No 
     amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     shall be in order except the further amendment in the nature 
     of a substitute printed in part 2 of the report, which may be 
     offered only by Representative Gephardt of Missouri or his 
     designee, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 
     one hour equally divided and controlled by the proponent and 
     an opponent, and shall not be subject to amendment. All 
     points of order against the further amendment in the nature 
     of a substitute are waived. At the conclusion of 
     consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall 
     rise and report the bill to the House with such amendment as 
     may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote 
     in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the 
     Whole to the bill or to the amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute made in order as original text. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and any 
     amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion 
     except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
                              {time}  1300

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Goodlatte). The gentleman from New York 
[Mr. Solomon] is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Moakley], 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.
  (Mr. SOLOMON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks, and include extraneous material.)
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, the resolution before us is a rule 
providing for the consideration of the bill H.R. 1215, which is the 
Contract With America Tax Relief Act of 1995. The bill is appropriately 
entitled the Tax Fairness and Deficit Reduction Act of 1995 because it 
combines the tax relief provisions of H.R. 1215 with various spending 
reductions from other committees, both to offset the cost of the tax 
cuts and to begin us on a downward glide path toward a balanced budget. 
Have we not waited forever for this?
  The rule provides for a Democrat substitute printed in part 2 of the 
Rules Committee report if offered by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. 
Gephardt], the minority leader.
  Finally, the rule provides for 1 motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, this rule represents the final major procedural hurdle 
to fulfilling our Contract With America and, oh, what an exciting, 
successful run this 100-day contract period has been. Did you ever 
think it would get here?
  The bill this rule makes in order is certainly an appropriate closing 
to that contract. It addresses both the 
[[Page H4193]] need to give tax relief to the American people and debt 
relief to future generations by locking us into a downward glide path 
toward a balanced budget by fiscal year 2002.
  Mr. Speaker, I do not think I have to prove my credentials as a 
deficit hawk to anyone in this body. I am the only Member of this 
House, in the last 20 years, to actually offer a balanced budget with 
specifics. But, Mr. Speaker, like many of my colleagues, I have 
expressed concerns about enacting tax cuts without first making the 
necessary spending cuts to produce a balanced budget. That is very, 
very important to me. I would not be standing here today in support of 
this rule and bill if I did not think that this bill as modified by the 
adoption of the language that we are putting into this rule right now--
which we will be voting on in a few minutes--locks us into that 
commitment. It does that. Make no mistake about it, a vote on this rule 
is a vote to balance the budget, and you better remember that.
  To those on the other side who claim that this is some kind of a fig 
leaf, I would just urge you to first read the legislation. The Upton-
Castle-Martini-Solomon amendment prohibits the tax cuts from taking
 effect until we first adopt a budget resolution that projects a 
balanced budget by the year 2002. It then--and this is the critical 
point--requires that pursuant to that budget resolution a 
reconciliation bill must be enacted into law that keeps that commitment 
with real spending cuts. And that is enacted into law. This is not some 
budget resolution that the Committee on Rules can waive the Budget Act 
for. If spending cuts are not done, those tax cuts do not become law. 
It is just as simple and as real as that.

  Mr. Speaker, if we deviate, then further policy options for putting 
us back on track will be a part of the subsequent budget resolution and 
those in turn will be translated into real spending cuts in the 
reconciliation bill to follow, on which each and every one of us are 
going to be forced to vote on, on the floor of this House.
  That is no fig leaf. Perhaps we should not have Members, running for 
higher office, running around here saying it is. Mr. Speaker, anyone 
who calls this a fig leaf does not know the difference between a fig 
leaf and a sledgehammer. Well, I do, believe you me. Reconciliation is 
a sledgehammer. If you have ever been here to vote on one, you ought to 
know, because you are going to be responsible to the voters back home 
whichever way you vote. It makes a real impact and it gets real 
results. You all, that are on this big-spender list I have here, always 
complain about it.
  Mr. Speaker, over 40 amendments were filed with the Committee on 
Rules. Many of those amendments were good amendments that I could 
individually support. But we cannot rewrite the Internal Revenue Code 
on the floor of this House. We did not do it under a Democrat House, 
and we will not do it under a Republican House. Not only do such 
amendments affect other provisions in that code in ways we cannot 
always anticipate, but taken together they can also produce vast new 
revenue drains on the Treasury that we just cannot afford given our 
current deficit situation. You all know how serious that is.
  I urge Members on both sides of the aisle to remain true to our past, 
our bipartisan practice of modified closed rules when we are dealing 
with tax and reconciliation bills. Put aside your additional individual 
wish lists. I have done it for now, and I want you to look at the big 
picture. This rule and this bill takes the fiscally responsible 
approach of paying for the tax cuts and putting us on that downward 
glide path toward a balanced budget which is so terribly, terribly 
important to the future generations of this country.
  I urge every Member to vote ``yes'' on the rule and to vote ``yes'' 
on this bill. The American people want it.
  Mr. Speaker, I include the following for the Record:

                Correction of Votes in Committee Report

       The Rules Committee's report, House Report 104-100 on H. 
     Res. 128, the rule for the consideration of H.R. 1215, the 
     ``Contract With America Tax Relief Act of 1995,'' contains an 
     erroneously reported rollcall vote due to a typographical 
     error during the printing process. The vote was correctly 
     reported in the original report filed with the Clerk.
       Below is a correct version of that vote as contained in the 
     Rules Committee report as filed with the House. The amendment 
     number referred to in the motion is to an amendment filed 
     with the Rules Committee--a summary of which are contained 
     following the listing of votes in the committee report.


                    rules committee rollcall no. 122

       Date: April 4, 1995.
       Measure: Rule for the consideration of H.R. 1215, Contract 
     With America Tax Relief Act.
       Motion By: Mr. Moakley.
       Summary of Motion: Allow a division of the question and a 
     separate vote on Titles II and V (H.R. 1215), the senior 
     citizen equity provisions.
       Results: Rejected, 4 to 9.
       Vote by Member: Quillen--Nay; Dreier--Nay; Goss--Nay; 
     Linder--Nay; Pryce--Nay; Diaz-Balart--Nay; McInnis--Nay; 
     Waldholtz--Nay; Moakley--Yea; Beilenson--Yea; Frost--Yea; 
     Hall--Yea; Solomon--Nay.

    THE AMENDMENT PROCESS UNDER SPECIAL RULES REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE,\1\ 103D CONGRESS VERSUS 104TH    
                                                    CONGRESS                                                    
                                              [As of April 4, 1995]                                             
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  103d Congress                        104th Congress           
              Rule type              ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Number of rules    Percent of total   Number of rules    Percent of total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open/Modified-open\2\...............                 46                 44                 21                 75
Modified Closed\3\..................                 49                 47                  7                 25
Closed\4\...........................                  9                  9                  0                  0
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Totals:.......................                104                100                 28                100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\This table applies only to rules which provide for the original consideration of bills, joint resolutions or 
  budget resolutions and which provide for an amendment process. It does not apply to special rules which only  
  waive points of order against appropriations bills which are already privileged and are considered under an   
  open amendment process under House rules.                                                                     
\2\An open rule is one under which any Member may offer a germane amendment under the five-minute rule. A       
  modified open rule is one under which any Member may offer a germane amendment under the five-minute rule     
  subject only to an overall time limit on the amendment process and/or a requirement that the amendment be     
  preprinted in the Congressional Record.                                                                       
\3\A modified closed rule is one under which the Rules Committee limits the amendments that may be offered only 
  to those amendments designated in the special rule or the Rules Committee report to accompany it, or which    
  preclude amendments to a particular portion of a bill, even though the rest of the bill may be completely open
  to amendment.                                                                                                 
\4\A closed rule is one under which no amendments may be offered (other than amendments recommended by the      
  committee in reporting the bill).                                                                             


                          SPECIAL RULES REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE, 104TH CONGRESS                         
                                              [As of April 4, 1995]                                             
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  H. Res. No. (Date                                                                                             
       rept.)               Rule type             Bill No.                 Subject           Disposition of rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Res. 38 (1/18/95)  O...................  H.R. 5..............  Unfunded Mandate Reform..  A: 350-71 (1/19/   
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 44 (1/24/95)  MC..................  H. Con. Res. 17.....  Social Security..........  A: 255-172 (1/25/  
                                            H.J. Res. 1.........  Balanced Budget Amdt.....   95).              
H. Res. 51 (1/31/95)  O...................  H.R. 101............  Land Transfer, Taos        A: voice vote (2/1/
                                                                   Pueblo Indians.            95).              
H. Res. 52 (1/31/95)  O...................  H.R. 400............  Land Exchange, Arctic      A: voice vote (2/1/
                                                                   Nat'l. Park and Preserve.  95).              
H. Res. 53 (1/31/95)  O...................  H.R. 440............  Land Conveyance, Butte     A: voice vote (2/1/
                                                                   County, Calif.             95).              
H. Res. 55 (2/1/95).  O...................  H.R. 2..............  Line Item Veto...........  A: voice vote (2/2/
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 60 (2/6/95).  O...................  H.R. 665............  Victim Restitution.......  A: voice vote (2/7/
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 61 (2/6/95).  O...................  H.R. 666............  Exclusionary Rule Reform.  A: voice vote (2/7/
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 63 (2/8/95).  MO..................  H.R. 667............  Violent Criminal           A: voice vote (2/9/
                                                                   Incarceration.             95).              
H. Res. 69 (2/9/95).  O...................  H.R. 668............  Criminal Alien             A: voice vote (2/10/
                                                                   Deportation.               95).              
H. Res. 79 (2/10/95)  MO..................  H.R. 728............  Law Enforcement Block      A: voice vote (2/10/
                                                                   Grants.                    95).              
H. Res. 83 (2/13/95)  MO..................  H.R. 7..............  National Security          PQ: 229-100; A: 227-
                                                                   Revitalization.            127 (2/15/95).    
H. Res. 88 (2/16/95)  MC..................  H.R. 831............  Health Insurance           PQ: 230-191; A: 229-
                                                                   Deductibility.             188 (2/21/95).    
H. Res. 91 (2/21/95)  O...................  H.R. 830............  Paperwork Reduction Act..  A: voice vote (2/22/
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 92 (2/21/95)  MC..................  H.R. 889............  Defense Supplemental.....  A: 282-144 (2/22/  
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 93 (2/22/95)  MO..................  H.R. 450............  Regulatory Transition Act  A: 252-175 (2/23/  
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 96 (2/24/95)  MO..................  H.R. 1022...........  Risk Assessment..........  A: 253-165 (2/27/  
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 100 (2/27/    O...................  H.R. 926............  Regulatory Reform and      A: voice vote (2/28/
 95).                                                              Relief Act.                95).              


                                                                                                                
[[Page H4194]]
                    SPECIAL RULES REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE, 104TH CONGRESS--Continued                    
                                              [As of April 4, 1995]                                             
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  H. Res. No. (Date                                                                                             
       rept.)               Rule type             Bill No.                 Subject           Disposition of rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Res. 101 (2/28/    MO..................  H.R. 925............  Private Property           A: 271-151 (3/1/   
 95).                                                              Protection Act.            95).              
H. Res. 104 (3/3/95)  MO..................  H.R. 988............  Attorney Accountability    A: voice vote (3/6/
                                                                   Act.                       95).              
H. Res. 103 (3/3/95)  MO..................  H.R. 1058...........  Securities Litigation      ...................
                                                                   Reform.                                      
H. Res. 105 (3/6/95)  MO..................  ....................  .........................  A: 257-155 (3/7/   
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 108 (3/6/95)  Debate..............  H.R. 956............  Product Liability Reform.  A: voice vote (3/8/
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 109 (3/8/95)  MC..................  ....................  .........................  PQ: 234-191 A: 247-
                                                                                              181 (3/9/95).     
H. Res. 115 (3/14/    MO..................  H.R. 1158...........  Making Emergency Supp.     A: 242-190 (3/15/  
 95).                                                              Approps..                  95).              
H. Res. 116 (3/15/    MC..................  H.J. Res. 73........  Term Limits Const. Amdt..  A: voice vote (3/28/
 95).                                                                                         95).              
H. Res. 117 (3/16/    Debate..............  H.R. 4..............  Personal Responsibility    A: voice vote (3/21/
 95).                                                              Act of 1995.               95).              
H. Res. 119 (3/21/    MC..................  ....................  .........................  A: 217-211 (3/22/  
 95).                                                                                         95).              
H. Res. 125 (4/3/95)  O...................  H.R. 1271...........  Family Privacy Protection  A: 423-1 (4/4/95). 
                                                                   Act.                                         
H. Res. 126 (4/3/95)  O...................  H.R. 660............  Older Persons Housing Act  ...................
H. Res. 128 (4/4/95)  MC..................  H.R. 1215...........  Contract With America Tax  ...................
                                                                   Relief Act of 1995.                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Codes: O-open rule; MO-modified open rule; MC-modified closed rule; C-closed rule; A-adoption vote; PQ-previous 
  question vote. Source: Notices of Action Taken, Committee on Rules, 104th Congress.                           

           National Taxpayers Union--Big Spender of 1993

       Alabama: Rep. Tom Bevill, Rep. Robert E. Cramer, Rep. Earl 
     F. Hilliard.
       Arizona: Rep. Karan English, Rep. Ed Pastor.
       Arkansas: Sen. Dale Bumpers, Sen. David Pryor, Rep. Ray 
     Thornton.
       California: Sen. Barbara Boxer, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Rep. 
     Xavier Becerra, Rep. Howard L. Berman, Rep. George E. Brown, 
     Rep. Ronald V. Dellums, Rep. Julian C. Dixon, Rep. Don 
     Edwards, Rep. Anna G. Eshoo, Rep. Sam Farr, Rep. Vic Fazio, 
     Rep. Bob Filner, Rep. Dan Hamburg, Rep. Jane Harman, Rep. Tom 
     Lantos, Rep. Matthew G. Martinez, Rep. Robert T. Matsui, Rep. 
     George Miller, Rep. Norman Y. Mineta, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Rep. 
     Lucille Roybal-Allard, Rep. Pete Stark, Rep. Esteban E. 
     Torres, Rep. Walter R. Tucker, Rep. Maxine Waters, Rep. Henry 
     A. Waxman, Rep. Lynn Woolsey.
       Colorado: Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, Rep. David E. 
     Skaggs.
       Connecticut: Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, 
     Rep. Sam Gejdenson, Rep. Barbara B. Kennelly.
       Delaware: Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr.
       Florida: Sen. Bob Graham, Rep. Jim Bacchus, Rep. Corrine 
     Brown, Rep. Peter Deutsch, Rep. Sam M. Gibbons, Rep. Alcee L. 
     Hastings, Rep. Harry A. Johnston, Rep. Carrie P. Meek, Rep. 
     Pete Peterson, Rep. Karen L. Thurmon.
       Georgia: Rep. Sanford D. Bishop, Rep. George Darden, Rep. 
     John Lewis, Rep. Cynthia A. McKinney.
       Hawaii: Sen. Daniel K. Akaka, Sen. Daniel K. Inouye, Rep. 
     Neil Abercrombie, Rep. Patsy T. Mink.
       Illinois: Sen. Carol Moseley-Braun, Sen. Paul Simon, Rep. 
     Cardiss Collins, Rep. Richard J. Durbin, Rep. Lane Evans, 
     Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, Rep. Mel Reynolds, Rep. Dan 
     Rostenkowski, Rep. Bobby L. Rush, Rep. George E. Sangmeister, 
     Rep. Sidney R. Yates.
       Indiana: Rep. Frank McCloskey, Rep. Peter J. Visclosky.
       Iowa: Sen. Tom Harkin, Rep. Neal Smith.
       Kansas: Rep. Dan Glickman.
       Kentucky: Sen. Wendell H. Ford, Rep. Romano L. Mazzoli.
       Louisiana: Sen. John B. Breaux, Sen. J. Bennett Johnston, 
     Rep. Cleo Fields, Rep. William J. Jefferson.
       Maine: Sen. George J. Mitchell, Rep. Thomas H. Andrews.
       Maryland: Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski, Sen. Paul S. Sarbanes, 
     Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin, Rep. Steny H. Hoyer, Rep. Kweisi 
     Mfume, Rep. Albert R. Wynn.
       Massachusetts: Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Sen. John Kerry, 
     Rep. Barney Frank, Rep. Joseph P. Kennedy, Rep. Edward J. 
     Markey, Rep. Joe Moakley, Rep. Richard E. Neal, Rep. John W. 
     Olver, Rep. Gerry E. Studds.
       Michigan: Sen. Carl Levin, Sen. Donald W. Riegle Jr., Rep. 
     David E. Bonior, Rep. Bob Carr, Rep. Barbara-Rose Collins, 
     Rep. John Conyers, Rep. John D. Dingell, Rep. William D. 
     Ford, Rep. Dale E. Kildee, Rep. Sander M. Levin.
       Minnesota: Sen. Paul Wellstone, Rep. James L. Oberstar, 
     Rep. Martin Olav Sabo, Rep. Bruce F. Vento.
       Mississippi: Rep. G.V. Montgomery, Rep. Bennie Thompson, 
     Rep. Jamie L. Whitten.
       Missouri: Rep. William L. Clay, Rep. Richard A. Gephardt, 
     Rep. Ike Skelton, Rep. Harold L. Volkmer, Rep. Alan Wheat.
       Montana: Sen. Max Baucus, Rep. Pat Williams.
       Nevada: Sen. Harry Reid, Rep. James Bilbray.
       New Jersey: Rep. Robert Menendez, Rep. Donald M. Payne, 
     Rep. Robert G. Torricelli.
       New Mexico: Rep. Bill Richardson.
       New York: Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Rep. Gary L. 
     Ackerman, Rep. Eliot L. Engel, Rep. Floyd H. Flake, Rep. 
     Maurice D. Hinchey, Rep. George J. Hochbrueckner, Rep. Nita 
     M. Lowey, Rep. Thomas J. Manton, Rep. Michael R. McNulty, 
     Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Rep. Major R. Owens, Rep. Charles B. 
     Rangel, Rep. Charles E. Schumer, Rep. Jose E. Serrano, Rep. 
     Louise M. Slaughter, Rep. Edolphus Towns, Rep. Nydia M. 
     Velazquez.
       North Carolina: Rep. Evan Clayton, Rep. W.G. Hefner, Rep. 
     Stephen L. Neal, Rep. David Price, Rep. Charlie Rose, Rep. 
     Melvin Watt.
       Ohio: Sen. John Glenn, Sen. Howard M. Metzenbaum, Rep. 
     Douglas Applegate, Rep. Sherrod Brown, Rep. Tony P. Hall, 
     Rep. Tom Sawyer, Rep. Louis Stokes, Rep. Ted Strickland.
       Oklahoma: Rep. Mike Synar.
       Oregon: Rep. Elizabeth Furse, Rep. Mike Kopetski, Rep. Ron 
     Wyden.
       Pennsylvania: Sen. Harris Wofford, Rep. Lucien E. 
     Blackwell, Rep. Robert A. Borski, Rep. William J. Coyne, Rep. 
     Thomas M. Foglietta, Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski, Rep. John P. 
     Murtha.
       Rhode Island: Sen. Claiborne Pell, Rep. Jack Reed.
       South Carolina: Sen. Ernest F. Hollings, Rep. James E. 
     Clyburn, Rep. Butler Derrick, Rep. John M. Spratt.
       South Dakota: Sen. Tom Daschle.
       Tennessee: Sen. Harlan Mathews, Sen. Jim Sasser, Rep. 
     Harold E. Ford.
       Texas: Rep. Jack Brooks, Rep. John Bryant, Rep. Jim 
     Chapman, Rep. Ronald D. Coleman, Rep. E. de la Garza, Rep. 
     Martin Frost, Rep. Henry B. Gonzalez, Rep. Gene Green, Rep. 
     Eddie Bernice Johnson, Rep. Solomon P. Ortiz, Rep. J.J. 
     Pickle, Rep. Frank Tejeda, Rep. Craig Washington, Rep. 
     Charles Wilson.
       Vermont: Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, Rep. Bernard Sanders.
       Virginia: Rep. Rick Boucher, Rep. Leslie L. Byrne, Rep. 
     James P. Moran, Rep. Robert C. Scott.
       Washington: Sen. Patty Murray, Rep. Norm Dicks, Rep. Mike 
     Kreidler, Rep. Jim McDermott, Rep. Al Swift, Rep. Jolene 
     Unsoeld.
       West Virginia: Sen. Robert C. Byrd, Sen. John D. 
     Rockefeller IV, Rep. Alan B. Mollohan, Rep. Nick J. Rahall, 
     Rep. Bob Wise.
       Wisconsin: Rep. Gerald D. Kleczka, Rep. David R. Obey.

                                                                                    NATIONAL TAXPAYERS UNION                                                                                    
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Percent           Percent          381839All                                                                                 
               Name                  PA     Sta    Dist    Grade    score    Rank    attend.  Avg.Support382510Support  8309620.45922Eligibility832963Eligibility  LDR  Budget  Approp.   Region
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Long J (IN).......................  D     IN           4  D             42     219    100.00                 845                              2028                 ...  ......  .......        2
Cox J (IL)........................  D     IL          16  D             42     220    100.00                 843                              2028                 ...  ......  .......        2
Stallings R (ID)..................  D     ID           2  D             41     221     90.53                 761                              1836                 ...  ......  .......        1
Johnston H (FL)...................  D     FL          14  D             41     222     98.47                 826                              1997                 ...  ......  .......        3
Mazzoli R (KY)....................  D     KY           3  D             41     223    100.00                 838                              2028                   d  ......  .......        3
Larocco L (ID)....................  D     ID           1  D             41     224     99.51                 831                              2018                 ...  ......  .......        1
Visclosky P (IN)..................  D     IN           1  D             41     225    100.00                 832                              2028                 ...  ......        1        2
Lloyd M (TN)......................  D     TN           3  D             41     226     97.83                 810                              1984                 ...  ......  .......        3
Lancaster H (NC)..................  D     NC           3  D             41     227     99.90                 823                              2026                 ...  ......  .......        3
Huckaby J (LA)....................  D     LA           5  D             41     228     86.09                 709                              1746                 ...      1   .......        3
Peterson C (MN)...................  D     MN           7  D             40     229     99.46                 811                              2017                 ...  ......  .......        2
Andrews M (TX)....................  D     TX          25  D             40     230     99.95                 815                              2027                 ...  ......  .......        3
Schroeder P (CO)..................  D     CO           1  D             40     231     99.61                 802                              2020                   d  ......  .......        1
Thomas L (GA).....................  D     GA           1  D             39     232     83.04                 665                              1684                 ...  ......        1        3
Brewster B (OK)...................  D     OK           3  D             39     233     99.85                 799                              2025                 ...  ......  .......        3
Cramer B (AL).....................  D     AL           5  D             39     234     99.56                 795                              2019                 ...  ......  .......        3
Hoagland P (NE)...................  D     NE           2  D             39     235     99.75                 796                              2023                 ...  ......  .......        2
Beilenson A (CA)..................  D     CA          23  D             39     236     92.55                 737                              1877                 ...      1   .......        1
Derrick B (SC)....................  D     SC           3  D             39     237     99.80                 790                              2024                   d  ......  .......        3


                                                                                                                                                                                                
[[Page H4195]]
                                                                               NATIONAL TAXPAYERS UNION--Continued                                                                              
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Percent           Percent          381839All                                                                                 
               Name                  PA     Sta    Dist    Grade    score    Rank    attend.  Avg.Support382510Support  8309620.45922Eligibility832963Eligibility  LDR  Budget  Approp.   Region
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pickett O (VA)....................  D     VA           2  D             39     238     99.36                 786                              2015                 ...  ......  .......        3
Spratt J (SC).....................  D     SC           5  D             39     239    100.00                 789                              2028                 ...      1   .......        3
Early J (MA)......................  D     MA           3  D             39     241     90.34                 707                              1832                 ...  ......        1        4
McMillen T (MD)...................  D     MD           4  D             38     242    100.00                 778                              2028                 ...  ......  .......        4
Kennedy J (MA)....................  D     MA           8  D             38     243     95.27                 741                              1932                 ...  ......  .......        4
Gordon B (TN).....................  D     TN           6  D             38     244     93.93                 725                              1905                   d  ......  .......        3
Panetta L (CA)....................  D     CA          16  D             38     245     98.67                 756                              2001                   d      1   .......        1
Browder G (AL)....................  D     AL           3  D             37     246     99.11                 753                              2010                 ...  ......  .......        3
Bacchus J (FL)....................  D     FL          11  D             37     247     99.41                 750                              2016                 ...  ......  .......        3
Pease D (OH)......................  D     OH          13  D             37     247     99.41                 750                              2016                 ...      1   .......        2
Bilbray J (NV)....................  D     NV           1  D             37     249     98.52                 743                              1998                 ...  ......  .......        1
Bruce T (IL)......................  D     IL          19  D             37     250     99.56                 737                              2019                 ...  ......  .......        2
Atkins C (MA).....................  D     MA           5  D             36     251     96.25                 711                              1952                 ...  ......        1        4
Skelton I (MO)....................  D     MO           4  D             36     252     94.63                 692                              1919                 ...  ......  .......        2
DeFazio P (OR)....................  D     OR           4  D             36     253     97.24                 702                              1972                 ...  ......  .......        1
Sangmeister G (IL)................  D     IL           4  D             36     254     98.22                 709                              1992                 ...  ......  .......        2
Johnson T (SD)....................  D     SD           0  D             36     255     99.70                 719                              2022                 ...  ......  .......        2
Staggers H (WV)...................  D     WV           2  D             35     256     89.45                 643                              1814                 ...  ......  .......        4
Bryant J (TX).....................  D     TX           5  D             35     257     95.32                 685                              1933                 ...      1   .......        3
Carr B (MI).......................  D     MI           6  D             35     258     95.81                 688                              1943                 ...  ......        1        2
Jenkins E (GA)....................  D     GA           9  D             35     259     95.27                 684                              1932                 ...  ......  .......        3
Darden G (GA).....................  D     GA           7  D             35     260     98.13                 700                              1990                 ...  ......  .......        3
Vento B (MN)......................  D     MN           4  D             35     261     99.61                 700                              2020                 ...  ......  .......        2
Espy M (MS).......................  D     MS           2  D             34     262     96.99                 676                              1967                 ...      1   .......        3
Eckart D (OH).....................  D     OH          11  D             34     263     96.60                 668                              1959                   d  ......  .......        2
Costello J (IL)...................  D     IL          21  D             34     264     94.23                 650                              1911                 ...  ......  .......        3
Murphy A (PA).....................  D     PA          22  F             33     266     93.74                 633                              1901                 ...  ......  .......        4
Hall T (OH).......................  D     OH           3  F             33     267     99.21                 667                              2012                 ...  ......  .......        2
Andrews R (NJ)....................  D     NJ           1  F             33     268     97.68                 653                              1981                 ...  ......  .......        4
Hatcher C (GA)....................  D     GA           2  F             33     269     62.72                 419                              1272                 ...  ......  .......        3
Volkmer H (MO)....................  D     MO           9  F             33     270     98.96                 660                              2007                 ...  ......  .......        2
Price D (NC)......................  D     NC           4  F             33     271     99.70                 664                              2022                 ...  ......        1        3
McCloskey F (IN)..................  D     IN           8  F             33     272     98.67                 656                              2001                 ...  ......  .......        2
Stark P (CA)......................  D     CA           9  F             33     273     92.26                 612                              1871                 ...  ......  .......        1
Schumer C (NY)....................  D     NY          10  F             32     274     95.51                 627                              1937                 ...  ......  .......        4
Aucoin L (OR).....................  D     OR           1  F             32     275     86.19                 565                              1748                 ...  ......        1        1
Peterson P (FL)...................  D     FL           2  F             32     276     97.14                 634                              1970                 ...  ......  .......        3
Russo M (IL)......................  D     IL           3  F             32     277     74.36                 485                              1508                   d  ......  .......        2
Applegate (OH)....................  D     OH          18  F             32     278     98.22                 634                              1992                 ...  ......  .......        2
Synar M (OK)......................  D     OK           2  F             31     279     98.42                 626                              1996                   d  ......  .......        3
Wilson C (TX).....................  D     TX           2  F             31     280     95.61                 608                              1939                 ...  ......        1        3
Wyden R (OR)......................  D     OR           3  F             31     281     99.31                 631                              2014                 ...  ......  .......        1
Pickle J (TX).....................  D     TX          10  F             31     282     97.78                 621                              1983                 ...  ......  .......        3
Olin J (VA).......................  D     VA           6  F             31     283     88.56                 561                              1796                 ...  ......  .......        3
Miller G (CA).....................  D     CA           7  F             31     284     93.64                 592                              1899                   d      1   .......        1
Studds G (MA).....................  D     MA          10  F             31     285     98.92                 622                              2006                 ...  ......  .......        4
Jones B (GA)......................  D     GA           4  F             31     286     78.16                 491                              1585                 ...  ......  .......        3
Lipinski W (IL)...................  D     IL           5  F             31     287     86.93                 545                              1763                 ...  ......  .......        2
Durbin R (IL).....................  D     IL          20  F             31     288     99.90                 626                              2026                 ...      1         1        2
Oberstar J (MN)...................  D     MN           8  F             31     289     99.95                 626                              2027                 ...      1   .......        2
McDermott J (WA)..................  D     WA           7  F             31     290     99.95                 621                              2027                 ...  ......  .......        1
Horn J (MO).......................  D     MO           2  F             31     291    100.00                 621                              2028                 ...  ......  .......        2
Slaughter L (NY)..................  D     NY          30  F             31     292     99.16                 614                              2011                 ...      1   .......        4
Conyers J (MI)....................  D     MI           1  F             30     293     83.43                 514                              1692                 ...  ......  .......        2
Yates S (IL)......................  D     IL           9  F             30     294     85.31                 525                              1730                 ...  ......        1        2
Kostmayer P (PA)..................  D     PA           8  F             30     295     99.80                 614                              2024                   d  ......  .......        4
Ford H (TN).......................  D     TN           9  F             30     296     84.27                 518                              1709                 ...  ......  .......        3
Gejdenson S (CT)..................  D     CT           2  F             30     297     99.56                 611                              2019                   d  ......  .......        4
Andrews T (ME)....................  D     ME           1  F             30     298     98.67                 603                              2001                 ...  ......  .......        4
Hayes C (IL)......................  D     IL           1  F             30     299     98.32                 598                              1994                 ...  ......  .......        2
Williams P (MT)...................  D     MT           1  F             30     300     92.70                 556                              1880                   d  ......  .......        1
Chapman J (TX)....................  D     TX           1  F             30     301     98.62                 590                              2000                 ...  ......        1        3
Sawyer T (OH).....................  D     OH          14  F             29     302     99.90                 597                              2026                 ...  ......  .......        2
Hamilton L (IN)...................  D     IN           9  F             29     303    100.00                 597                              2028                 ...  ......  .......        2
Levin S (MI)......................  D     MI          17  F             29     304     99.90                 596                              2026                 ...  ......  .......        2
Leighan E (OH)....................  D     OH          19  F             29     305     88.66                 528                              1798                 ...  ......  .......        2
Richardson B (NM).................  D     NM           3  F             29     306     96.89                 576                              1965                 ...  ......  .......        1
Kennelly B (CT)...................  D     CT           1  F             29     307     99.65                 590                              2021                   d  ......  .......        4
Frank B (MA)......................  D     MA           4  F             29     308     99.01                 583                              2008                 ...      1   .......        4
Mfume K (MD)......................  D     MD           7  F             29     309     98.62                 579                              2000                 ...  ......  .......        4
Clay W. (MO)......................  D     MO           1  F             29     310     97.63                 573                              1980                 ...  ......  .......        2
SABO M (MN).......................  D     MN           5  F             29     311     99.21                 581                              2012                   d      1         1        2
Owens M (NY)......................  D     NY          12  F             29     312     95.66                 555                              1940                 ...  ......  .......        4
Wise B (WV).......................  D     WV           3  F             28     313     95.41                 551                              1935                 ...      1   .......        4
Tallon R (SC).....................  D     SC           6  F             28     314     90.24                 521                              1830                 ...  ......  .......        3
Reed J (RI).......................  D     RI           2  F             28     315    100.00                 576                              2028                 ...  ......  .......        4
Skaggs D (CO).....................  D     CO           2  F             28     316    100.00                 576                              2028                 ...  ......        1        1
Kildee D (MI).....................  D     MI           7  F             28     317    100.00                 570                              2028                 ...      1   .......        2
Laface J (NY).....................  D     NY          32  F             28     318     96.94                 552                              1966                 ...  ......  .......        4
Yatron G (PA).....................  D     PA           6  F             28     319     89.55                 509                              1816                 ...  ......  .......        4
Gibbons S (FL)....................  D     FL           7  F             28     320     96.65                 549                              1960                 ...  ......  .......        3
Washington C (TX).................  D     TX          18  F             28     321     97.73                 555                              1982                 ...  ......  .......        3
Dellums R (CA)....................  D     CA           8  F             28     322     99.31                 562                              2014                 ...  ......  .......        1
Weiss T (NY)......................  D     NY          17  F             28     323     84.52                 478                              1714                 ...  ......  .......        4
Solarz S (NY).....................  D     NY          13  F             28     324     81.95                 461                              1662                 ...  ......  .......        4
Olver J (MA)......................  D     MA           1  F             28     325     99.41                 557                              2016                 ...  ......  .......        4
Wolpe H (MI)......................  D     MI           3  F             28     326     92.70                 517                              1880                 ...  ......  .......        2
Payne D (NJ)......................  D     NJ          10  F             27     327     94.77                 527                              1922                 ...  ......  .......        4
Lantos T (CA).....................  D     CA          11  F             27     328     96.45                 532                              1956                 ...  ......  .......        1
Guarini F (NJ)....................  D     NJ          14  F             27     329     95.07                 524                              1928                 ...      1   .......        4
Ortiz S (TX)......................  D     TX          27  F             27     330     94.58                 521                              1918                 ...  ......  .......        3
Nowark H (NY).....................  D     NY          33  F             27     331     94.97                 520                              1926                 ...  ......  .......        4
Anderson G (CA)...................  D     CA          32  F             27     332     94.53                 512                              1917                 ...  ......  .......        1
Flake F (NY)......................  D     NY           6  F             27     333     90.93                 491                              1844                 ...  ......  .......        4
Serrano J (NY)....................  D     NY          18  F             27     334     97.14                 524                              1970                 ...  ......  .......        4
Swift A (WA)......................  D     WA           2  F             27     335     98.96                 533                              2007                   d  ......  .......        1
Lehman R (CA).....................  D     CA          18  F             26     336     87.72                 471                              1779                 ...  ......        1        1
Blackwell L (PA)..................  D     PA           2  F             26     337     97.24                 516                              1972                 ...  ......  .......        4
Markey E (MA).....................  D     MA           7  F             26     338     95.32                 503                              1933                 ...  ......  .......        4
Lowey N (NY)......................  D     NY          20  F             26     339    100.00                 526                              2028                 ...  ......  .......        4
Rangel C (NY).....................  D     NY          16  F             26     340     98.67                 516                              2001                   d  ......  .......        4
Foglietta T (PA)..................  D     PA           1  F             26     341     89.50                 467                              1815                 ...  ......  .......        4
Collins B (MI)....................  D     MI          13  F             26     342     93.00                 484                              1886                 ...  ......  .......        2
Evans L (IL)......................  D     IL          17  F             26     343     99.95                 519                              2027                 ...  ......  .......        2
Edwards D (CA)....................  D     CA          10  F             26     344     97.53                 505                              1978                 ...  ......  .......        1
Collins C (IL)....................  D     IL           7  F             25     345     82.84                 425                              1680                 ...  ......  .......        2
Wheat A (MO)......................  D     MO           5  F             25     346     99.65                 511                              2021                   d  ......  .......        2
Savage G (IL).....................  D     IL           2  F             25     347     82.79                 423                              1679                 ...  ......  .......        2


                                                                                                                                                                                                
[[Page H4196]]
                                                                               NATIONAL TAXPAYERS UNION--Continued                                                                              
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Percent           Percent          381839All                                                                                 
               Name                  PA     Sta    Dist    Grade    score    Rank    attend.  Avg.Support382510Support  8309620.45922Eligibility832963Eligibility  LDR  Budget  Approp.   Region
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Waxman H (CA).....................  D     CA          24  F             25     348     97.88                 499                              1985                 ...  ......  .......        1
Scheuer J (NY)....................  D     NY           8  F             25     349     91.91                 465                              1864                 ...  ......  .......        4
Moakley J (MA)....................  D     MA           4  F             25     350     92.85                 469                              1883                   d  ......  .......        4
Torricelli R (NJ).................  D     NJ           9  F             25     351     97.29                 491                              1973                 ...  ......  .......        4
Unsoeld J (WA)....................  D     WA           3  F             25     352     92.80                 468                              1882                 ...  ......  .......        1
Neal R (MA).......................  D     MA           2  F             25     353     98.13                 492                              1990                 ...  ......  .......        4
Kanjorski P (PA)..................  D     PA          11  F             25     354    100.00                 500                              2028                 ...  ......  .......        4
Hoyer S (MD)......................  D     MD           5  F             25     355     99.06                 495                              2009                   d  ......        1        4
Delauro R (CT)....................  D     CT           3  F             25     356    100.00                 499                              2028                 ...  ......  .......        4
Kleczka G (WI)....................  D     WI           4  F             25     357     98.92                 493                              2006                   d  ......  .......        2
Matsui R (CA).....................  D     CA           3  F             25     358     94.92                 472                              1925                   d      1   .......        1
Hefner W (NC).....................  D     NC           8  F             24     359     53.70                 266                              1089                   d  ......        1        3
Stokes L (OH).....................  D     OH          21  F             24     360     98.32                 485                              1994                 ...  ......        1        2
Pelosi N (CA).....................  D     CA           5  F             24     361     89.74                 442                              1820                 ...  ......        1        1
Ford W (MI).......................  D     MI          15  F             24     362     94.28                 464                              1912                 ...  ......  .......        2
Nagle D (IA)......................  D     IA           3  F             24     363     96.25                 471                              1952                 ...  ......  .......        2
Berman H (CA).....................  D     CA          26  F             24     364     98.92                 483                              2006                 ...      1   .......        1
Jones W (NC)......................  D     NC           1  F             24     365     76.97                 373                              1561                 ...  ......  .......        3
Obey D (WI).......................  D     WI           7  F             24     366     99.75                 481                              2023                   d  ......        1        2
Frost M (TX)......................  D     TX          24  F             24     367     96.45                 463                              1956                   d  ......  .......        3
McHugh M (NY).....................  D     NY          28  F             24     368     99.06                 474                              2009                   d  ......        1        4
Abercrombie N (HI)................  D     HI           1  F             23     369     97.78                 466                              1983                 ...  ......  .......        1
Pastor E (AZ).....................  D     AZ           2  F             23     370     96.60                 458                              1959                 ...  ......  .......        1
Mavroules N (MA)..................  D     MA           6  F             23     371     96.84                 443                              1964                 ...  ......  .......        4
Waters M (CA).....................  D     CA          29  F             22     372     94.72                 432                              1921                 ...  ......  .......        1
De la Garza E (TX)................  D     TX          15  F             22     373     93.44                 423                              1895                 ...  ......  .......        3
Smith L (FL)......................  D     FL          16  F             22     374     90.19                 408                              1829                   d  ......        1        3
Moran J (VA)......................  D     VA           8  F             22     375     91.67                 414                              1859                 ...  ......  .......        3
Traficant J (OH)..................  D     OH          17  F             22     376     99.31                 447                              2014                 ...  ......  .......        2
Ackerman G (NY)...................  D     NY           7  F             22     377     82.79                 372                              1679                 ...  ......  .......        4
Koltr J (PA)......................  D     PA           4  F             22     378     74.41                 331                              1509                 ...  ......  .......        4
Lewis J (GA)......................  D     GA           5  F             22     379     94.87                 418                              1924                   d  ......  .......        3
Towns E (NY)......................  D     NY          11  F             22     380     83.33                 365                              1690                 ...  ......  .......        4
Mink P (HI).......................  D     HI           2  F             21     381     95.32                 415                              1933                 ...  ......  .......        1
Mrazek R (NY).....................  D     NY           3  F             21     382     89.64                 386                              1818                 ...  ......        1        4
Coyne W (PA)......................  D     PA          14  F             21     383     99.80                 429                              2024                 ...  ......  .......        4
Boxer B (CA)......................  D     CA           6  F             21     384     60.65                 260                              1230                 ...  ......  .......        1
Downey T (NY).....................  D     NY           2  F             21     385     99.46                 425                              2017                 ...  ......  .......        4
Cardin B (MD).....................  D     MD           3  F             21     386     95.56                 407                              1938                 ...  ......  .......        4
Roybal E (CA).....................  D     CA          25  F             20     387     99.56                 413                              2019                 ...  ......        1        1
Bevill T (AL).....................  D     AL           4  F             20     388     95.81                 396                              1943                   d  ......        1        3
Whitten J (MS)....................  D     MS           1  F             20     389     68.34                 277                              1386                   d  ......        1        3
Rahall N (WV).....................  D     WV           4  F             20     390     98.42                 395                              1996                 ...  ......  .......        4
Natcher W (KY)....................  D     KY           2  F             20     391    100.00                 401                              2028                 ...  ......        1        3
Mineta N (CA).....................  D     CA          13  F             20     392     99.51                 398                              2018                   d  ......  .......        1
Boucher R (VA)....................  D     VA           9  F             20     393     99.31                 393                              2014                 ...  ......  .......        3
Engel E (NY)......................  D     NY          19  F             19     394     94.03                 366                              1907                 ...  ......  .......        4
Dwyer B (NJ)......................  D     NJ           6  F             19     395     85.06                 331                              1725                 ...      1         1        4
Gaydos J (PA).....................  D     PA          20  F             19     396     79.44                 309                              1611                 ...  ......  .......        4
Kaptur M (OH).....................  D     OH           9  F             19     397     96.20                 373                              1951                 ...  ......        1        2
Kopetski M (OR)...................  D     OR           5  F             19     398     98.37                 379                              1995                 ...  ......  .......        1
Martinez M (CA)...................  D     CA          30  F             19     399     97.19                 374                              1971                 ...  ......  .......        1
Rostenkowski D (IL)...............  D     IL           8  F             19     400     89.99                 344                              1825                   d  ......  .......        2
Dicks N (WA)......................  D     WA           6  F             19     401     96.01                 366                              1947                 ...  ......        1        1
Manton T (NY).....................  D     NY           9  F             19     402     92.46                 352                              1875                   d  ......  .......        4
Brown G (CA)......................  D     CA          36  F             18     403     89.40                 333                              1813                 ...  ......  .......        1
Hochbrueckner G (NY)..............  D     NY           1  F             18     404     99.85                 371                              2025                 ...  ......  .......        4
Dingell J (MI)....................  D     MI          16  F             18     405     88.66                 328                              1798                 ...  ......  .......        2
Jefferson W (LA)..................  D     LA           2  F             18     406     86.88                 321                              1762                 ...  ......  .......        3
Traxler B (MI)....................  D     MI           8  F             18     407     50.30                 182                              1020                 ...  ......        1        2
McNulty M (NY)....................  D     NY          23  F             18     408     98.96                 356                              3007                 ...  ......  .......        4
Perkins C (KY)....................  D     KY           7  F             18     409     87.92                 316                              1783                 ...  ......  .......        3
Annunzio F (IL)...................  D     IL          11  F             18     410     87.38                 314                              1772                 ...  ......  .......        4
Brooks J (TX).....................  D     TX           9  F             17     411     89.69                 318                              1819                 ...  ......  .......        3
Levine M (CA).....................  D     CA          27  F             17     412     58.68                 205                              1190                 ...  ......  .......        1
Bustamante A (TX).................  D     TX          23  F             17     413     88.12                 303                              1787                   d  ......  .......        3
Lehman W (FL).....................  D     FL          17  F             17     414     75.94                 260                              1540                 ...  ......  .......        3
Aspin L (WI)......................  D     WI           1  F             17     415     97.73                 329                              1982                 ...  ......  .......        2
Dymally M (CA)....................  D     CA          31  F             16     416     52.22                 174                              1059                 ...  ......  .......        1
Rose C (NC).......................  D     NC           7  F             16     417     99.41                 325                              2016                 ...  ......  .......        3
Smith N (IA)......................  D     IA           4  F             16     418     93.89                 306                              1904                 ...  ......        1        3
Gephardt R (MO)...................  D     MO           3  F             16     419     90.73                 295                              1840                   d      1   .......        2
Borski R (PA).....................  D     PA           3  F             16     420     98.62                 320                              2000                 ...  ......  .......        4
Murtha J (PA).....................  D     PA          12  F             15     421     97.58                 294                              1979                   d  ......        1        4
Bonior D (MI).....................  D     MI          12  F             15     422     82.30                 247                              1669                   d  ......  .......        2
Fazio V (CA)......................  D     CA           4  F             15     423     98.37                 292                              1995                   d  ......        1        1
Dixon J (CA)......................  D     CA          28  F             15     424     98.03                 289                              1988                 ...  ......        1        1
Hertel D (MI).....................  D     MI          14  F             14     425     92.16                 256                              1869                 ...  ......  .......        2
Mollohan A (WV)...................  D     WV           1  F             14     426     97.44                 269                              1976                 ...  ......        1        4
Coleman R (TX)....................  D     TX          16  F             13     427     97.53                 264                              1978                 ...  ......  .......        3
Gonzalez H (TX)...................  D     TX          20  F             13     428    100.00                 266                              2028                 ...  ......  .......        3
Thornton R (AR)...................  D     AR           2  F             13     429     97.73                 259                              1982                   d  ......  .......        3
Alexander B (AR)..................  D     AR           1  F             13     430     78.85                 201                              1599                 ...  ......        1        3
Roe R (NJ)........................  D     NJ           8  F             12     431     87.23                 218                              1769                 ...  ......  .......        4
Oakar M (OH)......................  D     OH          20  F             12     432     84.02                 198                              1704                 ...  ......  .......        2

        [From the National Taxpayers Union, Washington, DC]

           Biggest Spenders--102d Congress, 1st Session 1991

       Alabama: Rep. Tom Bevill, Rep. Glen Browder, Rep. Bud 
     Cramer, Rep. Claude Harris, Sen. Howell Heflin, Sen. Richard 
     C. Shelby.
       Arkansas: Rep. Bill Alexander, Rep. Beryl F. Anthony, Jr., 
     Rep. Ray Thornton.
       California: Rep. Glenn M. Anderson, Rep. Howard L. Berman, 
     Rep. Barbara Boxer, Rep. George E. Brown, Jr., Rep. Julian C. 
     Dixon, Rep. Calvin Dooley, Rep. Don Edwards, Rep. Vic Fazio, 
     Rep. Tom Lantos, Rep. Richard H. Lehman, Rep. Mel Levine, 
     Rep. Matthew G. Martinez, Rep. Robert T. Matsui, Rep. Norman 
     Y. Mineta, Rep. Leon E. Panetta, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Rep. 
     Edward R. Roybal, Rep. Esteban Edward Torres, Rep. Henry A. 
     Waxman.
       Colorado: Rep. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, Rep. David E. 
     Skaggs.
       Connecticut: Rep. Rosa DeLauro, Sen. Christopher Dodd, Rep. 
     Sam Gejdenson, Rep. Barbara B. Kennelly, Sen. Joseph 
     Lieberman.
       Florida: Rep. Jim Bacchus, Rep. Dante B. Fascell, Rep. Sam 
     M. Gibbons, Rep. William Lehman, Rep. Douglas Peterson, Rep. 
     Lawrence J. Smith.
       Georgia: Rep. George Darden, Rep. Charles F. Hatcher, Rep. 
     Ed Jenkins, Rep. Ben Jones, Rep. John Lewis, Rep. J. Roy 
     Rowland, Rep. Lindsay Thomas.
       Hawaii: Rep. Neil Abercrombie, Sen. Daniel Akaka, Sen. 
     Daniel Inouye, Rep. Patsy T. Mink.
       Idaho: Rep. Larry LaRocco, Rep. Richard H. Stallings.
       Illinois: Rep. Frank Annunzio, Rep. John W. Cox, Jr., Rep. 
     Dan Rostenkowski.
       Indiana: Rep. Jim Jontz, Rep. Frank McCloskey.
       [[Page H4197]] Iowa: Rep. David R. Nagle, Rep. Neal Smith.
       Kentucky: Rep. Romano L. Mazzoli, Rep. William H. Natcher, 
     Rep. Carl C. Perkins.
       Louisiana: Sen. John Breaux, Rep. William J. Jefferson.
       Maryland: Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin, Rep. Steny H. Hoyer, 
     Rep. Tom McMillen, Sen. Paul Sarbanes.
       Massachusetts: Rep. Chester G. Atkins, Rep. Barney Frank, 
     Rep. Joseph P. Kennedy II, Rep. Edward J. Markey, Rep. 
     Nicholas Mavroules, Rep. John Joseph Moakley, Rep. Richard E. 
     Neal, Rep. John W. Olver.
       Michigan: Rep. David E. Bonior, Rep. Bob Carr, Rep. 
     Barbara-Rose Collins, Rep. John D. Dingell, Rep. Dennis M. 
     Hertel, Rep. Dale E. Kildee, Rep. Sander M. Levin, Rep. Bob 
     Traxler.
       Minnesota: Rep. Martin Olav Sabo, Rep. Bruce F. Vento.
       Mississippi: Rep. Mike Espy, Rep. Jamie L. Whitten.
       Missouri: Rep. Richard A. Gephardt, Rep. Joan Kelly Ham, 
     Rep. Alan Wheat.
       Nebraska: Rep. Peter Hoagland.
       Nevada: Rep. James H. Bilbray, Sen. Richard H. Bryan, Sen. 
     Harry Reid.
       New Jersey: Rep. Bernard J. Dwyer, Rep. Robert A. Roe, Rep. 
     Robert G. Torricelli.
       New Mexico: Rep. Bill Richardson, Sen. Jeff Bingaman.
       New York: Rep. Gary L. Ackerman, Rep. Sherwood L. Boehlert, 
     Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, Rep. Thomas J. Downey, Rep. Eliot L. 
     Engel, Rep. Benjamin A. Gilman, Rep. George J. Hochbrueckner, 
     Rep. Frank Horton, Rep. John J. LaFalce, Rep. Nita M. Lowey, 
     Rep. Thomas J. Manton, Rep. Matthew F. McHugh, Rep. Michael 
     R. McNulty, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Rep. Robert J. 
     Mrazek, Rep. Charles B. Rangel, Rep. Charles E. Schumer, Rep. 
     Jose E. Serrano, Rep. Louise M. Slaughter, Rep. Stephen J. 
     Solarz.
       North Carolina: Rep. W.G. (Bill) Hefner, Rep. Walter B. 
     Jones, Rep. H. Martin Lancaster, Rep. David E. Price, Rep. 
     Charlie Rose.
       North Dakota: Sen. Quentin Burdick.
       Ohio: Rep. Edward F. Feighan, Rep. Tony P. Hall, Rep. Mary 
     Rose Oakar, Rep. Thomas C. Sawyer.
       Oklahoma: Sen. David L. Boren, Rep. Bill Brewster.
       Oregon: Rep. Les AuCoin, Rep. Mike Kopetski, Sen. Bob 
     Packwood, Rep. Ron Wyden.
       Pennsylvania: Rep. Robert A. Borski, Rep. William J. Coyne, 
     Rep. Thomas M. Foglietta, Rep. Joseph M. Gaydos, Sen. Arlen 
     Specter, Sen. Harris Wofford, Rep. Joe Kolter, Rep. Peter H. 
     Kostmayer, Rep. John P. Murtha, Rep. Gus Yatron.
       South Carolina: Rep. Butler Derrick, Rep. John M. Spratt, 
     Jr.
       Tennessee: Rep. Bob Clement, Rep. Harold E. Ford, Rep. Bart 
     Gordon, Sen. Al Gore, Rep. Marilyn Lloyd.
       Texas: Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, Rep. Jack Brooks, Rep. John 
     Bryant, Rep. Albert G. Bustamante, Rep. Jim Chapman, Rep. 
     Ronald D. Coleman, Rep. E de la Garza, Rep. Chet Edwards, 
     Rep. Martin Frost, Rep. Henry B. Gonzalez, Rep. Solomon P. 
     Ortiz, Rep. J.J. Pickle, Rep. Charles Wilson.
       Utah: Rep. Wayne Owens.
       Virginia: Rep. Rick Boucher, Rep. James P. Moran, Rep. Owen 
     B. Pickett, Sen. Charles Robb, Rep. Norman Sisisky.
       Washington: Rep. Norman D. Dicks, Rep. Jim McDermott, Rep. 
     Al Swift, Rep. Jolene Unsoeld.
       West Virginia: Rep. Alan B. Mollohan, Rep. Bob Wise.
       Wisconsin: Rep. Les Aspin, Rep. Gerald D. Kleczka.
                                                                    ____

          [From the National Taxpayers Union, Washington, DC]

                             Bombs of 1990

       The number one congressional song for big spenders in 1990 
     ``Hey, Big Spender.''
       Alabama: Sen. Howell T. Heflin, Sen. Richard C. Shelby, 
     Rep. Glen Browder, Rep. Tom Bevill, Rep. Ronnie Flippo, Rep. 
     Claude Harris.
       Alaska: Sen. Ted Stevens.
       Arizona: Sen. Dennis DeConcini, Rep. Morris K. Udall.
       Arkansas: Rep. Bill Alexander, Rep. Beryl F. Anthony, Jr.
       California: Sen. Alan Cranston, Rep. Douglas H. Bosco, Rep. 
     Robert T. Matsui, Rep. Vic Fazio, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Rep. 
     Barbara Boxer, Rep. Don Edwards, Rep. Tom Lantos, Rep. Norman 
     Y. Mineta, Rep. Leon E. Panetta, Rep. Richard H. Lehman, Rep. 
     Henry A. Waxman, Rep. Edward R. Roybal, Rep. Howard L. 
     Berman, Rep. Mel Levine, Rep. Julian C. Dixon, Rep. Augustus 
     F. Hawkins, Rep. Matthew G. Martinez, Rep. Mervyn M. Dymally, 
     Rep. Glenn M. Anderson, Rep. Esteban Edward Torres, Rep. 
     George E. Brown, Jr.
       Colorado: Rep. David E. Skaggs.
       Connecticut: Rep. Barbara B. Kennelly, Rep. Sam Gejdenson.
       Florida: Sen. Bob Graham, Rep. Bill Nelson, Rep. Lawrence 
     J. Smith, Rep. William Lehman, Rep. Dante B. Fascell.
       Georgia: Sen. Wyche Fowler, Jr., Rep. Lindsay Thomas, Rep. 
     Charles F. Hatcher, Rep. Ben Jones, Rep. John Lewis, Rep. 
     George (Buddy) Darden, Rep. J. Roy Rowland.
       Hawaii: Sen. Daniel K. Inouye, Sen. Daniel K. Akaka.
       Illinois: Rep. Charles A. Hayes, Rep. William O. Lipinski, 
     Rep. Cardiss Collins, Rep. Dan Rostenkowski, Rep. Sidney R. 
     Yates, Rep. Lane Evans, Rep. Terry L. Bruce, Rep. Richard J. 
     Durbin, Rep. Jerry F. Costello.
       Indiana: Rep. Peter J. Visclosky, Rep. Frank McCloskey.
       Iowa: Rep. David R. Nagle, Rep. Neal Smith.
       Kentucky: Sen. Wendell H. Ford, Rep. William H. Natcher, 
     Rep. Romano L. Mazzoli, Rep. Carl C. Perkins.
       Louisiana: Sen. John B. Breaux, Sen. J. Bennett Johnston, 
     Rep. Lindy Boggs.
       Maryland: Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski, Sen. Paul S. Sarbanes, 
     Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin, Rep. Tom McMillen, Rep. Steny H. 
     Hoyer.
       Massachusetts: Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Rep. Richard E. 
     Neal, Rep. Barney Frank, Rep. Chester G. Atkins, Rep. 
     Nicholas Mavroules, Rep. Edward J. Markey, Rep. Joseph P. 
     Kennedy II, Rep. John Joseph Moakley, Rep. Gerry E. Studds.
       Michigan: Rep. John Conyers, Jr., Rep. Howard Wolpe, Rep. 
     Dale E. Kildee, Rep. Bob Traxler, Rep. Robert W. Davis, Rep. 
     David E. Bonior, Rep. George W. Crockett, Jr., Rep. William 
     D. Ford, Rep. John D. Dingell, Rep. Sander M. Levin.
       Minnesota: Rep. Bruce F. Vento, Rep. Martin Olav Sabo, Rep. 
     Gerry Sikorski, Rep. James L. Oberstar.
       Mississippi: Rep. Jamie L. Whitten,
        Rep. Mike Espy, Rep. G.V. (Sonny) Montgomery.
       Missouri: Rep. William L. (Bill) Clay, Rep. Richard A. 
     Gephardt, Rep. Ike Skelton, Rep. Alan Wheat, Rep. Harold L. 
     Volkmer.
       Nebraska: Rep. Peter Hoagland.
       Nevada: Rep. James H. Bilbray:
       New Jersey: Rep. Bernard J. Dwyer, Rep. Robert A. Roe, Rep. 
     Robert G. Torricelli, Rep. Donald Payne.
       New Mexico: Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Rep. Bill Richardson.
       New York: Rep. George J. Hochbrueckner, Rep. Robert J. 
     Mrazek, Rep. Floyd H. Flake, Rep. Gary L. Ackerman, Rep. 
     James H. Scheuer, Rep. Thomas J. Manton, Rep. Charles E. 
     Schumer, Rep. Edolphus Towns, Rep. Major R. Owens, Rep. 
     Stephen J. Solarz, Rep. Charles B. Rangel, Rep. Jose E. 
     Serrano, Rep. Eliot L. Engel, Rep. Nita M. Lowey, Rep. 
     Bejamin A. Gilman, Rep. Michael R. McNulty, Rep. Sherwood L. 
     Boehlert, Rep. Matthew F. McHugh, Rep. Frank Horton, Rep. 
     Louise M. Slaughter, Rep. Henry J. Nowak.
       North Carolina: Sen. Terry Sanford, Rep. Walter B. Jones, 
     Rep. H. Martin Lancaster, Rep. David E. Price, Rep. Charlie 
     Rose, Rep. W.G. (Bill) Hefner.
       North Dakota: Sen. Quentin N. Burdick.
       Ohio: Sen. John Glenn, Rep. Thomas A. Luken, Rep. Marcy 
     Kaptur, Rep. Thomas C. Sawyer, Rep. Edward F. Feighan, Rep. 
     Mary Rose Oakar, Rep. Louis Stokes.
       Oklahoma: Sen. David L. Boren, Rep. Mike Synar, Rep. Wes 
     Watkins.
       Oregon: Rep. Les AuCoin, Rep. Ron Wyden, Rep. Peter A. 
     DeFazio.
       Pennsylvania: Rep. Thoms M. Foglietta, Rep. William H. Gray 
     III, Rep. Robert A. Borski, Rep. Peter H. Kostmayer, Rep. 
     John P. Murtha, Rep. William J. Coyne.
       South Carolina: Rep. Butler Derrick, Rep. John M. Spratt, 
     Jr.
       South Dakota: Rep. Tim Johnson.
       Tennessee: Sen. Albert Gore, Jr., Rep. Marilyn Lloyd, Rep. 
     Bob Clement, Rep. Bart Gordon, Rep. John Tanner, Rep. Harold 
     E. Ford.
       Texas: Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, Rep. Jim Chapman, Rep. Charles 
     Wilson, Rep. Jack Brooks, Rep. J.J. Pickle, Rep. Marvin 
     Leath, Rep. Pete Geren, Rep. E Kika de la Garza, Rep. Ronald 
     D. Coleman, Rep. Craig A. Washington, Rep. Henry B. Gonzalez, 
     Rep. Albert G. Bustamante, Rep. Martin Frost, Rep. Michael A. 
     Andrews, Rep. Solomon P. Ortiz.
       Vermont: Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, Rep. James M. Jeffords.
       Virginia: Rep. Norman Sisisky, Rep. Lewis F. Payne, Jr., 
     Rep. Rick Boucher.
       Washington: Sen. Brock Adams, Rep. Al Swift, Rep. Jolene 
     Unsoeld, Rep. Norman D. Dicks, Rep. Jim McDermott.
       West Virginia: Rep. Alan B. Mollohan, Rep. Harley O. 
     Staggers, Jr., Rep. Bob Wise.
       Wisconsin: Rep. Les Aspin, Rep. Gerald D. Kleckzka, Rep. 
     David Obey.
                                                                    ____


         VOTE TALLY MEMBER REPORT SORTED BY NET SPENDING--SENATE        
        [What Members of Congress voted for in the 103d Congress        
                    (Figures in millions of dollars)]                   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Name, party, and state          Increases     Cuts        Net   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Johnston, J. (D-LA).................    127,123     -31,700     95,422
2 Bryan, R. (D-NV)....................    132,582     -44,342     88,240
3 Breaux, J. (D-LA)...................    130,572     -45,993     84,579
4 Daschle, T. (D-SD)..................    130,763     -46,354     84,409
5 Inouye, D. (D-HI)...................    130,702     -16,352     84,350
6 Moseley-Braun, C. (D-IL)............    134,551     -50,324     84,229
7 Reid, H. (D-NV).....................    132,610     -48,449     84,161
8 Biden, J. (D-DE)....................    130,708     -46,815     83,893
9 Rockefeller, J. (D-WV)..............    130,488     -46,657     83,831
10 Mikulski, B. (D-MD)................    128,823     -45,826     82,997
11 Akaka, D. (D-HI)...................    130,732     -47,884     82,848
12 Boxer, B. (D-CA)...................    136,389     -53,720     82,669
13 Wellstone, P. (D-MN)...............    135,793     -54,280     81,513
14 Riegle, D. (D-MI)..................    128,496     -47,037     81,459
15 Ford, W. (D-KY)....................    130,732     -49,714     81,018
16 Glenn, J. (D-OH)...................    127,262     -46,343     80,919
17 Sarbanes, P. (D-MD)................    127,332     -47,571     79,761
18 Murray, P. (D-WA)..................    127,332     -48,003     79,329
19 Dodd, C. (D-CT)....................    126,256     -47,002     79,254
20 Feinstein, D. (D-CA)...............    127,521     -50,872     76,649
21 Kennedy, E. (D-MA).................    127,256     -51,079     76,177
22 Heflin, H. (D-AL)..................    133,490     -57,768     75,722
23 Harkin, T. (D-IA)..................    140,062     -64,432     75,630
24 Campbell, B. (D-CO)................    127,361     -51,818     75,543
25 Moynihan, D. (D-NY)................    129,613     -54,602     75,011
26 Mitchell, G. (D-ME)................    127,308     -52,668     74,640
27 Byrd, R. (D-WV)....................    128,325     -53,869     74,456
28 Mathews, H. (D-TN).................    129,125     -56,887     72,238
29 Sasser, J. (D-TN)..................    132,719     -60,681     72,038
30 Wofford, H. (D-PA).................    132,613     -61,662     70,951
31 Bradley, B. (D-NJ).................    129,639     -59,336     70,303
32 Leahy, P. (D-VT)...................    134,144     -64,377     69,767
33 Bingaman, J. (D-NM)................    125,602     -56,267     69,335
34 Bumpers, D. (D-AR).................    133,128     -65,901     67,227


                                                                        
[[Page H4198]]
   VOTE TALLY MEMBER REPORT SORTED BY NET SPENDING--SENATE--Continued   
        [What Members of Congress voted for in the 103d Congress        
                    (Figures in millions of dollars)]                   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Name, party, and state          Increases     Cuts        Net   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
35 Dorgan, B. (D-ND)..................    132,900     -66,454     66,446
36 Levin, C. (D-MI)...................    127,302     -61,756     66,046
37 Kerry, J. (D-MA)...................    127,332     -62,446     64,886
38 Hollings, E. (D-SC)................    126,315     -62,298     64,017
39 Pryor, D. (D-AR)...................    130,534     -66,918     63,616
40 Pell, C. (D-RI)....................    121,372     -58,847     62,525
41 Lautenberg, F. (D-NJ)..............    136,633     -74,425     62,208
42 Conrad, K. (D-ND)..................    131,665     -70,587     61,078
43 Nunn, S. (D-GA)....................    127,354     -69,730     57,624
44 Graham, B. (D-FL)..................    129,093     -71,883     57,210
45 Simon, P. (D-IL)...................    134,777     -82,337     52,440
46 Metzenbaum, H. (D-OH)..............    122,709     -71,661     51,048
47 Baucus, M. (D-MT)..................    129,869     -79,774     50,095
48 Jeffords, J. (R-VT)................    127,492     -79,181     48,311
49 Feingold, R. (D-WI)................    126,993     -81,812     45,121
50 Robb, C. (D-VA)....................    127,304     -84,096     43,208
51 DeConcini, D. (D-AZ)...............    137,832     -95,895     41,937
52 Exon, J. (D-NE)....................    130,612     -89,195     41,417
53 Kerrey, B. (D-NE)..................    127,183     -95,574     31,609
54 Hutchison, K. (R-TX)...............    112,902     -84,690     28,212
55 Lieberman, J. (D-CT)...............    122,816     -95,098     27,718
56 Boren, D. (D-OK)...................    126,528    -100,581     25,947
57 Hatfield, M. (R-OR)................    112,727     -86,919     25,808
58 Shelby, R. (D-AL)..................    117,660     -92,487     25,173
59 Stevens, T. (R-AK).................    122,046     -97,887     24,159
60 Specter, A. (R-PA).................    124,538    -100,781     23,757
61 Kohl, H. (D-WI)....................    124,700    -103,945     20,755
62 Cochran, T. (R-MS).................    117,697    -101,611     16,086
63 Gorton, S. (R-WA)..................    119,839    -108,973     10,866
64 Bond, C. (R-MO)....................    117,452    -112,300      5,152
65 McConnell, M. (R-KY)...............    117,608    -113,755      3,853
66 Lott, T. (R-MS)....................    115,558    -113,289      2,269
67 Domenici, P. (R-NM)................    113,763    -113,076        687
68 Bennett, R. (R-UT).................    118,656    -118,998       -342
69 Gramm, P. (R-TX)...................    116,963    -117,343       -380
70 Hatch, O. (R-UT)...................    118,376    -119,900     -1,524
71 Burns, C. (R-MT)...................    116,079    -118,112     -2,033
72 D'Amato, A. (R-NY).................    119,056    -121,381     -2,325
73 Thurmond, S. (R-SC)................    117,863    -120,618     -2,755
74 Wallop, M. (R-WY)..................     96,189    -100,419     -4,230
75 Lugar, R. (R-IN)...................    115,399    -120,289     -4,890
76 Dole, B. (R-KS)....................    117,684    -122,677     -4,993
77 Pressler, L. (R-SD)................    113,502    -119,079     -5,577
78 Danforth, J. (R-MO)................    119,264    -127,421     -8,157
79 Murkowski, F. (R-AK)...............    111,051    -120,295     -9,244
80 Durenberger, D. (R-MN).............    113,712    -122,966     -9,254
81 Coats, D. (R-IN)...................    111,932    -121,410     -9,478
82 Packwood, B. (R-OR)................    110,030    -121,330    -11,300
83 Kassebaum, N. (R-KS)...............    120,090    -133,058    -12,968
84 Chafee, J. (R-RI)..................    122,158    -136,007    -13,849
85 Warner, J. (R-VA)..................    104,460    -121,462    -17,002
86 Roth, W. (R-DE)....................     95,926    -114,511    -18,585
87 Helms, J. (R-NC)...................     91,567    -112,912    -21,345
88 Kempthorne, D. (R-ID)..............    115,281    -137,160    -21,879
89 Craig, L. (R-ID)...................    115,251    -137,160    -21,909
90 McCain, J. (R-AZ)..................    111,698    -139,708    -28,010
91 Cohen, W. (R-ME)...................    116,295    -146,117    -29,822
92 Mack, C. (R-FL)....................    113,043    -143,972    -30,929
93 Coverdell, P. (R-GA)...............    111,795    -142,899    -31,104
94 Simpson, A. (R-WY).................     98,332    -130,480    -32,148
95 Nickles, D. (R-OK).................    108,958    -142,761    -33,803
96 Grassley, C. (R-IA)................    117,692    -152,677    -34,985
97 Faircloth, L. (R-NC)...............    103,531    -139,538    -36,007
98 Brown, H. (R-CO)...................    103,040    -140,292    -37,252
99 Gregg, J. (R-NJ)...................    103,600    -144,296    -40,696
100 Smith, R. (R-NH)..................     91,214    -136,976    -45,762


         VOTE TALLY MEMBER REPORT SORTED BY NET SPENDING--HOUSE         
  [What Members of Congress voted for in the 103d Congress (figures in  
                          millions of dollars)]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Name                  Increases     Cuts         Net   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Tejeda, F. (TX)--D.................    141,363    (47,773)    93,590  
2 Murtha, J. (PA)--D.................    140,545    (47,492)    93,053  
3 Boehlert, S. (NY)--R...............    136,912    (45,270)    91,642  
4 Gonzalez, H. (TX)--D...............    140,382    (49,191)    91,191  
5 Clement, B. (TN)--D................    131,474    (43,068)    88,406  
6 Chapman, J. (TX)--D................    139,177    (51,602)    87,575  
7 Wise, B. (WV)--D...................    133,297    (47,577)    85,720  
8 Fazio, V. (CA)--D..................    133,278    (47,609)    85,669  
9 Dicks, N. (WA)--D..................    133,328    (47,767)    85,561  
10 Darden, G. (GA)--D................    133,263    (47,811)    85,452  
11 Peterson, P. (FL)--D..............    133,241    (47,789)    85,452  
12 Bevill, T. (AL)--D................    133,165    (47,841)    85,324  
13 Manton, T. (NY)--D................    133,056    (57,900)    85,156  
14 Meek, C. (FL)--D..................    132,765    (47,663)    85,102  
15 Ortiz, S. (TX)--D.................    132,218    (47,340)    84,878  
16 Swift, A. (WA)--D.................    132,523    (48,140)    84,383  
17 Hoyer, S. (MD)--D.................    133,222    (48,893)    84,329  
18 Brown, C. (FL)--D.................    133,224    (49,213)    84,011  
19 DeLauro, R. (CI)--D...............    133,097    (49,205)    83,892  
20 Berman, H. (CA)--D................    133,124    (49,327)    83,797  
21 Kennelly, B. (CT)--D..............    133,256    (49,553)    83,703  
22 Cramer, R. (AL)--D................    131,079    (47,836)    83,243  
23 Lancaster, H. (NC)--D.............    141,669    (59,515)    82,154  
24 Roybal-Allard, L. (CA)--D.........    132,591    (50,597)    81,994  
25 Smith, N. (IA)--D.................    130,221    (48,374)    81,847  
26 Gephardt, R. (MO)--D..............    133,462    (51,699)    81,763  
27 Hall, T. (OH)--D..................    135,102    (53,743)    81,359  
28 Sawyer, T. (OH)--D................    133,549    (52,280)    81,269  
29 de la Garza, E (TX)--D............    132,460    (51,281)    81,179  
30 Gibbons, S. (FL)--D...............    131,598    (50,571)    81,027  
31 Glickman, D. (KS)--D..............    131,011    (50,128)    80,883  
32 Price, D. (NC)--D.................    133,572    (53,450)    80,122  
33 Moran, J. (VA)--D.................    134,094    (54,248)    79,846  
34 Richardson, B. (NM)--D............    132,345    (52,617)    79,728  
35 Spratt, J. (SC)--D................    133,556    (53,868)    79,688  
36 McCloskey, F. (IN)--D.............    133,603    (54,139)    79,464  
37 Rose, C. (NC)--D..................    130,222    (50,862)    79,360  
38 Dixon, J. (CA)--D.................    135,695    (56,387)    79,308  
39 Whitten, J. (MS)--D...............    130,260    (51,373)    78,887  
40 Coleman, R. (TX)--D...............    134,930    (56,112)    78,818  
41 Mollohan, A. (WV)--D..............    127,593    (48,951)    78,642  
42 Reed, J. (RI)--D..................    133,048    (54,455)    78,593  
43 Thornton, R. (AR)--D..............    135,134    (56,709)    78,425  
44 Sabo, M. (MN)--D..................    129,219    (51,210)    78,009  
45 Bilbray, J. (NV)--D...............    133,633    (55,667)    77,966  
46 Levin, S. (MI)--D.................    133,080    (55,338)    77,742  
47 Derrick, B. (SC)--D...............    129,552    (52,095)    77,457  
48 Traficant, J. (OH)--D.............    132,239    (54,813)    77,426  
49 Rogers, H. (KY)--R................    129,359    (52,075)    77,284  
50 Matsui, R. (CA)--D................    134,510    (57,291)    77,219  
51 Ackerman, G. (NY)--D..............    131,956    (54,784)    77,172  
52 Volkmer, H. (MO)--D...............    131,029    (54,470)    76,559  
53 Skelton, I. (MO)--D...............    130,804    (55,373)    75,431  
54 Pickett, O. (VA)--D...............    110,525    (35,608)    74,917  
55 Edwards, C. (TX)--D...............    129,826    (54,946)    74,880  
56 Brooks, J. (TX)--D................    133,173    (58,641)    74,532  
57 Harman, J. (CA)--D................    132,362    (57,848)    74,514  
58 Clyburn, J. (SC)--D...............    133,732    (60,148)    73,584  
59 Mineta, N. (CA)--D................    131,362    (57,945)    73,417  
60 Bentley, H. (MD)--R...............    112,601    (39,832)    72,769  
61 Johnston, H. (FL)--D..............    130,685    (58,569)    71,116  
62 Stokes, L. (OH)--D................    131,023    (59,011)    72,012  
63 Bishop, S. (GA)--D................    133,046    (61,705)    71,341  
64 Laughlin, G. (TX)--D..............    129,656    (58,974)    70,682  
65 McNulty, M. (NY)--D...............    132,851    (62,223)    70,628  
66 Synar, M. (OK)--D.................    129,921    (59,423)    70,498  
67 Clayton, E. (NC)--D...............    130,160    (59,698)    70,462  
68 Sarpalius, B. (TX)--D.............    136,659    (67,164)    69,495  
69 Beilenson, A. (CA)--D.............    123,210    (54,085)    69,125  
70 Olver, J. (MA)--D.................    136,248    (67,248)    69,000  
71 Williams, P. (MI)--D..............    138,000    (69,030)    68,970  
72 Morella, C. (MD)--R...............    116,854    (48,097)    68,757  
73 Gejdenson, S. (CT)--D.............    133,578    (64,972)    68,606  
74 Conyers, J. (MI)--D...............    126,861    (58,795)    68,066  
75 Rostenkowski, D. (IL)--D..........    134,763    (66,907)    67,856  
76 Hamilton, L. (IN)--D..............    133,806    (66,170)    67,636  
77 Jefferson, W. (LA)--D.............    133,276    (65,803)    67,473  
78 Torres, E. (CA)--D................    133,372    (66,328)    67,044  
79 Sisisky, N. (VA)--D...............    117,136    (50,586)    66,550  
80 Cantwell, M. (WA)--D..............    133,291    (66,938)    66,353  
81 Machtley, R. (RI)--R..............    117,118    (50,818)    66,300  
82 Mfume, K. (MD)--D.................    135,916    (69,644)    66,272  
83 Diaz-Balart, L. (FL)--R...........    105,349    (39,199)    66,150  
84 Scott, R. (VA)--D.................    129,072    (62,932)    66,140  
85 Maloney, C. (NY)--D...............    133,215    (67,248)    65,967  
86 Lipinski, W. (IL)--D..............    135,707    (69,875)    65,832  
87 Danner, P. (MO)--D................    136,122    (70,370)    65,752  
88 Hochbrueckner (NY)--D.............    130,549    (64,845)    65,704  
89 Nadler, J. (NY)--D................    132,948    (67,379)    65,569  
90 Mazzoli, R. (KY)--D...............    133,475    (67,925)    65,550  
91 Lantos, T. (CA)--D................    132,565    (67,248)    65,317  
92 Browder, G. (AL)--D...............    132,765    (67,654)    65,111  
93 Klein, H. (NJ)--D.................    132,260    (68,715)    63,545  
94 Visclosky, P. (IN)--D.............    133,488    (70,124)    63,364  
95 Brown, G. (CA)--D.................    131,062    (67,969)    63,093  
96 Waxman, H. (CA)--D................    129,495    (66,453)    63,042  
97 Reynolds, M. (IL)--D..............    133,322    (70,340)    62,982  
98 Kildee, D. (MI)--D................    133,729    (71,150)    62,579  
99 LaFalce, J. (NY)--D...............    132,956    (70,487)    62,469  
100 Fowler, T. (FL)--R...............    117,511    (55,120)    62,391  
101 Blackwell, L. (PA)--D............    133,043    (70,656)    62,387  
102 English, K. (AZ)--D..............    131,824    (69,704)    62,120  
103 Spence, F. (SC)--R...............    103,080    (40,981)    62,099  
104 Frost, M. (TX)--D................    133,070    (71,340)    61,730  
105 Boucher, R. (VA)--D..............    134,942    (73,222)    61,720  
106 Dingell, J. (MI)--D..............    131,236    (69,533)    61,703  
107 Applegate, D. (OH)--D............    129,120    (68,370)    60,750  
108 Tucker, W. (CA)--D...............    130,908    (70,253)    60,655  
109 Skaggs, D. (CO)--D...............    133,458    (72,811)    60,647  
110 Woolsey, L. (CA)--D..............    135,699    (75,289)    60,410  
111 Foglietta, T. (PA)--D............    133,448    (73,070)    60,378  
112 Martinez, M. (CA)--D.............    135,563    (75,388)    60,175  
113 Pickle, J. (TX)--D...............    131,819    (71,968)    59,851  
114 Filner, B. (CA)--D...............    130,125    (70,313)    59,812  
115 Rahall, N. (WV)--D...............    130,704    (70,898)    59,806  
116 Lehman, R. (CA)--D...............    127,920    (68,375)    59,545  
117 Borski, R. (PA)--D...............    135,626    (76,251)    59,375  
118 Shepherd, K. (UT)--D.............    130,880    (71,552)    59,328  
119 Wilson, C. (TX)--D...............    132,332    (73,141)    59,191  
120 Carr, B. (MI)--D.................    132,782    (73,805)    58,977  
121 McCurdy, D. (OK)--D..............    129,871    (70,988)    58,883  
122 Hastings, A. (FL)--D.............    124,611    (65,777)    58,834  
123 Waters, M. (CA)--D...............    128,403    (69,625)    58,778  
124 Roemer, T. (IN)--D...............    115,914    (57,139)    58,775  
125 Mink, P. (HI)--D.................    133,951    (75,239)    58,712  
126 Collins, B. (MI)--D..............    130,646    (72,086)    58,560  
127 Gordon, B. (TN)--D...............    133,005    (74,449)    58,556  
128 Johnson, E. (TX)--D..............    135,851    (77,427)    58,424  
129 Bonior, D. (MI)--D...............    135,494    (77,509)    57,985  
130 Hughes, W. (NJ)--D...............    122,142    (64,546)    57,596  
131 Pelosi, N. (CA)--D...............    136,146    (78,669)    57,477  
132 Hilliard, E. (AL)--D.............    127,840    (70,623)    57,217  
133 Deutsch, P. (FL)--D..............    135,305    (78,163)    57,142  
134 Baesler, S. (KY)--D..............    131,843    (74,887)    56,956  
135 Ford, H. (TN)--D.................    112,243    (55,410)    56,833  
136 Hamburg, D. (CA)--D..............    131,907    (75,315)    56,592  
137 Towns, E. (NY)--D................    131,897    (75,597)    56,300  
138 Lowey, N. (NY)--D................    136,236    (80,007)    56,229  
139 Neal, R. (MA)--D.................    135,123    (78,926)    56,197  
140 Eshoo, A. (CA)--D................    134,752    (79,068)    55,684  
141 Swett, D. (NH)--D................    131,083    (75,590)    55,493  
142 Abercrombie, N. (HI)--D..........    136,002    (80,623)    55,379  
143 Kleczka, G. (WI)--D..............    136,083    (80,769)    55,314  
144 Ford, W. (MI)--D.................    127,978    (72,795)    55,183  
145 Gutierrez, L. (IL)--D............    127,792    (72,618)    55,174  
146 Hefner, W. (NC)--D...............    135,846    (80,675)    55,171  
147 Huffington, M. (CA)--R...........     94,862    (39,830)    55,032  
148 Wynn, A. (MD)--D.................    136,193    (81,292)    54,901  
149 Lloyd, M. (IN)--D................    128,944    (74,208)    54,736  
150 Schumer, C. (NY)--D..............    135,227    (80,604)    54,623  
151 Pallone, E. (NJ)--D..............    113,692    (59,576)    54,116  
152 Coppersmith, S. (AZ)--D..........    117,093    (63,054)    54,039  
153 Engel, E. (NY)--D................    135,678    (81,675)    54,003  
154 Hinchey, M. (NY)--D..............    135,659    (81,733)    53,926  
155 Thurman, K. (FL)--D..............    132,997    (79,204)    53,793  
156 McDermott, J. (WA)--D............    134,667    (80,927)    53,740  
157 Sharp, P. (IN)--D................    131,236    (77,679)    53,557  
158 Schenk, L. (CA)--D...............    133,606    (80,147)    53,459  
159 Costello, J. (IL)--D.............    134,522    (81,139)    53,383  
160 Byrne, L. (VA)--D................    131,385    (78,014)    53,371  
161 Kopetski, M. (OR)--D.............    130,335    (77,141)    53,194  
162 Gilman, B. (NY)--R...............    110,441    (57,314)    53,127  
163 Obey, D. (WI)--D.................    136,075    (82,955)    53,120  
164 Menendez, R. (NJ)--D.............    133,872    (80,884)    52,988  
165 Bryant, J. (TX)--D...............    133,135    (80,232)    52,903  
166 Slaughter, L. (NY)--D............    136,055    (83,249)    52,806  
167 Kanjorski, P. (PA)--D............    136,145    (83,549)    52,596  
168 Gillmor, P. (OH)--R..............    113,401    (60,947)    52,454  
169 Kennedy, J. (MA)--D..............    135,871    (83,428)    52,443  
170 Coyne, W. (PA)--D................    136,205    (84,074)    52,131  
171 Durbin, R. (IL)--D...............    135,331    (83,300)    52,031  
172 Bacchus, J. (FL)--D..............    132,887    (80,920)    51,967  
173 Furse, E. (OR)--D................    134,727    (82,816)    51,911  
174 Edwards, D. (CA)--D..............    124,699    (72,855)    51,844  
175 Markey, E. (MA)--D...............    136,201    (84,477)    51,724  
176 Fields, C. (LA)--D...............    136,243    (84,672)    51,571  
177 Andrews, M. (TX)--D..............    124,106    (72,551)    51,555  
178 Studds, G. (MA)--D...............    135,994    (84,675)    51,319  
179 Johnson, T. (SD)--D..............    134,057    (82,854)    51,203  
180 Young, D. (AK)--R................    107,842    (56,885)    50,957  
181 Neal, S. (NC)--D.................    116,769    (65,916)    50,853  
182 Unsoeld, J. (WA)--D..............    136,071    (85,252)    50,819  
183 Strickland, T. (OH)--D...........    136,034    (85,400)    50,634  
184 Evans, L. (IL)--D................    136,045    (85,511)    50,534  
185 Yates, S. (IL)--D................    135,744    (85,592)    50,152  
186 Stupak, B. (MI)--D...............    135,875    (85,738)    50,137  
187 Lewis, J. (GA)--D................    131,820    (81,783)    50,037  
188 Sanders, B. (VT)--I..............    128,991    (79,303)    49,688  
189 Moakley, J. (MA)--D..............    129,582    (80,030)    49,552  
190 Brewster, B. (OK)--D.............    108,809    (59,262)    49,547  
191 Mann, D. (OH)--D.................    111,590    (62,197)    49,393  
192 Clay, W. (MO)--D.................    126,983    (77,654)    49,329  
193 Vucanovich, B. (NV)--R...........    109,877    (60,553)    49,324  
194 Walsh, J. (NY)--R................    132,037    (83,063)    48,974  
195 Barlow, T. (KY)--D...............    133,075    (84,133)    48,942  
196 Kaptur, M. (OH)--D...............    135,191    (86,679)    48,512  
197 Andrews, T. (ME)--D..............    134,168    (85,669)    48,499  
198 Parker, M. (MS)--D...............    117,776    (69,297)    48,479  
199 Montgomery, G. (MS)--D...........    122,661    (74,247)    48,414  
200 Payne, L. (VA)--D................    126,508    (78,141)    48,367  
201 Emerson, B. (MO)--R..............    105,584    (57,296)    48,288  
202 Wheat, A. (MO)--D................    133,071    (84,832)    48,239  
203 Ros-Lehtinen, I. (FL)--R.........    101,273    (53,047)    48,226  
204 Slattery, J. (KS)--D.............    125,991    (78,020)    47,971  
205 Becerra, X. (CA)--D..............    134,083    (86,337)    47,746  
206 Leach, J. (IA)--R................    111,274    (63,586)    47,688  
207 Combest, L. (TX)--R..............     86,879    (39,267)    47,612  
208 McKinney, C. (GA)--D.............    132,747    (85,370)    47,377  
209 Flake, F. (NY)--D................    134,476    (87,420)    47,056  
210 Cooper, J. (TN)--D...............    130,486    (83,481)    47,005  
211 Rangel, C. (NY)--D...............    126,757    (79,759)    46,998  
212 Smith, B. (OR)--R................     76,561    (29,600)    46,961  
213 Oberstar, J. (MN)--D.............    129,767    (82,993)    46,834  
214 Vento, B. (MN)--D................    131,653    (84,926)    46,727  
215 Watt, M. (NC)--D.................    131,786    (85,282)    46,504  
216 Pomeroy, E. (ND)--D..............    133,784    (87,344)    46,440  
217 Pastor, E. (AZ)--D...............    128,259    (81,835)    46,424  
218 Tanner, J. (TN)--D...............    131,670    (85,516)    46,154  
219 Payne, D. (NJ)--D................    131,116    (85,294)    45,822  
220 Miller, G. (CA)--D...............    134,447    (88,752)    45,695  
221 Hoagland, P. (NE)--D.............    132,702    (87,191)    45,511  
222 Johnson, D. (GA)--D..............    131,875    (87,544)    44,331  
223 Rush, B. (IL)--D.................    131,997    (87,780)    44,217  
224 Holden, T. (PA)--D...............    136,034    (92,293)    43,741  
225 Kreidler, M. (WA)--D.............    135,965    (92,527)    43,438  
226 Owens, M. (NY)--D................    121,084    (77,737)    43,347  
227 Lightfoot, J. (IA)--R............     96,061    (52,927)    43,134  
228 Barcia, J. (MI)--D...............    132,669    (89,812)    42,857  
229 Geren, P. (TX)--D................    113,248    (70,661)    42,587  
230 Stark, P. (CA)--D................    128,276    (86,378)    41,898  
231 Collins, C. (IL)--D..............    117,579    (75,819)    41,760  
232 Bereuter, D. (NE)--R.............     94,106    (52,443)    41,663  
233 Regula, R. (OH)--R...............    115,493    (74,188)    41,305  
234 Roukema, M. (NJ)--R..............     98,215    (57,205)    41,010  
235 Hayes, J. (LA)--D................    109,938    (69,222)    40,716  
236 Brown, S. (OH)--D................    136,089    (95,756)    40,333  
237 Torricelli, R. (NJ)--D...........    133,861    (93,755)    40,106  
238 Sangmeister, G. (IL)--D..........    136,095    (96,172)    39,923  
239 Stearns, C. (FL)--R..............     89,425    (49,647)    39,778  
240 Serrano, J. (NY)--D..............    127,638    (87,924)    39,714  
241 Foley, T. (WA)--D................     75,302    (35,590)    39,712  
242 Molinari, S. (NY)--R.............    112,661    (73,230)    39,431  
243 Kim, J. (CA)--R..................    112,313    (73,194)    39,119  


                                                                        
[[Page H4199]]
    VOTE TALLY MEMBER REPORT SORTED BY NET SPENDING--HOUSE--Continued   
  [What Members of Congress voted for in the 103d Congress (figures in  
                          millions of dollars)]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Name                  Increases     Cuts         Net   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
244 Dellums, R. (CA)--D..............    174,443    (85,450)    38,993  
245 Wyden, R. (OR)--D................    126,217    (87,274)    38,943  
246 Deal, N. (GA)--D.................    118,788    (80,398)    38,390  
247 Klink, R. (PA)--D................    136,088    (97,919)    38,169  
248 Torkildsen, P. (MA)--R...........    119,938    (81,861)    38,077  
249 Green, G. (TX)--D................    117,418    (79,844)    37,574  
250 Barrett, T. (WI)--D..............    129,832    (92,871)    36,961  
251 Skeen, J. (NM)--R................    112,479    (75,564)    36,915  
252 Rowland, J. (GA)--D..............    109,857    (73,388)    36,469  
253 Cardin, B. (MD)--D...............    133,856    (97,578)    36,278  
254 Velazquez, N. (NY)--D............    127,188    (90,925)    36,263  
255 Frank, B. (MA)--D................    124,628    (88,555)    36,073  
256 Snowe, O. (ME)--R................    123,710    (87,709)    36,001  
257 Farr, S. (CA)--D.................    109,731    (73,906)    35,825  
258 Roberts, P. (KS)--R..............     89,179    (53,720)    35,459  
259 Thompson, B. (MS)--D.............    111,728    (76,771)    34,957  
260 Barrett, B. (NE)--R..............     98,965    (64,067)    34,898  
261 McHale, P. (PA)--D...............    135,817   (101,176)    34,641  
262 Clinger, W. (PA)--R..............    104,552    (71,143)    33,409  
263 Smith, C. (NJ)--R................    119,676    (86,449)    33,227  
264 Bateman, H. (VA)--R..............    106,621    (73,802)    32,819  
265 Lazio, R. (NY)--R................    101,259    (68,809)    32,450  
266 Callahan, S. (AL)--R.............     83,227    (50,907)    32,320  
267 Andrews, R. (NJ)--D..............    118,812    (86,934)    31,878  
268 McDade, J. (PA)--R...............    109,525    (78,081)    31,444  
269 Jacobs, A. (IN)--D...............    114,071    (83,108)    30,963  
270 Canady C. (FL)--R................     94,433    (63,566)    30,867  
271 Washington, C. (TX)--D...........     98,221    (67,452)    30,769  
272 DeFazio, P. (OR)--D..............    112,003    (81,768)    30,235  
273 Levy, D. (NY)--R.................     97,636    (67,711)    29,925  
274 Long, J. (IN)--D.................    134,135   (104,384)    29,751  
275 Hefley, J. (CO)--R...............     74,007    (44,367)    29,640  
276 King, P. (NY)--R.................     94,194    (64,718)    29,476  
277 Gilchrest, T. (MD)--R............    117,374    (88,017)    29,357  
278 Dornan, R. (CA)--R...............     70,554    (41,368)    29,186  
279 Allard, W. (CO)--R...............     76,951    (47,788)    29,163  
280 Lewis, J. (CA)--R................    107,912    (78,838)    29,074  
281 Houghton, A. (NY)--R.............    113,776    (85,066)    28,710  
282 Stump, B. (AZ)--R................     69,828    (41,271)    28,577  
283 Dooley, C. (CA)--D...............    130,330   (102,428)    27,902  
284 Inslee, J. (WA)--D...............    134,108   (106,326)    27,782  
285 Hall, R. (TX)--D.................    103,847    (76,141)    27,706  
286 Fish, H. (NY)--R.................    115,328    (87,667)    27,661  
287 Kingston, J. (GA)--R.............     87,286    (59,930)    27,356  
288 Grandy, F. (IA)--R...............    102,787    (77,665)    25,122  
289 McHugh, J. (NY)--R...............     95,105    (70,325)    24,780  
290 Fingerhut, E. (OH)--D............    113,373    (88,677)    24,696  
291 Calvert, K. (CA)--R..............    101,960    (77,478)    24,482  
292 Poshard, G. (IL)--D..............    133,523   (109,126)    24,397  
293 Blute, P. (MA)--R................    117,151    (92,971)    24,180  
294 Burton, D. (IN)--R...............     81,826    (57,877)    23,939  
295 Schroeder, P. (CO)--D............    117,890    (94,438)    23,452  
296 Minge, D. (MN)--D................    116,973    (93,856)    23,117  
297 Margolies-Mezv, (PA)--D..........    117,351    (94,689)    22,262  
298 Bartlett, R. (MD)--R.............     90,787    (68,774)    22,013  
299 Orton, B. (UT)--D................     98,477    (76,968)    21,509  
300 Gallo, D. (NJ)--R................    102,380    (81,200)    21,180  
301 Murphy, A. (PA)--D...............    117,285    (96,225)    21,060  
302 McCollum, B. (FL)--R.............     86,428    (66,143)    20,295  
303 Bilirakis, M. (FL)--R............    111,730    (91,474)    20,256  
304 Larocco, L. (ID)--D..............    131,628   (112,089)    19,539  
305 Hutto, E. (FL)--D................     98,320    (79,123)    19,197  
306 Livingston, R. (LA)--R...........    106,973    (88,408)    18,565  
307 Hyde, H. (IL)--R.................     94,185    (76,478)    17,707  
308 Young, C. (FL)--R................    112,386    (94,847)    17,539  
309 Goodlatte, R. (VA)--R............     74,768    (57,421)    17,347  
310 Kolbe, J. (AZ)--R................     99,503    (82,210)    17,293  
311 Meyers, J. (KS)--R...............    105,890    (89,016)    16,874  
312 Valentine, T. (NC)--D............    111,821    (95,042)    16,779  
313 Ridge, T. (PA)--R................    108,188    (92,187)    16,001  
314 Hoekstra, P. (MI)--R.............     96,995    (81,066)    15,929  
315 McCandless, A. (CA)--R...........     80,914    (65,005)    15,909  
316 Smith, L. (TX)--R................     94,953    (79,108)    15,845  
317 Dunn, J. (WA)--R.................     82,033    (66,335)    15,698  
318 Condit, G. (CA)--D...............    111,786    (96,357)    15,429  
319 Lambert, B. (AR)--D..............    134,547   (119,193)    15,354  
320 Archer, B. (TX)--R...............     59,069    (43,841)    15,228  
321 Peterson, C. (MN)--D.............    117,450   (102,774)    14,676  
322 Meehan, M. (MA)--D...............    135,375   (120,729)    14,646  
323 Mcinnis, S. (CO)--R..............     72,873    (58,742)    14,131  
324 McCrery, J. (LA)--R..............    100,333    (86,945)    13,388  
325 Hancock, M. (MO)--R..............     58,513    (45,127)    13,386  
326 Buyer, S. (IN)--R................     94,089    (81,664)    12,425  
327 Zekuff, B. (NH)--R...............     79,479    (67,294)    12,176  
328 Tauzin, W. (LA)--D...............    112,409   (100,269)    12,140  
329 Shaw, E. (FL)--R.................     97,003    (85,295)    11,708  
330 Hastert, D. (IL)--R..............     96,879    (85,496)    11,383  
331 Ravenel, A. (SC)--R..............    116,390   (105,123)    11,267  
332 Thomas, B. (CA)--R...............     98,510    (87,775)    10,735  
333 Quinn, J. (NY)--R................     96,639    (86,354)    10,285  
334 Taylor, G. (MS)--D...............     97,103    (86,878)    10,225  
335 Franks, G. (CT)--R...............     99,359    (89,472)     9,887  
336 Baker, R. (LA)--R................     93,284    (83,613)     9,671  
337 Horn, S. (CA)--R.................    109,439   (100,148)     9,281  
338 Talent, J. (MO)--R...............     87,618    (78,445)     9,173  
339 Gallegly, E. (CA)--R.............     97,808    (88,778)     9,030  
340 Myers, J. (IN)--R................     92,448    (83,657)     8,791  
341 Gunderson, S. (WI)--R............     97,717    (88,982)     8,735  
342 Klug, S. (WI)--R.................     88,482    (79,847)     8,635  
343 Quilen, J. (TN)--R...............     92,083    (83,848)     8,235  
344 Mckeon, H. (CA)--R...............     88,758    (80,696)     8,062  
345 Pryce, D. (OH)--R................    107,963    (99,910)     8,053  
346 Oxley, M. (OH)--R................     86,516    (79,548)     6,968  
347 Knollenberg, J. (MI)--R..........     75,492    (69,738)     5,754  
348 Kyl, J. (AZ)--R..................     81,769    (76,110)     5,659  
349 Hobson, D. (OH)--R...............    107,143   (101,560)     5,583  
350 Linder, J. (GA)--R...............     83,347    (78,226)     5,121  
351 Saxton, H. (NJ)--R...............     96,489    (91,386)     5,103  
352 Boehner, J. (OH)--R..............     71,804    (66,717)     5,087  
353 Dickey, J. (AR)--R...............     91,151    (86,130)     5,021  
354 Goodling, B. (PA)--R.............     98,168    (93,254)     4,914  
355 Kasich, J. (OH)--r...............     93,919    (89,098)     4,821  
356 Weldon, C. (PA)--R...............     91,001    (86,258)     4,743  
357 Sundquist, D. (IN)--R............     96,191    (91,745)     4,446  
358 Hutchinson, T. (AR)--R...........     94,931    (90,577)     4,354  
359 Wolf, F. (VA)--R.................     94,060    (90,009)     4,051  
360 Castle, M. (DE)--R...............     89,461    (85,686)     3,775  
361 Lewis, T. (FL)--R................     82,691    (79,105)     3,586  
362 Porter, J. (IL)--R...............     96,466    (93,657)     2,809  
363 Crapo, M. (ID)--R................     74,138    (71,766)     2,372  
364 Bonilla, H. (TX)--R..............     95,946    (94,297)     1,649  
365 Penny, T. (MN)--D................    111,140   (110,111)     1,029  
366 Goss, P. (FL)--R.................     71,039    (70,567)       472  
367 Gingrich, N. (GA)--R.............     84,287    (83,872)       415  
368 Fields, J. (TX)--R...............     65,879    (65,861)        18  
369 Stenholm, C. (TX)--D.............     92,638    (92,702)       (64) 
370 Cox, C. (CA)--R..................     69,678    (69,808)      (130) 
371 Manzullo, D. (IL)--R.............     84,545    (85,360)      (815) 
372 Delay, T. (TX)--R................     72,114    (73,433)    (1,319) 
373 Taylor, C. (NC)--R...............     75,562    (76,931)    (1,369) 
374 Schaefer, D. (CO)--R.............     62,397    (64,193)    (1,796) 
375 Armey, D. (TX)--R................     66,063    (67,890)    (1,827) 
376 Bacgus, S. (AL)--R...............     76,529    (79,254)    (2,725) 
377 Schiff, S. (NM)--R...............     96,741    (99,656)    (2,915) 
378 Baker, B. (CA)--R................     74,768    (77,838)    (3,070) 
379 Shuster, B. (PA)--R..............     81,291    (84,389)    (3,098) 
380 Mica, J. (FL)--R.................     83,082    (86,383)    (3,301) 
380 Grams, R. (MN)--R................     66,974    (70,275)    (3,301) 
382 Everett, T. (AL)--R..............     92,379    (95,818)    (3,439) 
383 Bliley, T. (VA)--R...............     84,660    (88,240)    (3,580) 
384 Solomon, G. (NY)--R..............     67,851    (71,579)    (3,728) 
385 Michel, R. (IL)--R...............     84,049    (87,819)    (3,770) 
386 Santorum, R. (PA)--R.............     91,135    (94,914)    (3,779) 
387 Cunningham, R. (CA)--R...........     88,510    (92,438)    (3,928) 
388 Greenwood, J. (PA)--R............    103,726   (107,694)    (3,968) 
389 Inhofe, J. (OK)--R...............     64,351    (68,642)    (4,291) 
390 Packard, R. (CA)--R..............     81,520    (85,919)    (4,399) 
391 Gekas, G. (PA)--R................     83,847    (88,304)    (4,457) 
392 Upton, F. (MI)--R................    113,730   (119,172)    (5,442) 
393 Johnson, S. (TX)--R..............     64,697    (71,164)    (6,467) 
394 Hunter, D. (CA)--R...............     81,272    (88,508)    (7,236) 
395 Barca, P. (WI)--D................     98,012   (105,688)    (7,676) 
396 McMillan, A. (NC)--R.............    100,292   (108,494)    (8,202) 
397 Walker, R. (PA)--R...............     60,943    (69,783)    (8,840) 
398 Johnson, N. (CT)--R..............     98,841   (108,139)    (9,298) 
399 Fawell, H. (IL)--R...............     78,104    (87,618)    (9,514) 
400 Moorhead, C. (CA)--R.............     71,534    (82,590)   (10,056) 
401 Pombo, R. (CA)--R................     79,667    (90,580)   (10,913) 
402 Hoke, M. (OH)--R.................     74,439    (85,429)   (10,990) 
403 Petri, T. (WI)--R................     65,995    (78,148)   (12,153) 
404 Thomas, C. (WY)--R...............     80,843    (94,142)   (13,299) 
405 Collins, M. (GA)--R..............     75,886    (90,412)   (14,526) 
406 Franks, B. (NJ)--R...............     83,517    (98,412)   (14,895) 
407 Dreier, D. (CA)--R...............     68,710    (84,560)   (15,850) 
408 Inglis, B. (SC)--R...............     72,616    (89,009)   (16,393) 
409 Istook, E. (OK)--R...............     70,383    (87,137)   (16,754) 
410 Ewing, T. (IL)--R................     90,344   (109,384)   (19,140) 
411 Portman, R. (OH)--R..............     70,694    (89,944)   (19,250) 
412 Roth, T. (WI)--R.................     63,570    (83,398)   (19,828) 
413 Herger, W. (CA)--R...............     71,660    (92,493)   (20,833) 
414 Smith, N. (MI)--R................     62,611    (83,827)   (21,216) 
415 Paxon, B. (NY)--R................     58,374    (80,005)   (21,631) 
416 Hansen, J. (UT)--R...............     78,105   (100,181)   (22,076) 
417 Duncan, J. (TN)--R...............     64,137    (86,559)   (22,422) 
418 Doolittle, J. (CA)--R............     66,669    (89,816)   (23,147) 
419 Ballenger, C. (NC)--R............     74,183    (97,923)   (23,740) 
420 Camp, D. (MI)--R.................     95,088   (119,653)   (24,565) 
421 Shays, C. (CT)--R................     87,608   (112,645)   (25,037) 
422 Bunning, J. (KY)--R..............     61,945    (88,179)   (26,234) 
423 Miller, D. (FL)--R...............     71,308    (97,554)   (26,246) 
424 Ramstad, J. (MN)--R..............     75,533   (102,537)   (27,004) 
425 Barton, J. (TX)--R...............     63,541    (91,227)   (27,686) 
426 Zimmer, D. (NJ)--R...............     72,441   (103,701)   (31,260) 
427 Crane, P. (IL)--R................     56,922    (88,955)   (32,033) 
428 Coble, H. (NC)--R................     79,221   (111,406)   (32,185) 
429 Rohrabacher, D. (CA)--R..........     68,584   (105,546)   (36,962) 
430 Royce, E. (CA)--R................     72,229   (110,243)   (38,014) 
431 Nussle, J. (IA)--R...............     77,293   (116,620)   (39,327) 
432 Sensenbrenner, F. (WI)--R........     56,113   (106,430)   (50,317) 


                   VOTE TALLY STATE DELEGATION REPORT                   
  [What Members of Congress voted for in the 103d Congress (figures in  
                          millions of dollars)]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Name                  Increases     Cuts         Net   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
                                 ALABAMA                                
                                                                        
Heflin (D-AL)........................    133,490    (57,768)    75,722  
Shelby (D-AL)........................    117,660    (92,487)    25,173  
Bachus (R-AL)........................     76,529    (79,254)    (2,725) 
Bevill (D-AL)........................    133,163    (47,841)    85,324  
Browder (D-AL).......................    132,765    (67,654)    65,111  
Calahan (R-AL).......................     83,227    (50,907)    32,320  
Cramer (D-AL)........................    131,079    (47,836)    83,243  
Everett (R-AL).......................     92,379    (95,818)     3,439  
Hilliard (D-AL)......................    127,840    (70,623)    57,217  
                                                                        
                                 ALASKA                                 
                                                                        
Murkowski (R-AK).....................    111,051   (120,295)    (9,244) 
Stevens (R-AK).......................    122,046    (97,887)    24,159  
Young (R-AK).........................    107,842    (56,885)    50,957  
                                                                        
                                 ARIZONA                                
                                                                        
DeConcini (D-AZ).....................    137,812    (95,895)    41,937  
McCain (R-AZ)........................    111,698   (139,708)   (28,010) 
Coppersmith (D-AZ)...................    117,093    (63,054)    54,039  
English (D-AZ).......................    131,824    (69,704)    62,120  
Kolbe (R-AZ).........................     99,503    (82,210)    17,293  
Kyl (R-AZ)...........................     81,769    (76,110)     5,659  
Pastor (D-AZ)........................    128,259    (81,835)    46,424  
Stump (R-AZ).........................     69,828    (41,271)    28,557  
                                                                        
                                ARKANSAS                                
                                                                        
Bumpers (D-AR).......................    133,128    (65,901)    67,227  
Pryor (D-AR).........................    130,554    (66,918)    63,616  
Dickey (R-AR)........................     91,151    (86,130)     5,021  
Hutchinson (R-AR)....................     94,931    (90,577)     4,354  
Lambert (D-AR).......................    134,547   (119,193)    15,354  
Thornton (D-AR)......................    135,134    (56,709)    78,425  
                                                                        
                               CALIFORNIA                               
                                                                        
Boxer (D-CA).........................    140,993    (54,218)    86,775  
Feinstein (D-CA).....................    132,138    (51,370)    80,768  
Baker (R-CA).........................     74,799    (78,815)    (4,016) 
Becerra (D-CA).......................    137,670    (87,833)    49,837  
Beilenson (D-CA).....................    128,024    (55,597)    72,427  
Berman (D-CA)........................    137,047    (50,800)    86,247  
Brown, G (D-CA)......................    135,173    (65,532)    69,641  
Calvert (R-CA).......................    102,699    (78,647)    24,052  
Condit (D-CA)........................    115,854    (97,670)    18,184  
Cox (R-CA)...........................     68,959    (69,864)      (905) 
Cunningham (R-CA)....................     93,751   (102,314)    (8,563) 
Dellums (D-CA).......................    129,203    (86,911)    42,292  
Dixon (D-CA).........................    140,550    (57,899)    82,651  
Dooley (D-CA)........................    135,131   (103,887)    31,244  
Doolittle (R-CA).....................     66,041    (89,544)   (23,503) 
Dornan (R-CA)........................     69,447    (41,442)    28,005  
Dreier (R-CA)........................     70,191    (84,277)   (14,086) 
Edwards, D (D-CA)....................    129,473    (74,367)    55,106  
Eshoo (D-CA).........................    139,611    (80,580)    59,031  
Farr (D-CA)..........................    110,293    (68,790)    41,503  
Fazio (D-CA).........................    138,101    (49,121)    88,980  
Filner (D-CA)........................    134,813    (71,825)    62,988  
Gallegly (R-CA)......................     96,618    (89,958)     6,660  
Hamburg (D-CA).......................    133,657    (76,827)    56,830  
Harman (D-CA)........................    137,040    (59,360)    77,680  
Herger (R-CA)........................     72,438    (92,211)   (19,783) 
Horn (R-CA)..........................    114,207   (101,517)    12,690  
Huffington (R-CA)....................     95,233    (39,892)    55,341  
Hunter (R-CA)........................     84,581    (97,514)   (12,933) 
Kim (R-CA)...........................    112,267    (73,255)    39,012  
Lantos (D-CA)........................    137,512    (68,709)    68,803  
Lehman (D-CA)........................    132,567    (69,735)    62,832  
Lewis (R-CA).........................    108,670    (80,057)    28,613  
Martinez (D-CA)......................    140,397    (76,900)    63,497  
Matsui (D-CA)........................    139,358    (58,752)    80,606  
McCandless (R-CA)....................     78,321    (65,268)    13,053  
McKeon (R-CA)........................     86,349    (80,965)     5,384  
Miller, G (D-CA).....................    139,122    (90,264)    48,858  
Mineta (D-CA)........................    136,052    (59,457)    76,595  
Moorhead (R-CA)......................     72,312    (82,318)    10,006  
Packard (R-CA).......................     82,099    (86,177)    (4,078) 
Pelosi (D-CA)........................    140,834    (80,181)    60,653  
Pombo (R-CA).........................     76,111    (90,302)   (14,191) 
Rohrabacher (R-CA)...................     68,473   (105,263)   (36,790) 
Roybal-Allard (D-CA).................    137,426    (52,109)    85,317  
Royce (R-CA).........................     71,028   (109,971)   (38,943) 
Schenk (D-CA)........................    138,363    (81,659)    36,704  
Stark (D-CA).........................    127,647    (87,829)    39,818  
Thomas, B (R-CA).....................     97,174    (89,012)     8,162  
Torres (D-CA)........................    137,196    (67,840)    69,356  
Tucker (D-CA)........................    136,399    (67,466)    68,933  
Waters (D-CA)........................    133,217    (71,137)    62,080  
Waxman (D-CA)........................    134,328    (67,965)    66,363  
Woolsey (D-CA).......................    140,508    (76,801)    63,707  
                                                                        
                                COLORADO                                
                                                                        
Brown, H. (R-CO).....................    103,040   (140,292)   (37,252) 
Campbell, B. (D-CO)..................    127,361    (51,818)    75,543  
Allard (R-CO)........................     76,951    (47,788)    29,163  
Hefley (R-CO)........................     74,007    (44,367)    29,640  
McInnis (R-CO).......................     72,873    (58,742)    14,131  
Schaefer (R-CO)......................     62,397    (64,193)    (1,796) 
Schroeder (D-CO).....................    117,890   (94,.438)    23,452  
Skaggs (D-CO)........................    133,458    (72,811)    60,647  
                                                                        
                               CONNECTICUT                              
                                                                        
Dodd (D-CT)..........................    126,256    (47,002)    79,254  
Lieberman (D-CT).....................    122,816    (95,098)    27,718  
DeLauro (D-CT).......................    133,097    (49,205)    83,892  
Franks (R-CT)........................     99,359    (89,472)     9,887  
Gejdenson (D-CT).....................    133,578    (64,972)    68,606  
Johnson (R-CT).......................     98,841   (108,139)    (9,298) 
Kennelly (D-CT)......................    133,256    (49,553)    83,703  
Shays (R-CT).........................     87,608   (112,645)   (25,037) 
                                                                        
                                DELAWARE                                
                                                                        
Biden (D-DE).........................    130,708    (46,815)    83,893  
Roth (R-DE)..........................     95,926   (114,511)   (18,585) 
Castle (R-DE)........................     89,461    (85,686)     3,775  
                                                                        
                                 FLORIDA                                
                                                                        
Graham, B. (D-FL)....................    129,093    (71,883)    57,210  


                                                                        
[[Page H4200]]
              VOTE TALLY STATE DELEGATION REPORT--Continued             
  [What Members of Congress voted for in the 103d Congress (figures in  
                          millions of dollars)]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Name                  Increases     Cuts         Net   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mack (R-FL)..........................    113,043   (143,972)   (30,929) 
Bacchus (D-FL).......................    132,887    (80,920)    51,967  
Bilirakis (R-FL).....................    111,730    (91,474)    20,256  
Brown (D-FL).........................    133,224    (49,213)    84,011  
Canady (R-FL)........................     94,433    (63,566)    30,867  
Deutsch (D-FL).......................    135,305    (78,163)    57,142  
Diaz-Balart (R-FL)...................    105,349    (39,199)    66,150  
Fowler (R-FL)........................    117,511    (55,120)    62,391  
Gibbons (D-FL).......................    131,598    (50,571)    81,027  
Goss (R-FL)..........................     71,039    (70,567)       472  
Hastings (D-FL)......................    124,611    (65,777)    58,834  
Hutto (D-FL).........................     98,320    (79,123)    19,197  
Johnston (D-FL)......................    130,685    (58,569)    72,116  
Lewis (R-FL).........................     82,691    (79,105)     3,586  
McCollum (R-FL)......................     86,438    (66,143)    20,295  
Meek (D-FL)..........................    132,765    (47,663)    85,102  
Mica (R-FL)..........................     83,082    (86,383)    (3,301) 
Miller (R-FL)........................     71,308    (97,554)   (26,246) 
Peterson (D-FL)......................    133,241    (47,789)    85,452  
Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL)..................    101,273    (53,047)    48,226  
Shaw (R-FL)..........................     97,003    (85,295)    11,708  
Stearns (R-FL).......................     89,425    (49,647)    39,778  
Thurman (D-FL).......................    132,997    (79,204)    53,793  
Young (R-FL).........................    112,386    (94,847)    17,539  
                                                                        
                                 GEORGIA                                
                                                                        
Coverdell (R-GA).....................    111,795   (142,899)   (31,104) 
Nunn (D-GA)..........................    127,354    (69,730)    57,624  
Bishop (D-GA)........................    133,046    (61,705)    71,341  
Collins (R-GA).......................     75,886    (90,412)   (14,526) 
Darden (D-GA)........................    133,263    (47,811)    85,452  
Deal (D-GA)..........................    118,788    (80,398)    38,390  
Gingrich (R-GA)......................     84,287    (83,872)       415  
Johnson (D-GA).......................    131,875    (87,544)    44,331  
Kingston (R-GA)......................     87,286    (59,930)    27,356  
Lewis (D-GA).........................    131,820    (81,783)    50,037  
Linder (R-GA)........................     83,347    (78,226)     5,121  
McKinney (D-GA)......................    132,747    (85,370)    47,377  
Rowland (D-GA).......................    109,857    (73,388)    36,469  
                                                                        
                                 HAWAII                                 
                                                                        
Akaka (D-HI).........................    130,732    (47,884)    82,848  
Inouye (D-HI)........................    130,702    (46,352)    84,350  
Abercrombie (D-HI)...................    136,002    (80,623)    55,379  
Mink (D-HI)..........................    133,951    (75,239)    58,712  
                                                                        
                                  IDAHO                                 
                                                                        
Craig (R-ID).........................    115,251   (137,160)   (21,909) 
Kempthorne (R-ID)....................    115,281   (137,160)   (21,879) 
Crapo (R-ID).........................     74,138    (71,766)     2,372  
LaRocco (D-ID).......................    131,628   (112,089)    19,539  
                                                                        
                                ILLINOIS                                
                                                                        
Moseley-Braun (D-IL).................    134,553    (50,324)    84,229  
Simon (D-IL).........................    134,777    (82,337)    52,440  
Collins (D-IL).......................    117,579    (75,819)    41,760  
Costello (D-IL)......................    134,522    (81,139)    53,383  
Crane (R-IL).........................     56,922    (88,955)   (32,033) 
Durbin (D-IL)........................    135,331    (83,300)    52,031  
Evans (D-IL).........................    136,045    (85,511)    50,534  
Ewing (R-IL).........................     90,244   (109,384)   (19,140) 
Fawell (R-IL)........................     78,104    (87,618)    (9,514) 
Gutierrez (D-IL).....................    127,792    (72,618)    55,174  
Hastert (R-IL).......................     96,879    (85,496)    11,383  
Hyde (R-IL)..........................     94,185    (76,478)    17,707  
Lipinski (D-IL)......................    135,707    (69,875)    65,832  
Manzullo (R-IL)......................     84,545    (85,360)      (815) 
Michel (R-IL)........................     84,049    (87,819)    (3,770) 
Porter (R-IL)........................     96,466    (93,657)     2,809  
Poshard (D-IL).......................    133,523   (109,126)    24,397  
Reynolds (D-IL)......................    133,322    (70,340)    62,982  
Rostenkowski (D-IL)..................    134,763    (66,907)    67,856  
Rush (D-IL)..........................    131,997    (87,780)    44,217  
Sangmeister (D-IL)...................    136,095    (96,172)    39,923  
Yates (D-IL).........................    135,744    (85,592)    50,152  
                                                                        
                                 INDIANA                                
                                                                        
Coats (R-IN).........................    111,932   (121,410)    (9,478) 
Lugar (R-IN).........................    115,399   (120,289)    (4,890) 
Burton (R-IN)........................     81,826    (57,887)    23,939  
Buyer (R-IN).........................     94,089    (81,664)    12,425  
Hamilton (D-IN)......................    133,806    (66,170)    67,636  
Jacobs (D-IN)........................    114,071    (83,108)    30,963  
Long (D-IN)..........................    134,135   (104,384)    29,751  
McCloskey (D-IN).....................    133,603    (54,139)    79,464  
Myers (R-IN).........................     92,448    (83,657)     8,791  
Roemer (D-IN)........................    115,914    (57,139)    58,775  
Sharp (D-IN).........................    131,236    (77,679)    53,557  
Visclosky (D-IN).....................    133,488    (70,124)    63,364  
                                                                        
                                  IOWA                                  
                                                                        
Grassley (R-IA)......................    117,692   (152,677)   (34,985) 
Harkin (D-IA)........................    140,062    (64,432)    75,630  
Grandy (R-IA)........................    102,787    (77,665)    25,122  
Leach (R-IA).........................    111,274    (63,586)    47,688  
Lightfoot (R-IA).....................     96,061    (52,927)    43,134  
Nussle (R-IA)........................     77,293   (116,620)   (39,327) 
Smith (D-IA).........................    130,221    (48,374)    81,847  
                                                                        
                                 KANSAS                                 
                                                                        
Dole (R-KS)..........................    117,684   (122,677)    (4,993) 
Kassebaum (R-KS).....................    120,090   (133.058)   (12,968) 
Glickman (D-KS)......................    131,011    (50,128)    80,883  
Meyers (R-KS)........................    105,890    (89,016)    16,874  
Roberts (R-KS).......................     89,179    (53,720)    35,459  
Slattery (D-KS)......................    125,991    (78,020)    47,971  
                                                                        
                                KENTUCKY                                
                                                                        
Ford (D-KY)..........................    130,732    (49,714)    81,018  
McConnell (R-KY).....................    117,608   (113,755)     3,853  
Baesler (D-KY).......................    131,843    (74,887)    56,956  
Barlow (D-KY)........................    133,075    (84,133)    48,942  
Bunning (R-KY).......................     61,945    (88,179)    26,234  
Mazzoli (D-KY).......................    133,475    (67,925)    65,550  
Rogers (R-KY)........................    129,359    (52,075)    77,284  
                                                                        
                                LOUISIANA                               
                                                                        
Breaux (D-LA)........................    130,572    (45,993)    84,579  
Johnston (D-LA)......................    127,122    (31,700)    95,422  
Baker (R-LA).........................     93,284    (83,613)     9,671  
Fields (D-LA)........................    136,243    (84,672)    51,571  
Hayes (D-LA).........................    109,938    (69,222)    40,716  
Jefferson (D-LA).....................    133,276    (65,803)    67,473  
Livingston (R-LA)....................    106,973    (88,408)    18,565  
McCrery (R-LA).......................    100,333    (86,945)    13,388  
Tauzin (D-LA)........................    112,409   (100,269)    12,140  
                                                                        
                                  MAINE                                 
                                                                        
Cohen (R-ME).........................    116,295   (146,117)   (29,822) 
Mitchell (D-ME)......................    127,308    (52,668)    74,640  
Andrews (D-ME).......................    134,168    (85,669)    48,499  
Snowe (R-ME).........................    123,710    (87,709)    36,001  
                                                                        
                                MARYLAND                                
                                                                        
Mikulski (D-MD)......................    128,823    (45,826)    82,997  
Sarbanes (D-MD)......................    127,332    (47,571)    79,761  
Bartlett (R-MD)......................     90,787    (68,774)    22,013  
Bentley (R-MD).......................    112,601    (39,832)    72,769  
Cardin (D-MD)........................    133,856    (97,578)    36,278  
Gilchrest (R-MD).....................    117,374    (88,018)    29,357  
Hoyer (D-MD).........................    133,222    (48,893)    84,329  
Mfume (D-MD).........................    135,916    (69,644)    66,272  
Morella (R-MD).......................    116,854    (48,097)    68,757  
Wynn (D-MD)..........................    136,193    (81,292)    54,901  
                                                                        
                              MASSACHUSETTS                             
                                                                        
Kennedy (D-MA).......................    127,256    (51,079)    76,177  
Kerry J. (D-MA)......................    127,332    (62,446)    64,886  
Blute (R-MA).........................    117,151    (92,971)    24,180  
Frank (D-MA).........................    124,628    (88,555)    36,073  
Kennedy (D-MA).......................    135,871    (83,428)    52,443  
Markey (D-MA)........................    136,201    (84,477)    51,724  
Meehan (D-MA)........................    135,375   (120,729)    14,646  
Moakley (D-MA).......................    129,582    (80,030)    49,552  
Neal (D-MA)..........................    135,123    (78,926)    56,197  
Olver (D-MA).........................    136,248    (67,248)    69,000  
Studds (D-MA)........................    135,994    (84,675)    51,319  
Torkildsen (R-MA)....................    119,938    (81,861)    38,077  
                                                                        
                                MICHIGAN                                
                                                                        
Levin (D-MI).........................    127,302    (61,256)    66,046  
Riegle (D-MI)........................    128,496    (47,037)    81,459  
Barcia (D-MI)........................    132,669    (89,812)    42,857  
Bonior (D-MI)........................    135,494    (77,509)    57,985  
Camp (R-MI)..........................     95,088   (119,653)   (24,565) 
Carr (D-MI)..........................    132,782    (73,805)    58,977  
Collins (D-MI).......................    130,646    (72,086)    58,560  
Conyers (D-MI).......................    126,861    (58,795)    68,066  
Dingell (D-MI).......................    131,236    (69,533)    61,703  
Ford (D-MI)..........................    127,978    (72,795)    55,183  
Hoekstra (R-MI)......................     96,995    (81,066)    15,929  
Kildee (D-MI)........................    133,729    (71,150)    62,579  
Knollenberg (R-MI)...................     75,492    (69,738)     5,754  
Levin (D-MI).........................    133,080    (55,338)    77,742  
Smith (R-MI).........................     62,611    (83,827)   (21,216) 
Stupak (D-MI)........................    135,875    (85,738)    50,137  
Upton (R-MI).........................    113,730   (119,172)    (5,442) 
                                                                        
                                MINNESOTA                               
                                                                        
Durenberger (R-MN)...................    113,712   (122,966)    (9,254) 
Wellstone (D-MN).....................    135,793    (54,280)    81,513  
Grams (R-MN).........................     66,974    (70,275)    (3,301) 
Minge (D-MN).........................    116,973    (93,856)    23,117  
Oberstar (D-MN)......................    129,767    (82,933)    46,834  
Penny (D-MN).........................    111,140   (110,111)     1,029  
Peterson (D-MN)......................    117,150   (102,774)    14,676  
Ramstad (R-MN).......................     75,533   (102,537)   (27,004) 
Sabo (D-MN)..........................    129,219    (51,210)    78,009  
Vento (D-MN).........................    131,653    (84,926)    46,727  
                                                                        
                               MISSISSIPPI                              
                                                                        
Cochran (R-MS).......................    117,697   (101,611)    16,086  
Lott (R-MS)..........................    115,558   (113,289)     2,269  
Montgomery (D-MS)....................    122,661    (74,247)    48,414  
Parker (D-MS)........................    117,776    (69,297)    48,479  
Taylor (D-MS)........................     97,103    (86,878)    10,225  
Thompson (D-MS)......................    111,728    (76,771)    34,957  
Whitten (D-MS).......................    130,260    (51,373)    78,887  
                                                                        
                                MISSOURI                                
                                                                        
Bond (R-MO)..........................    117,452   (112,300)     5,152  
Danforth (R-MO)......................    119,264   (127,421)    (8,157) 
Clay (D-MO)..........................    126,983    (77,654)    49,329  
Danner (D-MO)........................    136,122    (70,370)    65,752  
Emerson (R-MO).......................    105,584    (57,296)    48,288  
Gephardt (D-MO)......................    133,462    (51,699)    81,763  
Hancock (R-MO).......................     58,513    (45,127)    13,386  
Skelton (D-MO).......................    130,804    (55,373)    75,431  
Talent (R-MO)........................     87,618    (78,445)     9,173  
Volkmer (D-MO).......................    131,029    (54,470)    76,559  
Wheat (D-MO).........................    133,071    (84,832)    48,239  
                                                                        
                                 MONTANA                                
                                                                        
Baucus (D-MT)........................    129,869    (79,774)    50,095  
Burns (R-MT).........................    116,079   (118,112)    (2,033) 
Williams (D-MT)......................    138,000    (69,030)    68,970  
                                                                        
                                NEBRASKA                                
                                                                        
Exon (D-NE)..........................    130,612    (89,195)    41,417  
Kerrey, R. (D-NE)....................    127,183    (95,574)    31,609  
Barrett (R-NE).......................     98,965    (64,067)    34,898  
Bereuter (R-NE)......................     94,106    (52,443)    41,663  
Hoagland (D-NE)......................    132,702    (87,191)    45,511  
                                                                        
                                 NEVADA                                 
                                                                        
Bryan (D-NV).........................    132,582    (44,342)    88,240  
Reid (D-NV)..........................    132,610    (48,449)    84,161  
Bilbray (D-NV).......................    133,633    (55,667)    77,966  
Vucanovich (R-NV)....................    109,877    (60,553)    49,324  
                                                                        
                              NEW HAMPSHIRE                             
                                                                        
Gregg (R-NH).........................    103,600   (144,296)    40,696  
Smith, R.C. (R-NH)...................     91,214   (136,976)    45,762  
Swett (D-NH).........................    131,083    (75,590)    55,493  
Zeliff (R-NH)........................     79,470    (67,294)    12,176  
                                                                        
                               NEW JERSEY                               
                                                                        
Bradley (D-NJ).......................    129,639    (59,336)    70,303  
Lautenberg (D-NJ)....................    136,633    (74,425)    62,208  
Andrews (D-NJ).......................    118,812    (86,934)    31,878  
Franks (R-NJ)........................     83,517    (98,412)   (14,895) 
Gallo (R-NJ).........................    102,380    (81,200)    21,180  
Hughes (D-NJ)........................    122,142    (64,546)    57,596  
Klein (D-NJ).........................    132,260    (68,715)    63,545  
Menendez (D-NJ)......................    133,872    (80,884)    52,988  
Pallone (D-NJ).......................    113,692    (59,576)    54,116  
Payne (D-NJ).........................    131,116    (85,294)    45,822  
Roukema (R-NJ).......................     98,215    (57,205)    41,010  
Saxton (R-NJ)........................     96,489    (91,386)     5,103  
Smith (R-NJ).........................    119,676    (86,449)    33,227  
Torricelli (D-NJ)....................    133,861    (93,755)    40,106  
Zimmer (R-NJ)........................     72,441   (103,701)   (31,260) 
                                                                        
                                                                        
                               NEW MEXICO                               
                                                                        
Bingaman (D-NM)......................    125,602    (56.267)    69,335  
Domenici (R-NM)......................    113,763   (113,076)       687  
Richardson (R-NM)....................    132,345    (52,617)    79,728  
Schiff (R-NM)........................     96,741    (99,656)    (2,945) 
Skeen (R-NM).........................    112,179    (75,564)    36,915  
                                                                        
                                NEW YORK                                
                                                                        
D'Amato (R-NY).......................    119,056   (121,381)    (2,325) 
Moynihan (D-NY)......................    129,613    (54,602)    75,011  
Ackerman (D-NY)......................    131,936    (54,784)    77,172  
Boehlert (R-NY)......................    136,912    (45,270)    91,642  
Engel (D-NY).........................    135,678    (81,675)    54,003  
Fish (R-NY)..........................    115,328    (87,667)    27,661  
Flake (D-NY).........................    134,476    (87,420)    47,056  
Gilman (R-NY)........................    110,441    (57,314)    53,127  
Hinchey (D-NY).......................    135,659    (81,733)    53,926  
Hochbrueck (D-NY)....................    130,549    (64,845)    65,704  
Houghton (R-NY)......................    113,776    (85,066)    28,710  
King (R-NY)..........................     94,194    (64,718)    29,476  
LaFalce (D-NY).......................    132,956    (70,487)    62,469  
Lazio (R-NY).........................    101,259    (68,809)    32,450  
Levy (R-NY)..........................     97,636    (67,711)    29,925  
Lowey (D-NY).........................    136,236    (80,007)    56,229  
Maloney (D-NY).......................    133,715    (67,248)    65,967  
Manton (D-NY)........................    133,056    (47,900)    85,156  
McHugh (R-NY)........................     95,105    (70,325)    24,780  
McNulty (D-NY).......................    132,851    (62,223)    70,628  
Molinari (R-NY)......................    112,661    (73,230)    39,431  
Nadler (D-NY)........................    132,948    (67,379)    65,569  
Owens (D-NY).........................    121,084    (77,737)    43,347  
Paxon (R-NY).........................     58,374    (80,005)   (21,631) 
Quinn (R-NY).........................     96,639    (86,354)    10,285  
Rangel (D-NY)........................    126,757    (79,759)    46,998  
Schumer (D-NY).......................    135,227    (80,604)    54,623  
Serrano (D-NY).......................    127,638    (87,924)    39,714  
Slaughter (D-NY).....................    136,055    (83,249)    52,806  
Solomon (R-NY).......................     67,851    (71,579)    (3,728) 
Towns (D-NY).........................    131,897    (75,597)   (56,300) 
Velazquez (D-NY).....................    127,188    (90,925)   (36,263) 
Walsh (R-NY).........................    132,037    (83,063)   (48,974) 
                                                                        
                             NORTH CAROLINA                             
                                                                        
Faircloth (R-NC).....................    103,531   (139,538)   (36,007) 
Helms (R-NC).........................     91,567   (112,912)   (21,345) 
Ballenger (R-NC).....................     74,183    (97,923)   (23,740) 
Clayton (D-NC).......................    130,160    (59,698)    70,462  
Coble (R-NC).........................     79,221   (111,406)   (32,185) 
Hefner (D-NC)........................    135,846    (80,675)    55,171  
Lancaster (D-NC).....................    141,669    (59,515)    82,154  
McMillan (R-NC)......................    100,292   (108,494)    (8,202) 
Neal (D-NC)..........................    116,769    (65,916)    50,853  
Price (D-NC).........................    133,572    (53,450)    80,122  
Rose (D-NC)..........................    130,222    (50,862)    79,360  
Taylor (R-NC)........................     75,562    (76,931)    (1,369) 


                                                                        
[[Page H4201]]
              VOTE TALLY STATE DELEGATION REPORT--Continued             
  [What Members of Congress voted for in the 103d Congress (figures in  
                          millions of dollars)]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Name                  Increases     Cuts         Net   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valentine (D-NC).....................    111,821    (95,042)    16,779  
Watt (D-NC)..........................    131,786    (85,282)    46,504  
                                                                        
                              NORTH DAKOTA                              
                                                                        
Conrad (D-ND)........................    131,665    (70,587)    61,078  
Dorgan (D-ND)........................    132,900    (66,454)    66,446  
Pomeroy (D-ND).......................    133,784    (87,344)    46,440  
                                                                        
                                  OHIO                                  
                                                                        
Glenn (D-OH).........................    127,262    (46,343)    80,919  
Metzenbaum (D-OH)....................    122,709    (71,661)    51,048  
Applegate (D-OH).....................    129,120    (68,370)    60,750  
Boehner (R-OH).......................     71,804    (66,717)     5,087  
Brown (D-OH).........................    136,089    (95,756)    40,333  
Fingerhut (D-OH).....................    113,373    (88,677)    24,696  
Gillmor (R-OH).......................    113,401    (60,947)    52,454  
Hall (D-OH)..........................    135,102    (53,743)    81,359  
Hobson (R-OH)........................    107,143   (101,560)     5,583  
Hoke (R-OH)..........................     74,439    (85,429)   (10,990) 
Kaptur (D-OH)........................    135,191    (86,679)    48,512  
Kasich (R-OH)........................     93,919    (89,098)     4,821  
Mann (D-OH)..........................    111,590    (62,197)    49,393  
Oxley (R-OH).........................     86,516    (79,548)     6,968  
Portman (R-OH).......................     70,694    (89,944)   (19,250) 
Pryce (R-OH).........................    107,963    (99,910)     8,053  
Regula (R-OH)........................    115,493    (74,188)    41,305  
Sawyer (D-OH)........................    133,549    (52,280)    81,269  
Stokes (D-OH)........................    131,023    (59,011)    72,012  
Strickland (D-OH)....................    136,034    (85,400)    50,634  
Traficant (D-OH).....................    132,239    (54,813)    77,426  
                                OKLAHOMA                                
                                                                        
Boren (D-OK).........................    126,528   (100,581)    25,947  
Nickles (R-OK).......................    108,958   (142,761)   (33,803) 
Brewster (D-OK)......................    108,809    (59,262)    49,547  
Inhofe (R-OK)........................     64,351    (68,642)    (4,291) 
Istook (R-OK)........................     70,383    (87,137)   (16,754) 
McCurdy (D-OR).......................    129,821    (70,988)    58,883  
Synar (D-OK).........................    129,921    (59,423)    70,498  
                                                                        
                                 OREGON                                 
                                                                        
Hatfield (R-OR)......................    112,737    (86,919)    25,808  
Packwood (R-OR)......................    110,030   (121,330)   (11,300) 
DeFazio (D-OR).......................    112,003    (81,768)    30,235  
Furse (D-OR).........................    134,727    (82,816)    51,911  
Kopetski (D-OR)......................    130,335    (77,141)    53,194  
Smith (R-OR).........................     76,561    (29,600)    46,961  
Wyden (D-OR).........................    126,217    (87,274)    38,943  
                                                                        
                              PENNSYLVANIA                              
                                                                        
Specter (R-PA).......................    124,538   (100,781)    23,757  
Wofford (D-PA).......................    132,613    (61,662)    70,951  
Blackwell (D-PA).....................    133,043    (70,656)    62,387  
Borski (D-PA)........................    135,626    (76,251)    59,375  
Clinger (R-PA).......................    104,552    (71,143)    33,409  
Coyne (D-PA).........................    136,205    (84,074)    52,131  
Foglietta (D-PA).....................    133,448    (73,070)    60,378  
Gekas (R-PA).........................     83,847    (88,304)    (4,457) 
Goodling (R-PA)......................     98,168    (93,254)     4,914  
Greenwood (R-PA).....................    103,726   (107,694)    (3,968) 
Holden (D-PA)........................    136,034    (92,293)    43,741  
Kanjorski (D-PA).....................    136,145    (83,549)    52,596  
Klink (D-PA).........................    136,088    (97,919)    38,169  
Margolies-Mezv (D-PA)................    117,351    (94,689)    22,662  
McDade (R-PA)........................    109,325    (78,081)    31,444  
McHale (D-PA)........................    135,817   (101,176)    34,641  
Murphy (D-PA)........................    117,285    (96,225)    21,060  
Murtha (D-PA)........................    140,515    (47,492)    93,053  
Ridge (R-PA).........................    108,188    (92,187)    16,001  
Santorum (R-PA)......................     91,135    (94,914)    (3,779) 
Shuster (R-PA).......................     81,291    (84,389)    (3,098) 
Walker (R-PA)........................     60,943    (69,783)    (8,840) 
Weldon (R-PA)).......................     91,001    (86,258)     4,743  
                                                                        
                              RHODE ISLAND                              
                                                                        
Chafee (D-RI)........................    122,158   (136,007)   (13,849) 
Pell (R-RI)..........................    121,372    (58,847)    62,525  
Machtley (R-RI)......................    117,118    (50,818)    66,300  
Reed (D-RI)..........................    133,048    (54,455)    78,593  
                                                                        
                             SOUTH CAROLINA                             
                                                                        
Hollings (D-SC)......................    126,315    (62,298)    64,017  
Thurmond (R-SC)......................    117,863   (120,618)    (2,755) 
Clyburn (D-SC).......................    133,732    (60,148)    73,584  
Derrick (D-SC).......................    129,552    (52,095)    77,457  
Inglis (R-SC)........................     72,616    (89,009)   (16,393) 
Ravenel (R-SC).......................    116,390   (105,123)    11,267  
Spence (R-SC)........................    103,080    (40,981)    62,099  
Spratt (D-SC)........................    133,556    (53,868)    79,688  
                                                                        
                              SOUTH DAKOTA                              
                                                                        
Daschle (D-SD).......................    130,763    (46,354)    84,409  
Pressler (R-SD)......................    113,502   (119,079)    (5,577) 
Johnson (D-SD).......................    134,057    (82,854)    51,203  
                                                                        
                                TENNESSEE                               
                                                                        
Mathews (D-TN).......................    129,125    (56,887)    72,238  
Sasser (D-TN)........................    132,719    (60,681)    72,038  
Clement (D-TN).......................    131,474    (43,068)    88,406  
Cooper (D-TN)........................    130,486    (83,481)    47,005  
Duncan (R-TN)........................     64,137    (86,559)   (22,422) 
Ford (D-TN)..........................    112,243    (55,410)    56,833  
Gordon (D-TN)........................    133,005    (74,449)    58,556  
Lloyd (D-TN).........................    128,944    (74,208)    54,736  
Quillen (R-TN).......................     92,083    (83,848)     8,235  
Sundquist (R-TN).....................     96,191    (91,745)     4,446  
Tanner (D-TN)........................    131,670    (85,516)    16,154  
                                                                        
                                  TEXAS                                 
                                                                        
Gramm (R-TX).........................    116,963   (117,343)      (380) 
Hutchison (R-TX).....................    112,902    (84,690)    28,212  
Andress (D-TX).......................    124,106    (72,551)    51,555  
Archer (R-TX)........................     59,069    (43,841)    15,228  
Armey (R-TX).........................     66,063    (67,890)    (1,827) 
Barton (R-TX)........................     63,541    (91,227)   (27,868) 
Bonilla (R-TX).......................     95,946    (94,297)     1,649  
Brooks (D-TX)........................    133,173    (58,641)    74,532  
Bryant (D-TX)........................    133,135    (80,232)    52,903  
Chapman (D-TX).......................    139,177    (51,602)    87,575  
Coleman (D-TX).......................    134,930    (56,112)    78,818  
Combest (R-TX).......................     86,879    (39,267)    47,612  
de la Garza (D-TX)...................    132,460    (51,281)    81,179  
DeLay (R-TX).........................     72,114    (73,433)    (1,319) 
Edwards (D-TX).......................    129,825    (54,946)    74,880  
Fields (R-TX)........................     65,879    (65,861)        18  
Frost (D-TX).........................    133,070    (71,340)    61,730  
Geren (D-TX).........................    113,248      70,661    42,587  
Gonzalez (D-TX)......................    140,382    (49,191)    91,191  
Green (D-TX).........................    117,418    (79,844)    37,574  
Hall (D-TX)..........................    103,817    (76,141)    27,706  
Johnson, E. (D-TX)...................    135,851    (77,427)    58,424  
Johnson, S. (R-TX)...................     64,697    (71,164)    (6,467) 
Laughlin (D-TX)......................    129,656    (58,974)    70,682  
Ortiz (D-TX).........................    132,218    (47,340)    84,878  
Pickle (D-TX)........................    131,819    (71,968)    59,851  
Sarpalius (D-TX).....................    136,659    (67,164)    69,495  
Smith (R-TX).........................     94,953    (79,108)    15,845  
Stenholm (D-TX)......................     92,638    (92,702)       (64) 
Tejeda (D-TX)........................    141,363    (47,773)    93,590  
Washington (D-TX)....................     98,221    (67,452)    30,769  
Wilson (D-TX)........................    132,332    (73,141)    59,191  
                                                                        
                                  UTAH                                  
                                                                        
Bennett (R-UT).......................    118,656   (118,998)      (342) 
Hatch (R-UT).........................    118,376   (119,990)    (1,524) 
Hansen (R-UT)........................     78,105   (100,181)   (22,076) 
Orton (D-UT).........................     98,477    (76,968)    21,509  
Shepherd (D-UT)......................    130,880    (71,552)    59,328  
                                                                        
                                 VERMONT                                
                                                                        
Jeffords (R-VT)......................    127,492    (79,181)    48,311  
Leahy (D-VT).........................    134,144    (64,377)    69,767  
Sanders (I-VT).......................    128,991    (79,303)    49,688  
                                                                        
                                VIRGINIA                                
                                                                        
Robb (D-VA)..........................    127,304    (84,096)    43,208  
Warner (R-VA)........................    104,160   (121,462)   (17,002) 
Bateman (R-VA).......................    106,621    (73,802)    32,819  
Bliley (R-VA)........................     84,660    (88,240)    (3,580) 
Boucher (D-VA).......................    134,942    (73,222)    61,720  
Byrne (D-VA).........................    131,385    (78,014)    53,371  
Goodlatte (R-VA).....................     74,768    (57,421)    17,347  
Moran (D-VA).........................    134,094    (54,248)    79,846  
Payne (D-VA).........................    126,508    (78,141)    48,367  
Pickett (D-VA).......................    110,525    (35,608)    74,917  
Scott (D-VA).........................    129,072    (62,932)    66,140  
Sisisky (D-VA).......................    117,136    (50,586)    66,550  
Wolf (R-VA)..........................     94,060    (90,009)     4,051  
                                                                        
                               WASHINGTON                               
                                                                        
Gorton (R-WA)........................    119,839   (108,973)    10,866  
Murray (D-WA)........................    127,332    (48,003)    79,329  
Cantwell (D-WA)......................    133,291    (66,938)    66,353  
Dicks (D-WA).........................    133,328    (47,767)    85,561  
Dunn (R-WA)..........................     82,033    (66,335)    15,698  
Foley (D-WA).........................     75,302    (35,590)    39,712  
Inslee (D-WA)........................    134,108   (106,326)    27,782  
Kreidler (D-WA)......................    135,965    (92,527)    43,438  
McDermott (D-WA).....................    134,667    (80,927)    53,740  
Swift (D-WA).........................    132,523    (48,140)    84,383  
Unsoeld (D-WA).......................    136,071    (85,252)    30,819  
                                                                        
                              WEST VIRGINIA                             
                                                                        
Byrd (D-WV)..........................    128,325    (53,869)    74,456  
Rockefeller (D-WV)...................    130,488    (46,657)    83,831  
Mollohan (D-WV)......................    127,593    (48,951)    78,642  
Rahall (D-WV)........................    130,704    (70,898)    59,806  
Wise (D-WV)..........................    133,297    (47,577)    85,720  
                                                                        
                                WISCONSIN                               
                                                                        
Feingold (D-WI)......................    126,933    (81,812)    45,121  
Kohl (D-WI)..........................    124,700   (103,945)    20,755  
Barca (D-WI).........................     98,012   (105,688)    (7,676) 
Barrett (D-WI).......................    129,832    (92,871)    36,961  
Gunderson (R-WI).....................     97,717    (88,982)     8,735  
Kleczka (D-WI).......................    136,083    (80,769)    55,314  
Klug (R-WI)..........................     88,482    (79,847)     8,635  
Obey (D-WI)..........................    136,075    (82,955)    53,120  
Petri (R-WI).........................     65,995    (78,148)   (12,153) 
Roth (R-WI)..........................     63,570    (83,398)   (19,828) 
Sensenbrenner (R-WI).................     56,113   (106,430)   (50,317) 
                                                                        
                                 WYOMING                                
                                                                        
Simpson (R-WY).......................     98,332   (130,480)   (32,148) 
Wallop (R-WY)........................     96,189   (100,419)    (4,230) 
Thomas (R-WY)........................     80,843    (94,142)   (13,299) 

Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. MOAKLEY asked and was given permission to include extraneous 
material.)
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, we are finally at the end of the contract.
  For 100 days America's children, senior citizens, and working 
families have watched the Republican Congress gut their school lunches, 
home heating assistance, and student loans. And for what reason? To pay 
for tax breaks for the very rich. To continue to allow billionaires to 
renounce their American citizenship to avoid paying taxes.
  The tax bill we are considering today illustrates very clearly the 
winners and losers in the Republican contract.
  This bill takes money from school lunches and hands it over to the 
very rich in the form of tax breaks--from the mouths of babes to the 
pockets of billionaires.
  Some people are very happy with the Republican Congress. Some people 
got what they wanted. They had their cake and they will eat it too. 
Those people are special interest lobbyists, corporations, and 
millionaires.
  The losers were children who get meals at school, young people who 
need summer jobs, and families whose homes are heated with the help of 
the LIHEAP Program.
  Mr. Speaker, I was sorry to see that Mr. Solomon's own committee, 
which is stacked with nine Republicans to four Democrats, refused to 
make in order any amendments.
  Yesterday he called himself the fiercest deficit hawk up here. Still, 
despite the demand of 102 Members of their own party, despite Mr. 
Solomon's support, the Republican leadership refused to allow 
amendments to slow down tax cuts in the face of exploding deficits.
  They imposed a watered down, milquetoast amendment that doesn't even 
qualify as a speed bump on the deficit highway.
  I know if Mr. Solomon were calling the shots on the Rules Committee 
he would have made stronger amendments in order. Once we're finished 
with the contract I hope he gets his way.
  I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so we can come 
back with an open rule, instead of this gag rule, and help someone 
other than the special interest lobbyists.
  Mr. Speaker, I include the following for the Record:

                                                                        
[[Page H4202]]
                                      FLOOR PROCEDURE IN THE 104TH CONGRESS                                     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Process used for floor      Amendments in
        Bill No.                  Title            Resolution No.           consideration              order    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 1.................  Compliance.............  H. Res. 6         Closed......................           None.
H. Res. 6..............  Opening Day Rules        H. Res. 5         Closed; contained a closed             None.
                          Package.                                   rule on H.R. 1 within the                  
                                                                     closed rule.                               
H.R. 5.................  Unfunded Mandates......  H. Res. 38        Restrictive; Motion adopted             N/A.
                                                                     over Democratic objection                  
                                                                     in the Committee of the                    
                                                                     Whole to limit debate on                   
                                                                     section 4; Pre-printing                    
                                                                     gets preference.                           
H.J. Res. 2............  Balanced Budget........  H. Res. 44        Restrictive; only certain            2R; 4D.
                                                                     substitutes.                               
H. Res. 43.............  Committee Hearings       H. Res. 43 (OJ)   Restrictive; considered in              N/A.
                          Scheduling.                                House no amendments.                       
H.R. 2.................  Line Item Veto.........  H. Res. 55        Open; Pre-printing gets                 N/A.
                                                                     preference.                                
H.R. 665...............  Victim Restitution Act   H. Res. 61        Open; Pre-printing gets                 N/A.
                          of 1995.                                   preference.                                
H.R. 666...............  Exclusionary Rule        H. Res. 60        Open; Pre-printing gets                 N/A.
                          Reform Act of 1995.                        preference.                                
H.R. 667...............  Violent Criminal         H. Res. 63        Restrictive; 10 hr. Time Cap            N/A.
                          Incarceration Act of                       on amendments.                             
                          1995.                                                                                 
H.R. 668...............  The Criminal Alien       H. Res. 69        Open; Pre-printing gets                 N/A.
                          Deportation                                preference; Contains self-                 
                          Improvement Act.                           executing provision.                       
H.R. 728...............  Local Government Law     H. Res. 79        Restrictive; 10 hr. Time Cap            N/A.
                          Enforcement Block                          on amendments; Pre-printing                
                          Grants.                                    gets preference.                           
H.R. 7.................  National Security        H. Res. 83        Restrictive; 10 hr. Time Cap            N/A.
                          Revitalization Act.                        on amendments; Pre-printing                
                                                                     gets preference.                           
H.R. 729...............  Death Penalty/Habeas...  N/A               Restrictive; brought up                 N/A.
                                                                     under UC with a 6 hr. time                 
                                                                     cap on amendments.                         
S. 2...................  Senate Compliance......  N/A               Closed; Put on suspension              None.
                                                                     calendar over Democratic                   
                                                                     objection.                                 
H.R. 831...............  To Permanently Extend    H. Res. 88        Restrictive; makes in order              1D.
                          the Health Insurance                       only the Gibbons amendment;                
                          Deduction for the Self-                    waives all points of order;                
                          Employed.                                  Contains self-executing                    
                                                                     provision.                                 
H.R. 830...............  The Paperwork Reduction  H. Res. 91        Open........................            N/A.
                          Act.                                                                                  
H.R. 889...............  Emergency Supplemental/  H. Res. 92        Restrictive; makes in order              1D.
                          Rescinding Certain                         only the Obey substitute.                  
                          Budget Authority.                                                                     
H.R. 450...............  Regulatory Moratorium..  H. Res. 93        Restrictive; 10 hr. Time Cap            N/A.
                                                                     on amendments; Pre-printing                
                                                                     gets preference.                           
H.R. 1022..............  Risk Assessment........  H. Res. 96        Restrictive; 10 hr. Time Cap            N/A.
                                                                     on amendments.                             
H.R. 926...............  Regulatory Flexibility.  H. Res. 100       Open........................            N/A.
H.R. 925...............  Private Property         H. Res. 101       Restrictive; 12 hr. time cap             1D.
                          Protection Act.                            on amendments; Requires                    
                                                                     Members to pre-print their                 
                                                                     amendments in the Record                   
                                                                     prior to the bill's                        
                                                                     consideration for                          
                                                                     amendment, waives                          
                                                                     germaneness and budget act                 
                                                                     points of order as well as                 
                                                                     points of order concerning                 
                                                                     appropriating on a                         
                                                                     legislative bill against                   
                                                                     the committee substitute                   
                                                                     used as base text.                         
H.R. 1058..............  Securities Litigation    H. Res. 105       Restrictive; 8 hr. time cap              1D.
                          Reform Act.                                on amendments; Pre-printing                
                                                                     gets preference; Makes in                  
                                                                     order the Wyden amendment                  
                                                                     and waives germaness                       
                                                                     against it.                                
H.R. 988...............  The Attorney             H. Res. 104       Restrictive; 7 hr. time cap             N/A.
                          Accountability Act of                      on amendments; Pre-printing                
                          1995.                                      gets preference.                           
H.R. 956...............  Product Liability and    H. Res. 109       Restrictive; makes in order          8D; 7R.
                          Legal Reform Act.                          only 15 germane amendments                 
                                                                     and denies 64 germane                      
                                                                     amendments from being                      
                                                                     considered.                                
H.R. 1158..............  Making Emergency         H. Res. 115       Restrictive; Combines                   N/A.
                          Supplemental                               emergency H.R. 1158 &                      
                          Appropriations and                         nonemergency 1159 and                      
                          Rescissions.                               strikes the abortion                       
                                                                     provision; makes in order                  
                                                                     only pre-printed amendments                
                                                                     that include offsets within                
                                                                     the same chapter (deeper                   
                                                                     cuts in programs already                   
                                                                     cut); waives points of                     
                                                                     order against three                        
                                                                     amendments; waives cl 2 of                 
                                                                     rule XXI against the bill,                 
                                                                     cl 2, XXI and cl 7 of rule                 
                                                                     XVI against the substitute;                
                                                                     waives cl 2(e) of rule XXI                 
                                                                     against the amendments in                  
                                                                     the Record; 10 hr time cap                 
                                                                     on amendments. 30 minutes                  
                                                                     debate on each amendment.                  
H.J. Res. 73...........  Term Limits............  H. Res. 116       Restrictive; Makes in order           1D; 3R
                                                                     only 4 amendments                          
                                                                     considered under a ``Queen                 
                                                                     of the Hill'' procedure and                
                                                                     denies 21 germane                          
                                                                     amendments from being                      
                                                                     considered.                                
H.R. 4.................  Welfare Reform.........  H. Res. 119       Restrictive; Makes in order          5D; 26R
                                                                     only 31 perfecting                         
                                                                     amendments and two                         
                                                                     substitutes; Denies 130                    
                                                                     germane amendments from                    
                                                                     being considered; The                      
                                                                     substitutes are to be                      
                                                                     considered under a ``Queen                 
                                                                     of the Hill'' procedure;                   
                                                                     All points of order are                    
                                                                     waived against the                         
                                                                     amendments..                               
H.R. 1271..............  Family Privacy Act.....  H. Res. 125       Open........................             N/A
H.R. 660...............  Housing for Older        H. Res. 126       Open........................             N/A
                          Persons Act.                                                                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
**72% restrictive; 28% open. ****Restrictive rules are those which limit the number of amendments which can be  
  offered, and include so called modified open and modified closed rules as well as completely closed rules and 
  rules providing for consideration in the House as opposed to the Committee of the Whole. This definition of   
  restrictive rule is taken from the Republican chart of resolutions reported from the Rules Committee in the   
  103rd Congress. ****Not included in this chart are three bills which should have been placed on the Suspension
  Calendar. H.R. 101, H.R. 400, H.R. 440.                                                                       

Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I would love to respond to the gentleman 
but time does not allow right now.
  I yield 2 minutes to the very distinguished gentleman from Sanibel, 
FL [Mr. Goss], a member of the Committee on Rules.
  (Mr. GOSS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GOSS. I thank the gentleman from Glens Falls, NY [Mr. Solomon], 
the distinguished chairman, for yielding me the generous time.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a very important vote that is coming up, for 
many reasons, just one of which is that passage of this rule is indeed 
going to complete our perfect record of bringing the Contract With 
America up for a vote just as we promised. We are keeping our promise.
  This rule does allow the minority free rein to offer its alternative 
tax plan, such as it may be, and this rule ensures that we match the 
primary goal of cutting spending so we can balance the budget with the 
important need to reduce taxation, to curtail Uncle Sam's persistent 
depressing reach into Americans' pockets and wallets. The average tax 
filer in my State of Florida will save $1,605 in taxes if this bill 
becomes law. Other States will fare similarly well. We are delivering 
the long overdue tax relief that is good for all America, for every 
American. It will create jobs by providing investment incentives, 
particularly for small businesses. And it will give much needed relief 
to our seniors by eliminating the very unfair 1993 Clinton Social 
Security tax and rolling back the unfair earnings test limit that saps 
the energies and earnings of seniors who need to work or want to work.
  H.R. 1215 is a down payment on comprehensive tax reform. The first 
100 days, we have done a lot. The next 265 days, we can do the rest.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on this rule, so we can get on with that job 
and do what we were elected to do last November.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Florida [Mr. Gibbons], the ranking member of the Committee on Ways and 
Means.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, we should vote against the previous 
question, we should vote against the rule and if it passes, we should 
vote against this bill. It is the wrong time to be cutting taxes. We 
ought to be cutting the deficit. It is the wrong time, it is the wrong 
way to be cutting taxes, even if we should be cutting them. This is a 
terrible gag rule. We are going to do nothing for 3 weeks after Friday. 
Why can we not spend enough time talking about the impact of this bill 
instead of gagging us with 1 hour to all the Democrats to talk about 
the tax matter, a $700 billion mistake?
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas [Mr. Archer], the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means and 
one of the most respected Members of this House.
  Mr. ARCHER. I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, in September of last year, we promised in our Contract 
With America that we would vote on tax relief for families and on 
incentives to create new jobs. We also promised to pay for these tax 
cuts by slowing down the growth of Federal spending, and today we 
fulfill that pledge. But we do more. This package nets out with a $30 
billion greater reduction in deficit than the President's budget 
proposal.

                              {time}  1315

  We have heard some Democrats say the taxpayers do not need or deserve 
tax cuts right now, and I disagree. The American family is overworked 
and it is overtaxed. So as promised, this bill provides a $500 per 
child tax credit, marriage penalty relief, tax credits for adoption of 
children and for the care of elderly family members.
  It also provides tax incentives for long-term care insurance and for 
tax-free distributions of life insurance for the terminally and 
chronically ill.
  This bill will repeal current laws that penalize seniors. It repeals 
the punitive 5-percent tax on Social Security benefits imposed by 
President Clinton in 1993, and it gives senior citizens greater 
opportunity to continue to work without suffering the loss of their 
benefits.
  Americans do not save enough. High taxes are a big reason why. So we 
include incentives for savings and investment. We create a new type of 
individual retirement account, IRA, the American Dream Savings Account, 
and 
[[Page H4203]] we permit homemakers to build their own IRA's.
  We provide much-needed capital gains relief to stimulate job-creating 
investment. Capital gains for individuals will get a 50-percent 
exclusion along with indexing for inflation. This will reduce the rate 
for lower income Americans to only 7\1/2\ percent.
  Corporations will be eligible for a 25-percent alternative capital 
gains rate. And people who sell their homes at a loss will finally be 
able to get a tax deduction for that loss.
  Businesses will have incentives to invest in new plant and equipment. 
The punitive and onerous job stifling alternative minimum tax will be 
repealed and small businesses will be able to double the amount that 
they can expense and deduct for the purchase of new equipment.
  People who work out of their homes will be able to deduct more home 
office expenses.
  The tax burden on family retention of small businesses and farms will 
be reduced, because the estate tax exclusion will be increased.
  Democrats complain that these tax cuts are too big, they are not 
fair, and they are not targeted, and they are simply wrong.
  These tax cuts are not too big. The total cost of all of the cuts is 
equal to 2 percent of what the Federal Government will spend over the 
next 5 years. And this will force a further 2-percent shrinking in the 
size of the Federal Government as we move to a balanced budget.
  I think that is what the American people want to hear. These tax cuts 
are fair. The biggest tax cuts go to families earning $30,000 to 
$75,000. Over the next 5 years, higher income people, that is, the top 
1 to 10 percent of the income categories, will actually pay a larger 
share of Federal taxes than they pay under current law. These taxes go 
to the right beneficiaries. Seventy-five percent go to families and 25 
percent to create jobs.
  Of the family benefits, 75 percent of the child credit goes to 
families with incomes under $75,000 and 90 percent goes to families 
with under $95,000 of annual income.
  This rule is the only way that we can comply with our contract 
pledge, which is to bring before the floor of this House a vote on 
these provisions. A vote against the rule will be a vote against the 
contract.
  I urge a vote for the rule.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes and 15 seconds to the 
former chairman of the Committee on the Budget, the gentleman from 
Minnesota [Mr. Sabo].
  (Mr. SABO asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SABO. Mr. Speaker, here we go again. Once more we have a major 
piece of legislation before us, and the Republican majority has 
structured a rule to get around all kinds of serious Budget Act 
problems.
  The reason we have a Budget Act is to help us think through 
legislation before we pass it. Yet this is the eighth time this year we 
have been asked by the new majority to ignore the Budget Act.
  The tax before us is a good example of the unwise legislation the 
House has recently been passing. The measure actually makes the long-
term deficit worse since the cost of these tax cuts grow far more 
quickly than the spending cuts.
  By the year 2000, according to CBO, the deficit under the bill will 
be $12 billion higher than it would be if we simply did nothing. 
Further, it contains some serious provisions that were never passed or 
considered by the appropriate committees. One of these provisions is a 
dangerous new taxpayer debt buydown plan. This proposal lets taxpayers 
designate a portion of their tax liability for debt reduction, thereby 
taking decisions about Federal spending from the people's elected 
representatives and handing them over to the wealthy. Essentially it 
says that the fundamental nature of the Federal Government should be 
changed from a representative democracy, one person one vote, to a 
plutocracy, one dollar one vote, a million dollars a million votes.
  Mr. Speaker, I cannot think of any more invidious scheme for us to 
include in a tax package. The plan has never been reviewed by the 
Committee on the Budget. Rather, it was just dropped into the bill by 
rule as a part of the Kasich substitute.
  Mr. Speaker, may I also remind the House that the Speaker, now 
Speaker, in August 1993 said that we, if we pass the President's 
program, we would head into a recession.
  Mr. Speaker, the facts are in. Employment is up, unemployment is 
down, inflation is low, growth was at 4 percent in 1994 productivity is 
improving, factories are operating at high rates, investment is 
booming. Mr. Speaker, you were wrong 2 years ago. This is a bad bill.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining on each side?
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon] has 18 minutes 
remaining, and the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Moakley] has 24\1/
2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, this year we have the privilege of having a 
very outstanding Member, a former judge from Ohio, serve on our 
Committee on Rules, Ms. Deborah Pryce.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio [Ms. 
Pryce].
  Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule. By adopting this 
resolution, we will enable the House to complete the contract's promise 
to strengthen families and grow the national economy by delivering real 
tax relief.
  Today, the average family spends more on taxes than it spends on 
food, clothing, and shelter combined. Many families now need a second 
breadwinner just to support the costs of a bloated Federal Government, 
not to cover the costs of raising a family.
  After years of struggling to move a pro-family, pro-growth tax plan 
through Congress, we have the opportunity today to tip the tax scales 
back in favor of mothers, fathers, grandparents, and children.
  It reduces the tax burden on families with children, and on two-
earner married couples. It creates valuable tax incentives to encourage 
families to adopt children, and to care for elderly relatives. And, it 
gives families more reason to save their hard-earned money for the 
future.
  In my own State of Ohio, taxes will be reduced by an average of more 
than $1,400 per person. That's $1,400 more that families can spend as 
they see fit, on the things they need most, and not as Washington would 
spend it for them.
  More importantly, this legislation is fiscally responsible. As we all 
know, the best hope for tax fairness for America's families lies in our 
commitment to reducing the deficit and achieving a balanced Federal 
budget.
  Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that the House will not have the 
chance to debate the Ganske amendment, but, as the distinguished 
chairman of the Rules Committee has pointed out, it has been customary 
over the years to consider tax measures under more restrictive 
procedures, and I will support this rule. It is a balanced and 
responsible rule. By allowing the Gephardt substitute and the customary 
motion to recommit, the rule provides the House with two clear 
opportunities to offer alternative tax proposals.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, only long-term expansion of our national 
economy, and the new jobs it will create, can make the American dream a 
reality for future generations. That is why it is so important that 
this Congress not miss this opportunity.
  Mr. Speaker, we have had a very productive 93 days so far in the 
104th Congress. The majority has kept its promise to the American 
people, and we have made rebuilding and strengthening America's 
families a top legislative priority.
  I urge our colleagues to adopt this rule so that we can usher in a 
new era of growth, productivity, and financial security--for our 
children and future generations of Americans.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
the District of Columbia [Ms. Norton].
  (Ms. NORTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  [Ms. NORTON addressed the House. Her remarks will appear hereafter in 
the Extensions of Remarks.]
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Illinois [Mrs. Collins].
   [[Page H4204]] (Mrs. COLLINS of Illinois asked and was given 
permission to revise and extend her remarks.)
  Mrs. COLLINS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule providing for 
consideration of this bill, for a variety of reasons. As the ranking 
member on the Government Reform and Oversight Committee, I want to 
point out one particular problem with the rule. It includes a provision 
that was never passed by any committee.
  This is a provision which hikes the taxes of 2 million middle-class 
Americans who work for the Federal Government in order to pay for tax 
cuts for the wealthy. It imposes these new taxes on Federal employees 
by making changes in the Federal retirement system; changes which were 
rejected by the committee of jurisdiction--the Government Reform and 
Oversight Committee.
  This rule places before the House legislation which no committee has 
ever considered. The retirement provisions in this bill were written by 
the chairman of the Budget Committee. In what is clearly an 
extraordinary departure from usual procedure, the Rules Committee has 
chosen to take a course of action which negates the very existence of 
authorizing committees. This is a very dangerous precedent to set. This 
is not the same situation as might occur with a reconciliation bill, 
where the Congress has previously voted for a budget resolution that 
included reconciliation instructions.
  In such a case, the Congress would vote to authorize the Budget 
Committee to report the necessary legislation, if the authorizing 
committee had failed to act, and the Congress had voted that budget 
reductions in a particular area were justified.
  This is not the case. This is bad business.
  But there has been no such vote, and the Rules Committee is acting 
without a mandate from the House.
  Continuing with the unusual, the rule makes in order a tax increase 
in a tax cut bill. The bill would increase the amount of payroll 
withholding for the average Federal employee by an additional 2.5 
percent of their income. This would take $750 more out of an employee's 
pocket each and every year.
  Last week, when I testified before the Rules Committee with a 
bipartisan panel of Members who made these points, the committee's 
chairman, Mr. Solomon, and one of its most distinguished majority 
members, Mr. Quillen, agreed with us. Chairman Solomon said, ``This is 
a case where we are raising taxes on some to pay for tax cuts for 
others, and that to me is wrong. I don't believe we ought to be doing 
this in this bill.''
  When we asked that an amendment be made in order to strike this 
provision, should it be included in the bill, Mr. Quillen asked to be 
made a cosponsor of any such amendment. Clearly, from their comments 
and those of other Members, Rules Committee members on both sides of 
the aisle were deeply troubled by this proposal, yet the rule allows 
for this proposal to be considered.
  For those of my colleagues who are not concerned about imposing a 
2.5-percent payroll tax on Federal employees, consider the precedent 
this sets. I believe that if the Republican leadership can get away 
with this, next they will try to raise the Social Security tax paid by 
all other American workers. They promised no new taxes, and yet, with 
this bill, they have broken that promise.
  For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote 
``no'' on the rule. Reject this effort to bypass the jurisdiction of 
authorizing committees. Oppose this effort by the Republican leadership 
to impose a tax increase on middle-class Americans.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, we continue to reserve our time.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Illinois [Mr. Evans].
  Mr. EVANS. Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, the House acted to reform 
the welfare system. We also need to ensure that an even larger welfare 
system--the more than $200 billion in corporate giveaways--is reformed. 
Corporate taxpayers must live up to their responsibility as U.S. 
residents and ensure that they do not dodge their duty to pay their 
fair share of taxes and their obligation to help reduce the deficit.
  I gave my Republican colleagues on the Rules Committee the 
opportunity to seek a fairer tax system by offering an amendment that 
curbs tax benefits given exclusively to multinational corporations and 
foreign investors. This amendment would have closed loopholes in the 
code that drain billions from our Treasury every year.
  Yet, the majority again refuses to stand up to corporate interests so 
that we can reduce the deficit and put fairness in our tax system.
  The Republican gravy train for the wealthy never seems to end. 
Included in this bill is a repeal of the alternative minimum tax. This 
tax ensures that profitable corporations do not avoid paying taxes in 
the United States. Many advocates of a repeal say that instead of an 
AMT, we need to look at individual parts of the code. But once again, 
the majority leaves loopholes for multinationals virtually untouched.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose the rule.

                              {time}  1330

  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland [Mr. Hoyer].
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, the rule before us contains a brutal breach 
of contract with America's public servants. Markup of similar 
legislation, as the ranking member, the gentlewoman from Illinois [Mrs. 
Collins], has said, was rejected on March 15 because a majority did not 
support this provision.
  The chairman of this committee who brings this bill to the floor said 
that 2 million Americans were getting a tax increase so that the 
wealthiest in America could get a tax decrease, because retirement 
benefits are an integral part of the retirement package that we offer 
to attract and retain top-quality Federal personnel. We should not make 
hasty, ill-considered, and not supported by a majority of the committee 
of jurisdiction decisions by the Committee on Rules, by the chairman's 
own admission, not having jurisdiction over this matter.
  The chairman said it is traditional not to have amendments to tax 
bills. If this is a tax bill and if title IV is a tax bill, it should 
take three-fifths of this body to increase the taxes on 2 million 
Americans.
  Proponents of this proposal have offered only one justification: We 
need to pay for the tax cut. There has been some argument about an 
unfunded liability, but the Congressional Research Service looked at 
this issue, is the unfunded liability of CRS a problem? And their 
answer was no, we have a system that is paid for. But everybody agrees 
that the Federal Employment Retirement System [FERS] is fully paid for, 
and it is included in this, a brutal breach of contract, my friends, in 
this, your last item.
  Reject this rule. Reject this brutal breach of contract. Reject this 
ill-considered tax policy.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Alabama [Mr. Browder].
  Mr. BROWDER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Speaker, I am not here to argue about the value of letting the 
American people keep as much of their money as we can. I support tax 
cuts.
  But the proposed bill gets the process wrong. I offered a 
straightforward amendment that insured deficit reduction would be the 
first priority while fulfilling the Contract With America. My amendment 
would have made us get on track to balance before the tax cuts become 
effective and would make continued tax cuts dependent upon us staying 
on track.
  The shame is that in making this rule, the majority opted to reject 
the advice of the American people. I am entering into the Record four 
quotes that show that a vote for this rule is a vote against the best 
advice provided to the Congress.
  I urge Members to support deficit reduction and returning money to 
the people who earn it by opposing the rule until we get it right.
  GOP leadership needs to listen to the public:

       Opinion polls show public support for tax cuts is low and 
     falling. Even Frank Luntz, the pollster who testmarketed the 
     ``Contract With America,'' says support has eroded in recent 
     months. ``The public currently believes that you cannot 
     balance the budget and get a tax cut,'' Mr. Luntz says.--The 
     Wall Street Journal, Monday, April 3, 1995

  GOP leadership needs to listen to the experts:

       Now, with all due respect to both parties, the American 
     people don't want a tax cut. 
     [[Page H4205]] Every poll indicates they want deficits 
     reduced.--Senator Warren Rudman, CNN Late Edition, Sunday, 
     April 2, 1995

  GOP leadership needs to listen to its supporters:

       ``Our members, if you ask them straight up, come down hard 
     for deficit reduction'' ahead of lower taxes, says the head 
     of a national association that is part of the GOP lobbying 
     coalition.--The Wall Street Journal, Friday, March 31, 1995

  GOP leadership needs to listen to its pollsters:

       Nothing tells America more about your priorities than the 
     sequence of your actions. . . . That's why ``banking'' the 
     budget savings before cutting taxes is so important. It's 
     aligned with the national mood, which would choose ``ensuring 
     no debt for their children'' (72%) over ``getting a tax cut 
     this year'' (24%).--Memorandum from Frank Luntz, January 19, 
     1995
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
  I would point out that the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Gibbons] 
appeared before our Committee on Rules. I have great respect for the 
gentleman, as much as anybody in this body. But I made a note when he 
said, ``I not only support a closed rule, I would support you sending 
this bill back to the Ways and Means Committee and telling us to get it 
right. That is our job. I support Chairman Archer on a closed rule.''
  I would just say to my good friend, the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. 
Browder], I really do have to resent his calling this a fig leaf. You 
know, we really are trying to work together here.
  Let me just quote some language in this legislation. It says, ``The 
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1996, as agreed to, 
provides that the budget of the United States will be in balance by 
fiscal year 2002.'' That is part 1.
  Part 2, ``The conference report, as agreed to, on the reconciliation 
bill for that resolution achieves the aggregate amount of deficit 
reduction to effectuate the reconciliation instructions required for 
the years covered by that resolution necessary to so balance the 
budget.'' That is why people like myself, who have proven that we are 
deficit hawks year in and year out for the past 16 years, support this 
rule. Every Member of this body should.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from 
Ohio [Mr. Kasich], and if there ever was a deficit hawk that meets my 
standards, it is the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Kasich].
  Mr. KASICH. Mr. Speaker, let me just say to my Republican colleagues 
particularly and to those Democrats who were considering casting a vote 
for this, this is like the end of a horse race, maybe like the Kentucky 
Derby, but that would not be appropriate; the last race in the Triple 
Crown.
  What we have done is we have kept our promises. We signed a Contract 
With America back last fall, and we said that there were a variety of 
things that we were going to do. We were going to downsize the 
operations of this House. We were going to cut committees. We were 
going to cut committee staff. We were going to cut committee funding. 
We said we would pass the Shays Act which would say that all laws we 
apply to the American people ought to be applied to ourselves. We said 
we would pass the balanced budget amendment. We got it done. We said we 
were going to pass the line-item veto. We got it done.
  And you know what else we said? We said we were going to come to this 
floor, that we were going to downsize the operation of the Federal 
Government as we head into the 21st century. Let me tell you, ladies 
and gentlemen, the American people are with us. The American people 
resent the fact that more of their money and more of their power and 
more control has been sent from where they live to this city.
  What the Republicans are beginning to do is to listen to the 
communications of the American people, and the will of the American 
people is simple. What they want done is they want this Federal 
Government downsized. They want it reduced in scope. They want it 
reduced in power, and they want their money given back to them so they 
can begin to solve problems where they live.
  They believe that, as we move into the 21st century, we need a 
smaller, more limited, more focused Federal Government, and they are 
demanding that in the course of doing that, in the course of shrinking 
this big Federal Government and giving them their money and power back, 
they can solve problems where they live, and at the same time that we 
are shifting power from Washington to local communities, we are also 
going to save the country from financial collapse.
  I just commend to you the testimony of Alan Greenspan before the 
House Committee on the Budget when he said that if, in fact, we balance 
the budget, the kind of prosperity that we would experience in this 
country cannot even be estimated, that the power
 and the ingenuity and the creativity of the American people and the 
absolute wonderful dynamic process of our economy, our free enterprise, 
entrepreneurial economy that rewards every individual for hard work, 
will unleash a prosperity that we have not known in this country.

  And what we are doing today by passing this rule and bringing this 
bill up for consideration is we are keeping our word. First and 
foremost, it is critical that the Republican Party keep its word to the 
American people. It is the only way to restore credibility, and when we 
come to the floor today, we are going to downsize this operation of the 
Federal Government, and we are going to give families, the building 
block of this Nation, it needs to be reinforced, in some cases it needs 
to be rebuilt, the American family is going to get some of their money 
back so that they can decide, individuals can decide, how to spend 
money on their children, not leaving it up to bureaucrats to decide.
  Second, we have a growth element. We say we want to increase the size 
of the funnel so that we can pour more prosperity, have more job 
creation in this country. We are going to help the senior citizens by 
lifting the earnings limit. Let them work. Do not penalize them for 
work if they want to work.
  We are going to have an IRA program. We are going to say to the 
people that if you want to save instead of punishing you in this 
country, we are going to give you an incentive to save.
  Let me just say that this is the final leg of the Republican Contract 
With America. But it is the first downpayment on what we will follow up 
with in May, and that is to take this provision that gives tax relief 
and has growth in it, and we are going to marry it up in May with our 
budget resolution.
  You know what we will achieve? What we promised last fall. We are 
going to balance the budget. We are going to save the future of this 
country. We are going to give Americans tax relief in the process, and 
we are going to shift power from this city back to where we live.
  That is what the American people want. Those that fight against it 
are resisting the will of the American people, and you know, the beauty 
of what we do today, we not only give you tax relief, but we also have 
more deficit reduction, $60 billion more in deficit reduction than the 
entire President's budget.
  And you know what, when it comes to deficit reduction and balancing 
the budget, you ain't seen nothing yet. We will be back in May to 
complete our job, to keep our word and save America and future 
generations.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Moran].
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, this is not a good tax-cut bill. In fact, 
there are two tax shelters within it which will make all the other tax 
shelters even enacted by this body pale by comparison, with regard to 
the abuse that they will enable people to take advantage of.
  But the worst part of this, of what we are to do today, is not even 
the bill, it is the rule. We are going to consider legislation which 
was rejected by the committee of jurisdiction, and under the guise of 
tax fairness, and not breaking contracts, we are going to increase 
taxes on each Federal employee by an average of $4,525, to provide a 
tax cut of about $1,000 to the average American.
  And talk about breaking contracts, when each Federal employee had to 
decide how to provide for the retirement security of their wives and 
children, we told them we would never break this retirement contract, 
and today we are going to break it. We are going to require them to 
lose retirement benefits, 
[[Page H4206]] and to increase their retirement contribution by 313 
percent.
  This day will go down in infamy if we pass this bill, and 
particularly if we do not reject this rule.
  Mr. MOAKELY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Texas [Mr. Stenholm.].
  (Mr. STENHOLM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, we have come to the end of a long and 
exhausting 100 days to take up this final piece of the Contract With 
America, which I have supported 70 to 80 percent thereof.
  Unfortunately, though, what we have before us today is not a crown 
jewel but, rather, fool's gold.
  You know, it was about 2 years ago at this time that we were on the 
floor trying to pass the rule for another high-profile, highly 
controversial piece of deficit-reduction legislation. As seems to be my 
destiny, my role leading up to that vote was to provide better 
assurance of true deficit reduction. We wanted to try to start to get 
some sort of handle on the entitlement spending which is increasingly 
driving our deficits.
  Let me tell you about the reaction I received for my efforts when we 
reached the floor from this side of the aisle. I heard about 
skepticism, cynicism, I was lectured about meaningless guarantees which 
had no teeth. I was considered gullible for accepting promises of what 
would happen tomorrow rather than demanding the deal be closed today.
  Now we come to today's vote when I hear I do not need to worry about 
deficit reduction in this bill. I am told the guarantee is already 
there. I am assured that we can have the promised land, both massive 
tax cuts and a balanced budge with borrowed money.
  Well, the tax cut promises could not be any clearer. But just how 
does today's deficit-reduction guarantee stack up against the agreement 
I worked for 2 years ago, the guarantee which was deemed so inadequate, 
so toothless, so meaningless? Well, we had proposed laying out 
specific, numeric entitlement targets. If those targets were exceeded, 
we would have required the House Committee on the Budget to report a 
budget resolution which brought us back in line with spending cuts.
  Now, does today's guarantee have such a requirement? No, it does not. 
We said that if the budget resolution or budget conference report 
breached the targets, the bills could not even be considered on the 
House floor.

                              {time}  1345

  No such prohibition in today's bill. We said, if the Congress decided 
to increase those targets, in other words, they chose to spend more 
money, a separate vote had to bring that provision into the political 
sunshine. No such sunshine in today's bill.
  As one who has been criticized for alleged weaknesses in spending 
discipline proposals, which were 100 times stronger than the rule we 
have today, would somebody please tell me why I should accept this 
``trust me'' language before us today? I refuse to trust anything other 
than an honest, enforceable guarantee that these tax cuts will not come 
at the expense of my children and grandchildren. I refuse to adorn 
myself with the jewels of political slogans and then hand to my 
children and grandchildren those worthless minerals passed off as gold.
  Tax cuts with borrowed money is no bargain. Vote ``no'' on this rule 
and vote ``no'' on this bill.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Maryland [Mr. Cardin].
  Mr. CARDIN. I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this rule.
  It does not comply with what the Contract With America said, that we 
are going to have a open debate on tax issues. There is no opportunity 
for us to offer an amendment. It breaks the promise that we would have 
specific spending cuts before us before we would be asked to vote on a 
tax cut.
  What this bill attempts to do is to use a phony mechanism for saying 
that we have to pass a budget reconciliation before the tax cuts become 
effective. But after we do that, the tax cuts become permanent.
  I hope my colleagues will read the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
Deficit Control Act of 1985, because that is what we did in 1985 with 
the Gramm-Rudman proposal. By the way, that bill required us to have a 
balanced budget by fiscal year 1991.
  The tax cut in this bill is permanent. The spending cuts are 1 year, 
and they do not even give us anywhere near the amount of money. Let us 
do deficit reduction first.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Maryland [Mrs. Morella].
  Mrs. MORELLA. I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for yielding 
this time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to state my opposition to the rule for H.R. 1327. 
This rule does not permit a number of very important amendments which 
are critical to improving this bill. It does not permit the Roberts-
Ganske amendment to direct the child tax credit to middle-income 
families; it does not permit the Porter amendment to require that our 
budget be balanced before tax cuts go into effect; and it does not 
permit an amendment I offered with several of my colleagues to remove 
the tax hike that this bill imposes upon Federal employees. A tax hike 
in a so-called tax reduction bill.
  Title IV of H.R. 1327 would require Federal employees to pay an 
additional 2.5 percent toward their retirement system. An average 
Government worker making $20,000 a year would have to pay an extra $500 
per year, and the employee making $30,000 would have to pay an 
additional $750. These are hefty sums for middle-class workers. 
Whatever happened to our contract with the Federal work force?
  Title IV also would change the retirement formula to reflect the 
highest 5 years of salary as opposed to the present formula based on 
the highest 3 years. This provision would affect postal workers as well 
as civil service employees. Changing the retirement formula reduces the 
lifetime retirement benefits by 4 percent.
  The General Accounting Office, just this week, issued a statement in 
support of the conclusions reached
 by the Congressional Research Service [CRS] on the status of the civil 
service retirement system. The report states that:

       (1) the system's unfunded liability is not a problem that 
     needs to be fixed to avoid steep increases in outlays from 
     the Treasury or increases in the deficit and (2) the system 
     is not insolvent nor will it become insolvent in the future.

  Mr. Speaker, Federal employees have borne the brunt of deficit 
reduction for more than a decade. Why are we once again taxing an 
already overburdened work force? Why have we tucked into this tax bill 
provisions that were never approved by the Government Reform and 
Oversight Committee?
  I oppose the rule, and I ask my colleagues not to support a tax bill 
that will harm the more than 2 million Federal workers and their 
families nationwide.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the Republican whip, 
the gentleman from Texas [Mr. DeLay], one of the outstanding Members of 
this body.
  Mr. Speaker, boy, he has surely earned his medal in the last 100 
days, I will tell you.
  Mr. DeLAY. I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me.
  I hope I do not take the 3 minutes, but I appreciate all work that 
the chairman of the Committee on Rules has done on this issue. I know 
it has been very, very hard for all the Members because this is a very 
big and important bill. Everyone wants a piece of it, but not everyone 
got what they wanted, and there are some ``push me, pull you'' going on 
on the rule. I appreciate that. But you have got to also appreciate the 
hugeness of this bill and what we are trying to do.
  Mr. Speaker,
   I rise in strong support of this rule, and in strong support of the 
Tax Fairness and Deficit Reduction Act.

  Last November, the American people spoke loud and clear by voting in 
the first Republican majority in the House in 40 years.
  The message voters sent was simple: Cut our taxes and cut Federal 
Government spending.
  The new Republican majority has heard that message, and today we 
start to deliver on our promise.
  [[Page H4207]] The rule we have before us is a fair one. It gives the 
Democrat minority a chance to offer an alternative while keeping the 
integrity of the Republican majority package.
  The rule also gives the American people a very clear choice.
  You can vote for a Democrat package that contains no tax relief for 
middle class Americans. Or you can vote for the Republican package that 
finally begins the process of talking the tax burden of the American 
people.
  I am reminded of the vote we had in 1993, when President Clinton and 
the leadership in the Congress voted in a tax increase that hit 
seniors, hit the middle class, and slowed economic growth.
  Two hundred forty billion dollars' worth of tax increases. All we are 
doing is allowing people to keep $190 billion of those taxes for 
themselves to spend the way they think it ought to be spent. Not one 
Republican voted for that tax increase.
  So today I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to join 
with us in righting the wrongs of 1993. Vote to stop taxing our 
seniors, vote to allow middle-class families to keep more of their 
money, and vote to create jobs for our workers.
  We have been asked how do you balance the budget by cutting taxes? 
Well, we have shown you that we honor our promises with passing the 
Contract With America; we will also show you in May when you cut taxes, 
as President Kennedy and President Reagan did, revenues go up and as we 
cut spending and the size of this Government, the cost of government 
goes down and the American people allowed to hold onto their money and 
spend it the time way they think is important.
  So I urge all my colleagues to vote for this rule, vote for job-
creating, deficit-cutting, the Tax Fairness and Deficit Reduction Act.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
North Dakota [Mr. Pomeroy].
  Mr. POMEROY. I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the rule before us. The 
majority leadership is desperate to convince this House and the 
American public that this is a bill for middle-income Americans. But 
their very rule snuffs out an amendment offered by Democrats and 
Republicans alike to ensure that it goes where it ought to. The bill, 
the amendment I offered is a case in point. It would have established 
tax fairness in the deductibility of health insurance. Presently 
corporations can deduct 100 percent, self-employed individuals 30 
percent, other individuals paying their own premium, nothing at all. 
The bill I introduced would have allowed an 80-percent reduction in 
premiums paid by individuals. This would have made coverage more 
affordable for their families and would have installed tax fairness. 
That is why my amendment was supported by the Farm Bureau, supported by 
the Farmers Union, supported by the National Association of the Self-
employed. And we do not even get a vote. In fact, when the Committee on 
Rules addressed this issue, at least one said, ``We don't want to open 
up the Tax Code on this issue.'' Well, they opened up the Tax Code for 
America's most wealthy; why will they not open up this bill for an 
amendment to help working Americans?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Vermont [Mr. Sanders].
  (Mr. SANDERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, more than half of the tax cuts proposed by 
the Republicans today for individuals will benefit families earning 
over $100,000 a year, and more than a quarter of the tax cuts will go 
to families earning over $200,000 a year.
  The highest-earning 1 percent of families will get more in tax cuts 
than the 60 percent of families at the lower end of the income scale.
  This is the Robin Hood proposal in reverse. We savagely cut programs 
for the poor and the vulnerable, and we give huge tax breaks to the 
rich and the powerful.
  Mr. Speaker, this is bad legislation because it does not allow us to 
debate the tens of billions of dollars in corporate welfare that goes 
to rich and large corporations. It does not allow us to debate the 
propriety of millionaires saving huge amounts of money on mortgage 
interest deductions. This is bad legislation, a bad rule; let us defeat 
it.
  Mr. Speaker, politics and much of what goes on here in Congress is 
really not very complicated. Everybody here understands that the 
majority of poor and working people don't vote and, for a variety of 
reasons, don't have much confidence that what happens here is relevant 
to their lives.
  On the other hand, the wealthy and the powerful do vote, do 
contribute very heavily to the political parties, do have well-paid 
lobbyists and lawyers working full time for their interests. And that 
in a nutshell is why the rich get richer, the middle class is 
shrinking, and the poor are becoming poorer and are facing a terrible 
onslaught from the leadership of this House.
  Mr. Speaker, during the last several months some of the wealthiest 
people in America and representatives of the largest corporations came 
together to contribute $11 million in one night to the Republican 
Party. Others came together for a $50,000-a-plate fund raising dinner 
with Newt Gingrich to raise money for a rightwing television network. 
Corporation like Amway and Golden Rule Financial have been contributing 
hundreds of thousands of dollars into Republican party coffers.
  And today, Mr. Speaker, is payback time. After cutting back massively 
on programs for low income people, on programs for children, on 
programs for the elderly, for students, for the homeless, for people 
with Aids, today is payback time for the rich and the powerful. Today, 
they get the return on their campaign contributions to the Republican 
party.
  Mr. Speaker, according to the Treasury Department, more than half of 
the tax cuts proposed by the Republicans for individuals will benefit 
families earning over $100,000 a year, and more than one quarter of the 
tax cuts will go to families earning over $200,000 a year. The highest 
earning 1 percent of families will get more in tax cuts than the 60 
percent of families at the lower of the income scale. For the very 
highest income people, the top 1 percent, the Republican proposal 
creates an average tax reduction of $20,362, for the lowest income 20 
percent taxes are reduced by all of $36.00. The Robinhood proposal in 
reverse. We cut savagely programs needed by the poor and vulnerable in 
order to give tax breaks to the rich and the powerful.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a bad bill because it does not allow us to 
provide rational alternatives to the tax breaks for the rich scheme 
that is being presented today. It does not allow us to cut the tens and 
tens of billions of dollars in corporate welfare that the largest 
corporations in America receive. It does not allow us to debate the 
propriety of millionaires saving large sums of money in taxes from the 
mortgage interest deduction on their palatial mansions. It does not 
allow us to remove Federal subsidies for such Federal agencies as OPIA, 
the Overseas Private Investment Association in which tax payers are 
paying to see their own jobs go to third world countries.
  Mr. Speaker, we need open and vigorous debate about how we can move 
toward a balanced budget in a fair and progressive way--not on the 
backs of the weak and the vulnerable. We need fair and open debates to 
begin the process of eliminating the tax loopholes and the subsidies 
which the wealthy in large corporations receive.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Utah [Mrs. Waldholtz] an outstanding Member and the first Freshman 
female Republican Member to serve on the Committee on Rules since the 
First World War.
  Mrs. WALDHOLTZ. I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, today we will have the chance to vote on a bill that 
will help restore tax fairness to families and senior citizens.
  For too long, American families and seniors have seen their tax 
burden rise. Today, the average American family pays more in taxes than 
it spends on food, clothing and shelter combined. Some senior citizens 
now face a marginal tax rate of 85 percent--a rate much higher than 
that of other Americans.
  The problem is not that the Government taxes too little; the problem 
is that it spends too much. The American people are simply overtaxed. 
The Tax Fairness and Deficit Reduction Act recognizes families for what 
they are--the basic building block of American society. It will give 
them the tax relief they so desperately need and deserve, and despite 
allegations that this bill is for the wealthy, seventy-six percent of 
the tax cuts go directly to families.
  The $500 per child tax credit will help nearly one-quarter million 
parents in my
 State of Utah alone. Listening to the other side of the aisle you 
would 
[[Page H4208]] think that only wealthy people have children. But, 75 
percent of the family tax credit goes to people with incomes of less 
than $75,000.
  Our bill recognizes the invaluable contribution homemakers make to 
the family by allowing nonworking spouses a full $2,000 deductible IRA 
contribution instead of the current $250, helping homemakers provide 
for their retirement years and recognizing the value and worth of their 
work at home.
  Our bill also helps senior citizens. Under the Clinton tax bill our 
seniors were unfairly singled out for higher taxes through an increase 
on their Social Security. Our bill will repeal that tax increase and 
restore tax fairness to elderly Americans. In addition, we will help 
remove the penalty for seniors who choose to work in their sunset years 
by raising the earnings test limit--rewarding rather than punishing 
working seniors.
  The tax money we collect is not ours, it belongs to the taxpayers. As 
we cut Government spending and reduce the size of the Government and 
balance the budget, we need to let people keep more of the money they 
earn. I encourage my colleagues to support this rule, and this bill.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Texas, [Mr. Doggett].
  Mr. DOGGETT. I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, it is true the circus is in town, but not really the 
roar of the lion that we hear today. The significant thing is a certain 
mooing sound that is under way. You see, I do not believe we will ever 
get the budget in balance without a true bipartisan effort. I thought 
we were headed in that direction because I have a letter here that was 
signed by 105 Republican Members who said that they recognized there 
was a need for more money for deficit reduction and they could change 
their tax proposal and apply it to only 85 percent of the families in 
this country and provide an addition $12 billion to $14 billion in 
deficit reduction.

                              {time}  1400

  That represented a half step, and it is sure a lot better than the 
lockstep we have seen most of this session of Congress. But somewhere 
along the way that all changed. We are not going to have a chance to 
vote on that proposal of 105 Republican Members because somewhere along 
the way the Speaker said ``no,'' and I do not know what it is that is 
so persuasive about him, but sometimes I get the feeling that, when 
these Members are around him, they are so cowed, I can almost hear them 
moo.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
Mexico [Mr. Richardson].
  (Mr. RICHARDSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, in this tax bill, where are the tax 
breaks designed to improve the lives of ordinary Americans? This bill 
has provisions to allow Exxon to write off expenses on capital 
improvements, but there are no breaks for students that try to improve 
themselves through higher education. The greatest threats to our 
Nation's economy are soaring deficits and the erosion of the middle 
class. Today's tax cut legislation will not remedy any of these 
problems. Instead it places the burden of future deficits squarely on 
the backs of working Americans.
  Economic indicators tell us that the economy is growing at a strong, 
steady pace. Do we really need to stimulate it with massive tax cuts 
for wealthy Americans and big business?
  We should take advantage of a healthy economy and follow a prudent 
course of deficit reduction that will solidify our financial base. Let 
us send a message to Americans that Congress is making honest spending 
cuts that pay off our debts. Tying spending cuts to budgetary gimmicks 
further undermines the credibility of this institution.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Rhode Island [Mr. Kennedy].
  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I rise against the rule and 
the Republican tax cut for the wealthy that this rule allows, a 
Republican tax cut plan where, according to the Citizens for Tax 
Justice, more than 71 percent of total capital gains tax cut breaks 
goes to those who make more than $200,000 a year.
  The question is: Who is going to pay?
  School lunches are getting cut. Elderly are getting tossed out of 
senior high-rises because they are reducing the amount of subsidies for 
the elderly to have affordable high-rises. In addition, they have not 
let the students alone either. They are now going to tack on interest 
payments for student loans starting the day the student enters the 
university.
  This is not progressive and far from being the middle-class tax cut 
that the Republicans would have us believe because it is putting the 
burden on the students, and who gets the break? The people who have the 
most money.
  It figures. It is the Republicans all over again.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Martini], another outstanding freshman 
Member who was helpful in writing in the language that is going to 
bring us to a balanced budget.
  Mr. MARTINI. Mr. Speaker, as we have kept our promises these first 
100 days, we have made the democratic process work. This week it will 
continue to work with the passage of this rule and this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, as originally written I must confess that I was 
concerned that the tax package in the Contract With America did not 
place enough emphasis on deficit reduction. Mindful of that concern, a 
group of us, including the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle], the 
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Upton], the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Solomon], and a host of others from both sides of the aisle, worked 
with the Republican leadership and fashioned an agreement on the issue 
that makes it entirely clear to the public that in passing tax relief 
we will not abandon our pledge to bring the deficit down to zero.
  According to the new provision, the tax cuts in the bill cannot go 
into effect until a budget is passed, putting us on course to a 
balanced budget in the year 2002, and each year thereafter Congress 
will have to revisit our deficit reduction goals to make sure we stay 
on track.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that with the addition of these 
provisions to this original bill my concerns have been satisfied. A 
good bill has been made better, and the process is working again. I 
urge support of this rule and this bill.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida [Mr. Gibbons], the former chairman of the Committee of Ways and 
Means.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, this is a time when we, as Members of 
Congress, should be deliberative and we should take our time in doing 
the Nation's business. This is a very, very important piece of economic 
legislation. It is a very, very important piece of social legislation. 
The Senate, when it will look at it, will call this a $700 billion tax 
cut. That is because they prefer to look at it in its longer term 
rather than the very short term that we House Members look at it.
  This is the wrong time in America's history to be cutting taxes. This 
is a time in America's history to be cutting the deficit. Why? Because 
America is at full employment today. Why? Because America is using its 
maximum factory capacity utilization today. Factory capacity 
utilization today in America is the highest it has been in 15\1/2\ 
years. The Federal Reserve knows it; that is the reason why they have 
increased interest rates 7 times in the last 14 months. Every sensible 
economist knows that this is the wrong time to be cutting taxes. They 
tell us it is only time, the right time, to cut the fiscal deficit.
  This bill, when it comes up, and it is going to come up, they have 
twisted enough arms to get it up, is an inequitable piece of social 
justice. Let us take the capital gains issue. It is a huge item in all 
of this, and who gets it? Only 8 percent of all taxpayers ever take a 
capital gains, 8 percent. But in this bill one-half of the capital 
gains will be taken by the upper 1 percent of our income earners every 
years, and they will take them every year, not just one time in a 
lifetime like most Americans.
  Let us tell the truth about the capital gains thing. Eight percent of 
Americans ever take a capital gain. Of 
[[Page H4209]] that 8 percent, more than half of it goes to those above 
$200,000, and I say, ``If you look at those people again, they're not 
just taking one or two capital gains in a lifetime. They take multiple 
capital gains every year.'' And what do they do? They are just swapping 
their equities around between each other. Somebody buys their bad 
investment if they want to get rid of it. There is no creation of 
additional capital. It is just a game there.
  So it is bad economic justice, it is bad social justice.
  Now let us take the family credit. When the Republicans first 
introduced this bill, they gave a family credit, to low income 
individuals, those below $50,000. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Armey] 
stood on the Capitol steps out there with the bill on September 27, 
1994, and shook it into everybody's face, but this bill takes away 13 
billion dollars worth of family tax credit from all those families 
earning less than $50,000 a year. That is not fair, that is not just, 
and that is not correct.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. (Mr. Goodlatte). The time of the gentleman 
from Florida [Mr. Gibbons] has expired.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, does the gentleman from Florida want 
another minute?
  Mr. GIBBONS. Yes.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 additional minute to the 
gentleman from Florida. I just did not want to slow the gentleman down 
when he got that steam going.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate it, and I say, ``You know I 
appreciate you, Mr. Solomon, but you gave me an hour to ration between 
204 Democrats. I've been swamped for requests for time. They would like 
to stay here and debate this.''
  I see the Speaker standing in the back back there chatting with the 
chairman of the Committee on the Budget, and I say, ``We welcome you 
here, Mr. Speaker. We don't see you as much as we used to, but we're 
glad to have you here today. Have you gotten off the elephant out there 
in the circus. or are you coming in here to ride this elephant?''
  Mr. Speaker, this is a lousy bill. It is the wrong time to be 
reducing taxes. We ought to be reducing the deficit now. We should not 
be cutting taxes the way we are doing it. It is reckless, it is 
irresponsible, it is bad policy for the American economy, it is bad 
policy for the American people.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from New York [Mrs. Lowey].
  (Mrs. LOWEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this closed 
and restrictive rule. I cannot believe that my colleagues in the 
majority, who claimed that they would open up this House, could come to 
us with a straight face and gag this Chamber with a rule that restricts 
us to 5 hours of debate on a matter of such gravity for the Nation's 
future--$630 billion to be exact.
  While I dare say that H.R. 1215 is far from the crown jewel that it 
has been touted to be by some, I will be the first to admit that the 
bill makes several changes in the Tax Code that I think are long 
overdue: easing the tax burden on senior citizens, providing tax 
credits for expenses incurred when adopting a child or caring for an 
elderly parent or grandparent in your home, and indexing capital gains. 
I would like to support provisions such as these, but this rule doesn't 
allow me to do that in a fiscally responsible manner. We are told to 
take all or nothing, and if that is the case I will have no choice but 
to vote no.
  Mr. Speaker, I will not vote for a bill that will enable some of our 
wealthiest corporations to avoid taxes altogether while giving just $90 
in tax relief for a family with an income of $20,000, and then forces 
massive cuts in programs that would have a devastating impact on 
hardworking Americans. For the citizens I represent in New York, this 
bill spells higher transit fares, devastating cuts in Medicare, reduced 
student loans, hungrier school children, less affordable child care, 
and fewer police on the beat.
  One of the bill's more offensive provisions is the repeal of the 
corporate alternative minimum tax, which was instituted in 1986 because 
more than half of the Nation's most profitable corporations had been 
able to utilize various loopholes in the Tax Code to pay no Federal 
income taxes, even though they were reporting huge profits. The 
inequity of this situation was so clear that the Reagan Administration 
supported establishment of a corporate AMT.
  Repeal of the corporate AMT would clearly represent an inequitable 
shift in the tax burden. Seventy-four percent percent of the 
corporations who pay the corporate minimum tax have assets greater than 
$250 million. Given these facts, it is not surprising that its repeal 
was not originally part of the Contract With America. Instead, it was 
added in at the 11th hour, when the American people weren't looking and 
special interest lobbyists were hard at work.
  Let me remind my colleagues that under this rule we will not have the 
opportunity to vote to restore the corporate AMT; to make the Social 
Security tax repeal effective immediately, as it should be; to help 
students pay for college; and to decide if the child tax credit should 
be available to the families of 35 percent of our Nation's children who 
need it most but who would not benefit from the credit as it is 
currently written in this bill.
  I urge a no vote on this rule.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Dreier], a very outstanding veteran member of the 
Committee on Rules.
  (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong support of this fair 
and balanced modified closed rule.
  Now, when the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Gibbons] came before the 
Committee on Rules, he requested a closed rule. We are not even going 
as far as the distinguished ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Ways and Means would like, but we do have a modified closed rule. It is 
a measure which is bringing to the floor an opportunity for us to do 
what the American people have said overwhelmingly that they want. They 
want us to try and reduce the size and scope of Government and allow 
them to keep a little bit of what they have earned.
  Now, as I have been listening to the rhetoric over the past few 
minutes about us versus them, class warfare, I am very discouraged. I 
have enjoyed working for years with the gentleman from Florida [Mr. 
Gibbons] on trade issues, but, when I hear him talking about the very 
few who will utilize the capital gains tax reduction versus those 
working individuals who do not or would not be able to, I cannot help 
but think of a column that appeared recently in the New York Post where 
Thomas Sowell said,

       Class-warfare politics is not just fraudulent, it is a 
     cheap play on envy and a very serious disservice to the whole 
     country. Not only does it divide us yet another way, it 
     threatens the very process by which all of us have benefited 
     economically.

                              {time}  1415

  This is a balanced approach. We want to recognize that we are in this 
together. The American people want us to responsibly deal with deficit 
reduction.
  This bill is a very important step on the road toward a balanced 
budget. Why? Because every shred of evidence is that with this capital 
gains tax rate reduction, we are going to see an increase in the flow 
of revenues to the Federal Treasury. That increase is going to help us 
responsibly get to a balanced budget.
  I urge support of this fair and balanced modified closed rule, and 
urge my colleagues to join us.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle] a former Governor of Delaware and 
one of the outstanding Members of this body, who has participated in 
writing the balanced budget legislation.
  (Mr. CASTLE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule for 
consideration of H.R. 1215, the Tax Fairness and Deficit Reduction Act 
of 1995.
  The American people deserve to keep more of their hard-earned money. 
They recognize that the Federal Government is collecting an ever larger 
share of their earnings and that the money it collects is often not 
well spent. Americans do not mind paying their fair share of the costs 
for our Nation's needs--protecting our national security, looking after 
those who truly 
[[Page H4210]] need help. But the programs and operations of the 
Federal Government have become too big and far too inefficient. 
Excessive Federal spending has resulted in a national debt of $4.8 
trillion and deficits of almost $200 billion adding to that debt every 
year.
  Americans want relief from taxes, but what my constituents in 
Delaware tell me is that reducing the deficit, balancing the budget, 
and making the Government live within its means is what they want done 
first, I am happy to say that we now have language in this bill that 
will ensure that Congress acts to cut the deficit and balance the 
budget before the tax cuts can become law.
  The Rules Committee has added an amendment offered by Mr. Upton, Mr. 
Martini, and myself which states that the tax provisions in this bill 
cannot become law until Congress passes a budget resolution and 
reconciliation legislation that will result in a balanced budget by the 
year 2002. This provision reflects the will of our constituents: cut 
taxes, but not at the expense of balancing the budget.
  By including this important provision in the bill we are insuring 
that Congress will have to face the difficult decisions to reduce 
Government spending. If Congress cannot make those decisions, the tax 
cuts will not go into effect. It is as simple as that.
  The Castle-Upton-Martini amendment also adds two key requirements to 
force Congress and the President to continue to work toward a balanced 
budget.
  After Congress passes the budget reconciliation legislation that 
places us on course to a balanced budget, in each subsequent year the 
budget committees and CBO must report on whether we are still on the 
path to balance in 2002. If we fall off course, Congress must consider 
ways to get back on course in that year's budget resolution. In short, 
Congress must take action if the deficit begins to increase.
  Equally as important, this provision will require the President to 
join in this effort, by requiring him to submit a balanced budget each 
year. This year, President Clinton has chosen again to propose a budget 
that would result in annual deficits of $200 billion for the next 5 
years. Under this amendment, if the President chooses not to officially 
submit a balanced budget, he would have to offer an alternative plan 
that shows how the budget could be balanced. It forces the President to 
face the same decisions the Congress must face.
  Mr. Speaker, I support tax relief for families, savings incentives 
for individual Americans, and investment incentives for business. But, 
I am adamant about the critical need to balance the budget. I support 
the rule because it clearly links tax cuts to deficit reduction. My 
colleagues and I will continue this effort on the budget resolution and 
the budget reconciliation bill to ensure that we stay on course to a 
balanced budget.
  I want to thank Fred Upton and Bill Martini for their efforts on this 
amendment. I also want to acknowledge Mr. Browder and Mr. Orton for 
their leadership on the need for deficit reduction. Finally, I 
appreciate the work of John Kasich and Jim Nussle, and the Republican 
leadership for working with us to make this provision part of the bill. 
I urge support of the rule and approval of the tax fairness and deficit 
reduction bill.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the 
gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee].
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this rule as a 
noninclusive rule and hurting the American people.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Democratic substitute to 
H.R. 1215. The Democratic substitute benefits primarily low- and 
middle-income Americans. Whereas, H.R. 1215 benefits primarily wealthy 
Americans with incomes above $200,000.
  The Democratic substitute sponsored by my colleague, Richard Gephardt 
of Missouri, ensures that 100 percent of the benefits of the tax cut 
will accrue to families with adjusted gross income of less than 
$100,000. Moreover, it permits us to invest in human capital by 
allowing middle-income families to deduct up to $10,000 in educational 
expenses per year.
  Furthermore, the Gephardt bill encourages Americans to emphasize 
savings for their retirement years by expanding the number of taxpayers 
who would be eligible to deduct contributions to individual retirement 
accounts [IRA]. This is accomplished by raising the adjusted gross 
income level requirement from $35,000 to $50,000 for single taxpayers 
and $60,000 to $75,000 for couples who file joint tax returns.
  The Gephardt bill also affirms our commitment to balancing the 
Federal budget. This bill requires certification by the Office of 
Management and Budget [OMB] that the Federal budget will be balanced in 
fiscal year 2002. H.R. 1215 fails to incorporate the requirement that 
deficit reduction be a priority.
  Frankly, the Democratic bill promotes fairness, maintains fiscal 
responsibility, and strengthens American families. And finally it is a 
good commonsense tax bill because it invests in our people--college 
loans for students--part of America's future.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, in closing I would like to urge Members to defeat the 
previous question. If the previous question is defeated, I intend to 
offer an amendment to the rule which will allow Members to vote on 
several amendments:
  The Ganske amendment, which lowers the eligible income level for the 
child tax credit;
  The Kennelly amendment relating to taxable income for the blind;
  The Browder amendment tying the tax cuts to deficit reduction;
  The Wolf amendment which strikes the tax increase on Federal workers; 
and
  The Nadler-Lowey amendment which restores the pre-1993 lower tax rate 
for middle-income seniors immediately rather than being phased in as 
the bill does.
  And many others as well.
  This will be the only opportunity on this bill to have votes on these 
issues affecting Federal workers, the blind, the middle class, deficit 
reduction, and the elderly. I urge Members to vote ``no'' on the 
previous question.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, I have here the U.S. Tax Code. It is the fear of every 
American. If we had an open rule today we would open it up, and gosh 
knows what would happen.
  Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of complaining about the tax cuts in 
this bill, but I wonder if the real opposition is to the fact on 
something we have not heard about much here today. Is there $100 
billion in real spending cuts in this bill? That is what Members are 
going to be voting for.
  You know, I said at the time when we opened this debate that a vote 
on this rule is going to be a vote for a balanced budget. Let me tell 
you, a vote against the rule is going to be a vote against a balanced 
budget.
  What the people are really afraid of is the language that appears in 
this bill, and it says, ``. . . the budget of the United States will be 
in balance by the fiscal year 2002.'' And the second part of it is 
something they fear even more. It writes into law ``the aggregate 
amount of deficit reduction to effectuate the reconciliation 
instructions required for the years covered by that resolution 
necessary to so balance the budget.''
  That will become the law if you vote for this rule and the bill it 
will bring up.
  Mr. Speaker, when you look at this chart, you see that President 
Clinton projected, when he gave us the budget a few months ago, another 
$1 trillion, $996 billion, added to the debt. What is compassionate 
about that, to load that kind of deficit on the American people and 
their children and my grandchildren?
  We can have a chance to do something about it right now. Vote for the 
previous question.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this rule on the Tax 
Fairness and Deficit Reduction Act, H.R. 1215.
  The Contract With America states that ``within the first 100 days of 
the 104th Congress, we shall bring to the House Floor the following 
bills, each to be given full and open debate, each to be given a clear 
and fair vote and each to be immediately available this day for public 
inspection and scrutiny.'' With a closed rule on the tax bill, the 
Republicans have not provided, as they said they would, for a ``full 
and open debate'' on this crucial legislation.
  I would agree that many Americans need tax relief, and that we must 
do all that we can to ensure fairness for our seniors and families. 
That is why I offered two amendments to this legislation which would 
have furthered these very important goals. But, unfortunately, ``full 
and open debate'' on these amendments was denied, and the Members of 
this House will not have the opportunity to vote on these amendments.
  My colleague from New York, Nita Lowey, and I introduced an amendment 
which would repeal immediately the increased tax on Social Security 
benefits rather than repeal it over a 5-year period, as the Republican 
bill does. While our amendment would have granted seniors 
[[Page H4211]] immediate tax relief, and would have been paid for by 
striking from the bill a repeal of the Corporate Alternative Minimum 
Tax--making corporations pay their fair share of taxes--it was, 
nonetheless, rejected by the Rules Committee. When we raised this issue 
of equity regarding our Nation's seniors we were hushed.
  While this bill does much to provide significant and immediate tax 
relief for wealthy corporations, it delays tax relief and fairness for 
our Nation's seniors. While the Republicans state that this bill will 
provide fairness, this, to me, does not seem fair.
  Repealing the Social Security tax increase immediately and paying for 
it by requiring Republicans to retain the Corporate Alternative Minimum 
Tax is only fair and equitable. The Alternative Minimum Tax was adopted 
to stop the practice of large corporations using the talents of high-
priced tax lawyers to contrive ingenious loopholes that enable them to 
escape all taxation. To provide these huge tax give-aways to 
corporations and not provide immediate tax relief and fairness to our 
Nation's senior would be the height of unfairness and hypocrisy. It 
would be a moral outrage to allow or Nation's most profitable 
corporations to cease paying income taxes immediately, while
 requiring seniors to wait half a decade for tax relief.

  Mr. Speaker, after restoring fairness to seniors by repealing the 
Social Security tax increase immediately, our amendment would have left 
approximately $7 billion for deficit reduction--almost half of the 
amount of appropriations this House rescinded earlier this month for 
this very purpose.
  Our amendment would have significantly reduced the deficit, while 
restoring tax fairness to our Nation's seniors, but the Republican 
leadership would not allow this fiscally prudent amendment to be 
considered on the House floor.
  Our amendment would have done the right thing by making profitable 
corporations pay their fair share and lifting this unjustified 
increased tax burden off senior citizens immediately.
  I asked, again with no success, that the Rules Committee consider 
another one of my amendments. The amendment would simply index income 
taxes to reflect regional differences in the cost of living. These 
differences mean that an income which might make one well off in, say, 
rural Arkansas, would barely afford a middle-class lifestyle in New 
York or Dallas. Yet the current Tax Code, by taxing nominal, rather 
than regionally adjusted, incomes, treats each of these taxpayers as if 
their incomes were economically equivalent.
  We know that this is not the case.
  People living in high cost-of-living areas, like New York City, 
should not be penalized by the tax system. By regionally adjusting 
income tax brackets, we can make the tax burden on American families 
more fair and equitable.
  Furthermore, I find it ironic that this rule waives the requirement 
for a three-fifths vote in order to increase taxes. The Republicans 
passed a rule earlier this Congress which would require that in order 
to increase taxes the House had to have a three-fifths vote. Now they 
are waiving this rule for the purposes of passing their tax bill which 
gives tax breaks to the wealthy. The hypocrisy here again is blatant.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is unfair and I urge my colleagues to oppose 
this rule.
  Ms. DUNN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this 
rule.
  Two years ago, the liberal Democrats voted for the largest tax in 
history. Today, we right that wrong by allowing the American people to 
keep more of their hard-earned money.
  The Republican Tax Relief and Deficit Reduction Act accomplishes many 
things for American families. One of the most symbolic and important is 
the provision that corrects an inequity against the American homemaker.
  Mr. Speaker, the current Tax Code treats American homemakers, who are 
overwhelmingly women, as second class citizens.
  In the eyes of the Federal Government, the work of the homemaker is 
not as valuable as the work of her husband.
  For tax purposes, a single-income family can set aside for retirement 
roughly one-half what a dual-income family can. Our spousal IRA 
proposal allows the work-at-home spouse to save $2,000 just like the 
spouse.
  This rule, and the Republican tax relief bill, acknowledge the value 
and hard work of the millions of homemakers in America.
  Support this rule, support homemakers, and support the families of 
America.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the 
resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Goodlatte). The question is on ordering 
the previous question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 230, 
nays 203, not voting 2, as follows:
                             [Roll No. 289]

                               YEAS--230

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunn
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clinger
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Cooley
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Funderburk
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gingrich
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Longley
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     Martini
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Meyers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Molinari
     Moorhead
     Morella
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oxley
     Packard
     Paxon
     Petri
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Riggs
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Royce
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stockman
     Stump
     Talent
     Tate
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Torkildsen
     Upton
     Vucanovich
     Waldholtz
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                               NAYS--203

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baesler
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bentsen
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bishop
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant (TX)
     Cardin
     Chapman
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Danner
     de la Garza
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayes
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Holden
     Hoyer
     Jackson-Lee
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klink
     LaFalce
     Lantos
     Laughlin
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lincoln
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Mfume
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moran
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Owens
     Pallone
     Parker
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Poshard
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Richardson
     Rivers
     Roemer
     [[Page H4212]] Rose
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Spratt
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Traficant
     Tucker
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Reynolds
     Stark
       

                              {time}  1437

  Mr. DAVIS changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Goodlatte). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             recorded vote

  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 228, 
noes 204, not voting 3, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 290]

                               AYES--228

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bevill
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunn
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clinger
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Cooley
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Funderburk
     Gallegly
     Gekas
     Geren
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gingrich
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Longley
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     Martini
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Meyers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Molinari
     Moorhead
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Paxon
     Petri
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Riggs
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Royce
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stockman
     Stump
     Talent
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Torkildsen
     Traficant
     Upton
     Vucanovich
     Waldholtz
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                               NOES--204

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baesler
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bilbray
     Bishop
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant (TX)
     Cardin
     Chapman
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Danner
     Davis
     de la Garza
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Ehrlich
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green
     Gunderson
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Holden
     Horn
     Hoyer
     Jackson-Lee
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klink
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lantos
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lincoln
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Mfume
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moran
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickett
     Poshard
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Richardson
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Rose
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Tucker
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Ward
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Pomeroy
     Reynolds
     Waters

                              {time}  1455

  Mr. TAUZIN changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
                          personal explanation
  Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Chairman, I regret that I was not present for 
rollcall vote No. 290, the rule to provide for the consideration of 
H.R. 1215, the Contract With America Tax Relief Act of 1995. I was 
unavoidably detained in a meeting with Office of Management and Budget 
Director Alice Rivlin regarding Missouri River flood control. I spoke 
on the floor of the House twice against the rule and, had I been 
present, I would have voted ``no.''


                          ____________________