[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 125 (Monday, July 31, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H8038-H8052]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1996

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). Pursuant to 
House Resolution 201 and rule XXIII, the Chair declares the House in 
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the 
further consideration of the bill, H.R. 2099.

                              {time}  1904


                     in the committee of the whole

  Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole 
House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 2099) making appropriations for the the Departments of 
Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry 
independent agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, and for other purposes, 
with Mr. Combest in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, 
title V was open for amendment at any point.
  Are there further amendments to title V?


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Dornan

  Mr. DORNAN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Dornan:
       Amendment No. 71: Page 88, after line 3, add ``Sec. 519. 
     None of the funds under this Act shall be used for the Senior 
     Environmental Employment Program.''
                         parliamentary inquiry

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding we were going to 
vote on the two previous amendments, the Durbin-Dingell and one other, 
and then go to amendments on VA-HUD. Could the membership be informed 
as to what the plan is? I understand there needs to be some time to 
count votes and things; that is fine. But just what is the specific 
plan?
  The CHAIRMAN. The plan is, as the Chair announced, to consider 
amendments to title V that were earlier not offered because Members 
were not present, and at the point that those amendments have been 
voted upon, then consider all of the remaining amendments to the bill.
  Mr. SCHUMER. So, just to continue my parliamentary inquiry, does this 
mean all votes, including the Durbin-Wilson-Dingell and Ensign 
amendments, and votes on additional amendments, will be rolled until 
the end of the bill?
  The CHAIRMAN. That may happen. The Chair cannot totally restrict the 
offering of amendments after that block of votes in that title V of the 
bill would still be open for amendment until the Committee rises. The 
Chair could not restrict Members from having the authority to offer 
those amendments.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. Chairman, I am not asking if Members will be 
restricted in offering amendments. I am simply asking when we can 
expect the next block of votes.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair was simply trying to state that following the 
amendments that would be offered now, they will be taken in order, the 
three the gentleman from New York [Mr. Schumer] mentioned plus others 
that may be offered on which votes are called.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Just extending my inquiry, Mr. Chairman, does that mean, 
if, say, there is a vote on the amendment being offered by the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Dornan] which will be debated very soon, 
will we vote on that immediately after the debate on that amendment, or 
will that be pushed to the back like these amendments, the Durbin-
Wilson-Dingell and Ensign amendments?
  The CHAIRMAN. If requested, a rollcall vote on the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from California [Mr. Dornan] would come at the end of 
the three which have already been postponed, and the further amendments 
would then come in order as well.
  Mr. SCHUMER. So in other words, Mr. Chairman, it would be fair to say 
that we are going to roll all votes until we finish debating all the 
amendments?
  The CHAIRMAN. It would be fair to state that that is correct.
  The Chair would make this exception:
  If after the series of votes taken on all amendments on which votes 
have been requested, if there were amendments which were in order that 
were offered, then the Chair would obviously recognize those.
  So the Chair is only stating there could possibly be amendments 
offered after the votes.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Understood, Mr. Chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Dornan].
  Mr. DORNAN. Mr. Chairman, this is a cost-saving measure that would be 
on page 88 at the very end of the bill. It would simply say that in 
creating a new section 509 that none of the funds under this act shall 
be used for the Senior Environmental Employment 

[[Page H 8039]]
Program. This is a program that is not offered, that will be removed in 
the authorization process. Again, we have the appropriating process 
without authorization. It is $55 million, and, when I became aware of 
it, it was breathtaking to see that six groups of senior citizens, and 
only six, selected in a very partisan way. It is a disguised form of 
patronage, that six senior citizen groups, and only six, would get 
grants, dozens of grants, totaling up to over $54 million, to be hired 
with taxpayers' money as so-called volunteers, all at the call of the 
Environmental Protection Agency to put them wherever they want and to 
spend these grants in any way they want without any oversight.
  So I think it is time, in a reduction of taxpayers' spending in our 
Government, that we take out these $55 million of funds now by just 
merely denying that any of these funds shall be spent under the act to 
fund the Senior Environmental Employment Program.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, my colleagues, I rise in 
opposition to this amendment, but I do so with some serious 
reservations.
  As the Members know, as we reviewed this bill, because it was a brand 
new ball game in which money was flowing through to several accounts 
following this recent election year. There were areas of the bill that 
justified consideration for adjustment, or perhaps even termination. 
Because of that we sought out those people who were working on the 
policy side of the House, the authorizing committees, working very 
closely to try to determine which programs might very well be reduced, 
changed, or otherwise.

                              {time}  1915

   Mr. Chairman, this was a program that I personally looked at rather 
closely. We did not come to an agreement with the authorizing committee 
regarding this amount. Because of that, I am only resisting my 
colleague's position because it does not have the approval of the 
authorizing committee, and therefore probably should not be a part of 
this bill. That is the basis of my resistance.
  Mr. DORNAN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. DORNAN. Mr. Chairman, if the authorizing committee, and it would 
start with the subcommittee, chaired by our colleague, the gentleman 
from California [Mr. Rohrabacher], terminated this Senior Environmental 
Employment Program, would the gentleman support that, as a Member, at 
the authorizing level?
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I would want to evaluate it at a lot more 
depth than I have before. I certainly would be inclined in that 
direction. If the gentleman would decide to withdraw his amendment, I 
would be happy to work with him.
  Mr. DORNAN. If the gentleman would further yield, Mr. Chairman, he 
has done such an outstanding job managing this bill, and has put so 
much effort into it and burned the midnight oil so much, that I will 
gladly accept that offer to work together on this, and withdraw the 
amendment.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I would very much appreciate my colleague's 
cooperation in that connection, Mr. Chairman. It would certainly help 
the House.
  Mr. DORNAN. Mr. Chairman, the Senior Environmental Employment [SEE] 
Program at the EPA is the most egregious example of what's wrong with 
how things work in Washington. The SEE Program is little more than a 
relic of the Tammany Hall era.
  Every year six and only six liberal special interest groups catering 
to senior citizens pay salaries to hundreds of their members to work at 
EPA facilities all over the country. The employee's salary, fringe 
benefits, travel expenses, registration fees, and medical monitoring 
are all covered by the liberal special interest group. The groups 
provide the jobs and their members are grateful.
  The only problem with this cozy scenario is that none of the money 
used by the special interest groups to pay their members is their own 
money. All the money used in the SEE Program comes from taxpayers.
  This means that lobbying groups such as AARP and the National Council 
of Senior Citizens [NCSC] receive millions of tax dollars each year to 
give patronage jobs to their members. And on top of it all, these 
groups get to keep up to 45 percent of these tax dollars for 
administrative and related costs.
  In 1994 alone, the AARP received nearly $25 million from taxpayers to 
hire their membership for positions at EPA facilities all around the 
Nation. Of this $25 million AARP kept $10 million for itself. NCSC kept 
$3 million out of $9 million for its operations.
  This is a patronage jobs program and nothing less.
  The Dornan amendment to H.R. 2099, the VA, HUD, and Independent 
Agencies appropriations bill would strike $55 million for the express 
purpose of defunding the SEE Program at EPA.
  Mr. Chairman, just a moment to explain how the program works. The EPA 
awards cooperative agreements to the six and only six, special interest 
groups throughout the United States to recruit older workers for 
temporary and part-time positions. The older Americans--55 years or 
older--who are selected to join the program are called SEE enrollees 
and they receive compensation from the grantee organization. They are 
not Federal employees. The grantee organization works with the 
requesting EPA office to develop appropriate part-time or temporary 
assignments as support staff in designated EPA offices. The grantee 
recipient of our taxpayers money is responsible for recruiting, 
screening and compensating the SEE enrollees. Once enrollees are 
placed, an EPA employee monitors their activities.
  The only requirements for participation in the program are that the 
applicant be at least 55 years of age and the applicant must operate 
through one of the six grantee organizations. SEE enrollees receive 
hourly compensation and are entitled to the fringe
 benefits offered by the grantee organization.

  By law, only certain private, nonprofit organizations designated by 
the Secretary of Labor under title V of the Older Americans Act of 1965 
are eligible. These eligible grantees are limited to just six: First, 
American Association of Retired Persons [AARP] Senator Simpson to the 
rescue, please; second, National Council of Senior Citizens [NCSC]; 
third, National Council on Aging [NCA]; fourth, National Caucus and 
Center on Black Aged [NCCBA]; fifth, National Association for Hispanic 
Elderly [NAHE]; and sixth, National Pacific/Asian Resource Center on 
Aging [NPARCA].
  No other seniors organizations are eligible as grantees. All older 
Americans wanting to participate in the SEE Program must work through 
one of these six grantees. Listen as I read the numbers of grants 
awarded along with the tax dollars given just in 1994 to these special 
interests.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Group            AARP            NCSC             NCA            NCCBA           NAHE           NPARCA    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. of grants...             128              53              11              66              23              26
Total dollars...      24,882,366       9,035,147       1,030,506       7,380,675       4,688,178       3,544,841
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  The SEE Program issued 307 grants totaling over $50 million in 1994. 
SEE grants to AARP and NCSC amounted to 67 percent of all SEE grants 
issued comprising 59 percent of all SEE funding. AARP and NCSC are the 
only two grantees with registered House lobbyists, 52 and 9 
respectively.
  Mr. Chairman, grantees are allowed to keep a certain percentage of 
SEE funds allocated for related costs of providing employment for each 
enrollee. These add-ons include: fringe benefits, travel, training and 
registration fees, medical monitoring, and administrative costs. Each 
grantee is allowed up to 15 percent for administrative costs.
  What this means, Mr. Chairman, is that on top of the 15 percent for 
administrative costs that each of these six grantees can charge 
taxpayers, they also are able to charge taxpayers for all sorts of 
benefits for their enrollees.
  As a result, AARP skims 40 percent off of each grant. NCSC takes 33 
percent. NCA grabs 30 percent. NCCBA snatches 17 off the top. NAHE 
squeezes 35 percent from taxpayers. And NPARCA siphons off a monumental 
45 percent.
  In 1994, those indirect costs amounted to $10 million for AARP, $3 
million for NCSC, $300,000 for NCA, $2 million for NCCBA, $1.6 million 
for NAHE, and another $1.6 million for NPARCA.
  Mr. Chairman, if we want to come up with a workfare jobs program for 
seniors, certainly we could do a much better job than the SEE Program 
at EPA. Older Americans involved in the SEE Program would actually be 
much better off if the Federal Government just gave them the money 
directly rather than funneling 

[[Page H 8040]]
the money through six Great Society lobby groups.
  Why not take the $50 million paid to the SEE Program in 1994 and just 
disperse it out evenly to all American seniors, rather than route the 
money through select liberal special-interest groups to a few select 
patrons? The AARP and the National Council of Senior Citizens alone 
skimmed $13 million off the top of the $50 million issued by the 
program in 1994. Thirty-seven percent of all the SEE money in 1994 went 
to cover the overhead of just six special interest lobbies who hold an 
iron grip monopoly on the program.
  Why aren't my few opponents to this amendment looking for private 
sector ways to meet the legitimate needs of senior citizens? The United 
Seniors Association and 60Plus are two seniors groups which support my 
amendment. But, or course, they don't have any vested interest in the 
success of the SEE Program. It is not coincidental that the only voices 
you'll hear in opposition to my amendment are voices protecting wallets 
being lined with tax dollars from this program.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to put an end to patronage jobs at 
EPA, and vote ``yes'' on the Dornan amendment.
  My amendment has the full support of: United Seniors Association; the 
60Plus Association; Citizens Against Government Waste; the National Tax 
Limitation Committee; Americans for Tax Reform; National Legal and 
Policy Center; the National Right to Work Committee; and the American 
Conservative Union.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
California?
  There was no objection.


           amendment no. 70 offered by mr. weldon of florida

  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Weldon of Florida: At the end of 
     the bill, add the following new title:

     TITLE VI--ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

                      Departmental Administration


                      construction, major project

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For construction of a medical facility in Brevard County, 
     Florida, to be derived by transfer from the amount provided 
     in title III of this Act under the heading ``Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency--Disaster Relief'', $154,700,000.

  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on 
the amendment.
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that I 
be given 6 minutes to explain my amendment, 3 minutes of which I will 
yield to the gentlewoman from Florida [Ms. Brown].
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Florida?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Florida [Mr. Weldon] will be 
recognized for 3 minutes, and the gentlewoman from Florida [Ms. Brown], 
will be recognized for 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Weldon].
  Mr. WELDON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today, with my colleague from 
Florida, to urge you to join me in providing a hospital for east-
central Florida's veterans. This project has been on the books at the 
VA for over a decade.
  My amendment transfers $154.7 million from the Federal Emergency 
Management Administration [FEMA] to the Veterans' Administration's 
major construction account.
  As a veteran and a doctor who has served many of these veterans, I 
understand their need firsthand.
  While the veteran population in most of the country has declined, 
Florida has seen a 25-percent increase over the last 10 years. Yet, the 
availability of veterans medical facilities has not kept pace with the 
influx.
  This will restore funding for the east-central Florida hospital at 
the President's 1996 budget request. This funding will complete a 
project that received $17.2 million in design money last year.
  There is money available in FEMA's budget. In addition to the $235 
million appropriated for FEMA disaster assistance in the bill before 
us, the Committee report states that:

       There is a significant unobligated balance of disaster 
     relief funds made available in prior years as well as a 
     fiscal year 1995 supplemental appropriation of $6.55 billion 
     for past and anticipated disaster relief.

  Today 100 veterans will move from New York, Wisconsin, Michigan, 
Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois, New Jersey, and other States to Florida. 
Tomorrow another 100 will come.
  The influx of veterans hasn't stopped, but the VA's ability to 
provide these veterans with medical care has. Florida's medical 
facilities also serve thousands of veterans who come to Florida for the 
winter. To my colleagues, I would say that many of these veterans are 
your constituents and this hospital will serve their needs.
  Florida ranks 2d in the Nation in veterans population, but 46th in 
medical care expenditure by the Veterans' Administration.
  Florida has virtually no long-term psychiatric beds and the fewest 
total psychiatric beds per 1,000 veterans. The proposed veterans 
hospital is designed to serve this need. Veterans in my district 
needing long-term psychiatric care must go to northern Georgia some 500 
miles away.
  This amendment is about fairness. It's about guaranteeing our 
Nation's veterans, who happen to live in Florida, access to the same 
type of medical care that is available to veterans in other parts of 
the Nation.
  Please vote for this amendment and help us serve all of our Nation's 
veterans.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today on behalf of 
veterans throughout this Nation and especially in Florida. The Weldon-
Brown amendment will restore $154,700,000 for a VA Medical Center in 
Brevard County, FL. This authorized project, included in President 
Clinton's budget for fiscal year 1996, has been planned for over 10 
years.
  Right now we have a disaster in Florida because Congress has not 
lived up to its commitment to veterans. The funds for this project will 
come from the Federal Emergency Agency Disaster Relief which has more 
than $7 billion and currently has $700,000 in discretionary funds.
  Perhaps it was an oversight that the House Appropriations 
subcommittee decided to cut this funding. The 470 bed VA hospital will 
provide 240 acute care beds and 230 beds for Florida's mentally ill 
veterans.
  Here are some of the shocking facts about Florida veterans:
  First, one in every two veterans who moved last year, moved to 
Florida.
  Second, Florida ranks second in the Nation in veterans population, 
but 46th in medical care funding by the VA.
  Third, Florida has more than twice the national average of veterans 
per hospital.
  Fourth, Florida VA facilities do not have long term beds for the 
mentally ill.
  The Brevard VA Medical Center will greatly assist in caring for 
veterans, especially mentally ill veterans--many of whom are fragile 
and aging World War II and Korean conflict veterans. These, and all, 
veterans should expect and receive good care. If we cannot protect 
veterans in their time of need, how can we ask them to stand in harms 
way to protect us?
  We all know that American men and women--in the prime of their 
lives--willingly go to remote parts of the world to defend this 
country. Sometimes they do not return. Sometimes they return wounded. 
Sometimes they return with wounds that do not surface until years 
later. War is never without human cost.
  There can be no backing down on this matter. A vote to keep this 
veterans' project is a vote to keep a promise to our veterans. This 
project is critically necessary to Florida veterans. We must fund this 
project. We owe this to our
 veterans.

  I have in my hand a copy of a letter from the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs, Mr. Jesse Brown, to Chairman Jerry Lewis. The letter is dated 
May 10, 1995. A part of the letter reads:

       The need for additional VA hospital beds in Florida has 
     been documented since December 1982, when VA completed the 
     congressionally mandated ``Thirty-Year Study of the Needs of 
     Veterans in Florida.'' This and subsequent analyses support 
     the need for the Brevard facility and identify a significant 
     population of veterans with inadequate access to care. The 
     nearest inpatient facilities are approximately 120 miles from 
     the Brevard County population center. The Brevard hospital 
     will provide primary and secondary medical and surgical 
     services and 

[[Page H 8041]]
     help fill a great need as a statewide referral center for chronically 
     mentally ill veterans. The administration included in our 
     fiscal year 1966 budget $154.7 million, which represents full 
     funding to complete construction of the Brevard County VA 
     Medical Center, because of the unique need for a new hospital 
     in this area and our desire to avoid the need for repeated, 
     partial requests in the future. We have been moving forward 
     with the advance planning for the project I believe we have 
     demonstrated the value and need for this project. It is the 
     right thing to do, and it is particularly appropriate that 
     this project be allowed to move forward at a time when a 
     grateful Nation is commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the 
     end of World War II.

  I have a letter from Major General Earl Peck, Executive Director, 
Department of Florida Veterans' Affairs, dated July 27, 1995, which 
reads in part: ``The veterans of Florida deeply appreciate the 
extraordinary efforts you and Dave Weldon are making to save the 
Brevard VA Medical Center. It would be patently unfair for the Congress 
to terminate all VA construction and, thus, freeze Florida veterans in 
a permanently disadvantaged status.''
  Mr. Chairman, I submit for the Record the letter from the Secretary 
of Veterans Affairs, as well as the letter from General Earl Peck, 
Executive Director, Department of Florida Veterans Affairs, dated July 
27, 1995, and the Department of Veterans Affairs fiscal year 1995 
budget submission, ``Construction Appropriations and Authorization,'' 
pages 2-6, 2-7, 2-8, 2-9, the Department of Veterans Affairs fiscal 
year 1996 Budget Submission, ``Construction Appropriation and 
Authorization'', page 2-11, 2-12, 2-13, and the Public Law referred to 
previously.
  The material referred to is as follows:

                            The Secretary of Veterans Affairs,

                                         Washington, May 10, 1995.
     Hon. Jerry Lewis,
     Chairman, Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies, 
         Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Lewis: I am following up on my March 13, 
     1995, letter requesting approval of our proposal to reprogram 
     $10 million from the Major Construction Working Reserve to 
     the Advance Planning Fund. Of the $10 million proposed for 
     reprogramming, a total of $5.5 million is needed to continue 
     with our planning for the new Medical Center in Brevard 
     County, Florida. I have not yet received an answer from you 
     approving our proposal. Rather, we have been advised by 
     Subcommittee staff that the reprogramming is not being 
     approved for the Brevard project. As a result, as of May 1, 
     the funding source for the Design Development of the Brevard 
     County VAMC was exhausted, and we were forced to shut down 
     this effort. We strongly urge your approval of the 
     reprogramming so that further delay and disruption can be 
     avoided on this extremely important project.
       The need for additional VA hospital beds in Florida has 
     been documented since December 1982, when VA completed the 
     Congressionally mandated ``Thirty-Year Study of the Needs of 
     Veterans in Florida'' (Public Law 97-101). This and 
     subsequent analyses support the need for the Brevard facility 
     and identify a significant population of veterans with 
     inadequate access to care. The ratio of VA hospital beds to 
     veterans is only 1.4/1000 for Florida, while it is 2.02/1000 
     nationally. When the Brevard VAMC is completed the ratio for 
     Florida will still be only 1.69/1000. The nearest inpatient 
     facilities to Brevard are Tampa and West Palm Beach, both 
     approximately 120 miles from the Brevard County population 
     center. The nearest outpatient facility is in Orlando, 
     approximately 50 miles distant.
       The Brevard hospital will provide primary and secondary 
     medical and surgical services and help fill a great need as a 
     statewide referral center for chronically mentally ill 
     veterans. Florida VA hospitals have a much smaller percentage 
     of psychiatry beds than VA hospitals nationwide and no 
     psychiatry beds for the chronically mentally ill. Private 
     providers and insurance coverage simply do not offer the 
     range of treatment and services necessary for veterans with 
     chronic psychiatric disorders. Even if these services were 
     available from the private sector, reimbursement costs would 
     be significantly higher than care through a VA facility. In 
     1989, the average cost of veteran admissions to non-VA 
     hospitals in East Central Florida was 35.6 percent higher 
     than care in VA hospitals. A similar study in Palm Beach 
     County, using 1990 data, showed private sector costs were 35 
     percent to 113 percent higher than similar care in VA 
     hospitals. Hospitalization in a VA medical center is cost-
     effective treatment.
       Plans for Brevard include a 120-bed nursing home on the 
     grounds. Florida has the highest percentage of veterans 65 
     years and older in the nation. They currently represent 30 
     percent of the state's veteran population and the numbers are 
     increasing. Based upon the 1990 census, approximately 1,100 
     VA-operated nursing home care beds will be needed in Florida 
     by FY 2005. VA currently operates 840.
       In keeping with the fundamental changes which are taking 
     place in modern health care, VA is moving vigorously toward 
     outpatient treatment in lieu of hospitalization wherever 
     medicine allows it. We are working to expand the number of 
     cost-effective ambulatory care centers which provide primary 
     and urgent care to veterans. However, both ambulatory care 
     centers and nursing homes must be supported by modern 
     inpatient services or they fail to offer the continuum of 
     care necessary for the effective care of our veterans.
       The Administration included in our FY 1996 budget $154.7 
     million, which represents full funding to complete 
     construction of the Brevard County VAMC, because of the 
     unique need for a new hospital in this area and our desire to 
     avoid the need for repeated, partial requests in the future. 
     We have been moving forward with the advance planning for the 
     project; and, at this time, our architects have developed and 
     evaluated several schemes for the new medical center. We have 
     selected the architectural proposal which will best meet the 
     needs of our veterans, in the most cost-effective manner. The 
     land, as you may know, has already been donated to the 
     Federal Government, thus further reducing the cost of the 
     project.
       In FY 1995, the Congress provided $17.2 million for 
     preparation of Construction Documents; but, before they can 
     be started, we must finish the earlier design stages which 
     are paid for from the Advance Planning Fund. VA has already 
     obligated about $1.945 million out of the Advance Planning 
     Fund for Schematic Design and site surveys. We now need to 
     move into Design Development, and the reprogramming is 
     necessary in order to fund this part of the work. Any further 
     delay in the reprogramming will threaten the continuity of 
     planning and design and thereby may compromise the quality of 
     the product produced by the architectural office, since they 
     will soon be forced to disband the design team to other 
     projects. It will also delay the schedule, forcing our 
     veterans to wait longer for accessible medical care, and will 
     increase the project cost through inflation.
       I believe we have demonstrated the value and need for this 
     project. Therefore, I urge you to act promptly to authorize 
     us to continue our mission to our Nation's veterans by 
     addressing recognized needs of Florida's veterans. It is the 
     right thing to do, and it is particularly appropriate that 
     this project be allowed to move forward at a time when a 
     grateful Nation is commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the 
     end of World War II.
           Sincerely,
     Jesse Brown.
                                                                    ____

         State of Florida, Department of Veterans' Affairs, Office 
           of the Executive Director
                                St. Petersburg, FL, July 27, 1995.
     Hon. Corrine Brown,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Congresswoman Brown: The veterans of Florida deeply 
     appreciate the extraordinary efforts you and Dave Weldon are 
     making to save the Brevard VAMC. It would be patently unfair 
     for the Congress to terminate all VA construction and, thus, 
     freeze Florida veterans in a permanently disadvantaged 
     status. Until we enjoy something approaching equitable access 
     to VA health care, selected construction projects and 
     resource reallocation must be fostered.
       Thank you for the proposed amendment to HR2099 and your 
     continuing support for Florida veterans.
           Sincerely,
                                       E.G. Peck, MGen USAF (Ret),
                                               Executive Director.

   Department of Veterans Affairs Fiscal Year 1996 Budget Submission


        brevard county, fl, new medical center and nursing home

       Proposal is to construct a new medical center with 
     ambulatory care facilities and a nursing home.
       I. Budget authority.--
Total estimated cost.......................................$171,900,000
Available through 1995.......................................17,200,000
1996 request................................................154,700,000
1997 or future.........................................................
       II. Priority score.--9.08.
       III. Description of Project.--A new 470-bed medical center 
     and 120-bed nursing home care unit will be constructed. The 
     new hospital will provide 135 internal medicine, 60 
     intermediate care, 45 surgical and 230 psychiatric beds and 
     an ambulatory care clinic to serve the veteran population in 
     this newly defined distributed population planning base 
     (DPPB) area. All associated site work, including surface 
     parking spaces, is included in this project. An environmental 
     impact statement has been accomplished in compliance with the 
     National Environment Policy Act.
       IV. Priorities/deficiencies addressed.--Provision of 
     comprehensive primary care services will ensure equity of 
     access to America's veterans irrespective of residence. The 
     East Central Florida area has been identified for over ten 
     years as a critically underserved area with a growing 
     population of retired, limited income veterans. The project 
     will provide capacity for comprehensive basic services. 
     Service delivery will be organized around the managed care 
     concept with primary and preventive care as a foundation.
       V. Alternatives to construction considered.--In 1988, VA 
     sent letters to hospitals located in the counties where 
     construction of this new medical center was being considered. 
     The purpose was to investigate potential opportunities to 
     acquire by lease or purchase existing hospitals as an 
     alternative to 

[[Page H 8042]]
     VA construction. No favorable responses were received.
       VI. Mission/background.--The proposed new medical center in 
     Brevard County, Florida will be part of the Florida/Puerto 
     Rico network. This network currently consists of five 
     existing medical centers in Florida and one medical center in 
     San Juan. Studies conducted in the early 1980's and 
     revalidated in 1992, showed that, by the year 2005, VA will 
     need approximately 1,000 additional hospital beds in the 
     State of Florida to meet the veteran demand. The new 400-bed 
     medical center in Palm Beach addresses a portion of the need 
     for additional beds. The studies showed that a medical center 
     in the East Central Florida area would serve a significant 
     number of veterans that currently have no reasonable access 
     to veterans health services. In March 1993, the Secretary of 
     Veterans Affairs announced plans to construct new medical 
     facilities to serve an expanding veteran population. 
     Consideration was given to patient utilization and 
     demographics, accessibility to other VA medical centers and 
     projected patient lengths of stay. As a result, a site in 
     Brevard County, near Rockledge, was chosen for construction 
     of a VA medical center.
       The new medical center will consist of 470 hospital beds 
     and provide primary and secondary general medical and 
     surgical care and acute psychiatric care. The medical center 
     will have full ambulatory care capability. In addition, a 
     120-bed nursing home care unit will be constructed to address 
     the critical need for nursing home care beds in the State of 
     Florida.
       VII. Affiliations sharing agreements.--This facility will 
     not be affiliated with any medical schools.
       VIII. Demographic data.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Projected  
                                              Current         (2005)    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorized beds:                                                        
    Hospital............................               0             470
    Nursing home care...................               0             120
Outpatient visits.......................               0         126,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Veteran Population Projections

1992............................................................282,620
2000............................................................275,258
2005............................................................257,952
       IX. Schedule.--
Complete design development....................................Feb 1996
Complete construction..........................................Dec 1999
       X. Project cost summary.--
New construction 792,524 gross square feet @ $127.94.......$101,397,000
Alterations.........................................................N/A
                                                       ________________

  Subtotal..................................................101,397,000
                                                       ================

Other costs:
  Site work, utilities, demolition and surface parking.......13,057,000
  Allowance for specialized equipment...........................507,000
  120-bed nursing home care unit (57,886 gsf).................7,293,000
  Energy plant (22,945 gsf @ $482.47/gsf)....................11,625,000
                                                       ________________

Total other costs............................................32,482,000
                                                       ================

    Total estimated base construction cost..................133,879,000
                                                       ================

Construction contingency (5 percent)..........................6,694,000
Technical services (10 percent)..............................14,057,000
Construction management firm costs............................4,113,000
Utilities agreements..........................................2,200,000
                                                       ________________

  Total estimated base cost.................................160,943,000
                                                       ================

Inflation allowance to construction contract award...........10,957,000
                                                       ________________

  Total estimated project cost..............................171,900,000
       XI. Annual operating staff and equipment costs.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Present   
                                              Project        facility   
                                            activation       operating  
                                               costs           costs    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment costs.........................     $30,000,000           (\1\)
One time non-recurring cost.............      14,928,000           (\1\)
Recurring costs:                                                        
    Additional manpower FTE: 1,329......      73,760,000           (\1\)
    Other recurring.....................      14,928,000           (\1\)
    Total recurring.....................      88,688,000           (\1\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Not applicable.                                                     

   Department of Veterans Affairs Fiscal Year 1995 Budget Submission


        brevard county, fl--new medical center and nursing home

       Proposal is to construct a new medical center with 
     ambulatory care facilities and a nursing home as a joint 
     venture with Patrick Air Force Base Medical Command.
       I. Budget authority.--
Total estimated cost.......................................$171,900,000
Available through 1994.................................................
1995 request.............................................\1\ 17,200,000
1996 or future..............................................154,700,000
\1\ Funds requested in 1995 are for design only.
       II. Priority score.--12.95.
       III. Description of project.--A new 470-bed medical center 
     and 120-bed nursing home care unit will be constructed. The 
     new hospital will provide 135 internal medicine, 60 
     intermediate care, 45 surgical and 230 psychiatric beds and 
     an ambulatory care clinic to serve the veteran population in 
     this newly defined distributed population planning base 
     (DPPB) area. All associated site work, including 
     approximately 1,300 surface parking spaces, is included in 
     this project. An environmental impact statement has been 
     accomplished in compliance with the National Environment 
     Policy Act.
       IV. Priorities/deficiencies addressed.--Only availability 
     of comprehensive primary care services will ensure equity of 
     access to America's veterans irresponsible of residence. The 
     East Central Florida area has been identified for over ten 
     years as a critically underserved area with a growing 
     population of retired, limited income veterans. An 
     opportunity has been identified through a joint venture with 
     Patrick Air Force Base to correct equity of access issues in 
     a cost-effective manner. The project will provide capacity 
     for comprehensive basic services. Service delivery will be 
     organized around the managed care concept with primary and 
     preventive care as a foundation.
       V. Alternatives to construction considered.--In 1988 VA 
     sent letters to hospitals located in the counties where 
     construction of this new medical center was being considered. 
     The purpose was to investigate potential opportunities to 
     acquire by lease or purchase existing hospitals as an 
     alternative to VA construction. No favorable responses were 
     received. Land has been donated for this project near Patrick 
     Air Force Base, which provided an ideal opportunity for cost-
     effective sharing arrangements with Patrick Air Force Base 
     and joint venture construction.
       VI. Mission/background.--The proposed new medical center in 
     Brevard County, Florida will be part of the Florida/Puerto 
     Rico network. This network currently consists of five 
     existing medical centers in Florida and one medical center in 
     San Juan. Studies conducted in the early 1980's and 
     revalidated in 1992, showed that, by the year 2005, VA will 
     meet approximately 1,000 additional hospital beds in the 
     State of Florida to meet the veteran demand. A new 400-bed 
     medical center currently under construction in Palm Beach 
     addresses a portion of the need for additional beds. The 
     studies showed that a medical center in the East Central 
     Florida area would serve a significant number of veterans 
     that currently have no reasonable access to veterans health 
     services. In March 1993, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
     announced plans to construct new medical facilities to serve 
     an expanding veteran population. Consideration was given to 
     patient utilization and demographics, accessibility to other 
     VA medical centers and projected patient lengths of stay. As 
     a result, a site in Brevard County, near Rockledge, was 
     chosen for construction of a VA medical center. Patrick Air 
     Force Base is located approximately seven miles to the 
     southeast, so that this site is conducive to a VA/Air Force 
     joint venture.
       The new medical center will consist of 470 hospital beds 
     and provide primary and secondary general medical and 
     surgical care and acute psychiatric care. The medical center 
     will have full ambulatory care capability. In addition, a 
     120-bed nursing home care unit will be constructed to address 
     the critical need for nursing home care beds in the State of 
     Florida.
       VII. Affiliations/sharing agreements.--This facility will 
     not be affiliated with any medical schools. Discussions to 
     share services are part of the project development efforts in 
     progress with the Air Force.
       VIII. Demographic data.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Projected 
                                                  Current       (2005)  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorized beds:                                                        
    Hospital..................................            0          470
    Nursing home care.........................            0          120
Outpatient visits.............................            0      126,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Veteran Population Projections

1992............................................................282,620
2000............................................................275,258
2005............................................................257,952
       IX. Schedule.--
Complete schematics/design development........................July 1995
Complete construction........................................Sept. 1999
       X. Project cost summary.--
  Phase I (Nursing Home, energy plant, foundation, substructure, and 
                   superstructure for main building)

New construction (NHC) 49,600 gross square feet @ $135.00....$6,696,000
Alterations.........................................................N/A
                                                       ________________

  Subtotal....................................................6,696,000
                                                       ================

Other costs:
  Site work, utilities, demolition and surface parking........4,172,000
  Energy plant (21,400 gsf)..................................10,431,000
  Main building (foundation, substructure, superstructure)...20,547,000
  Pre-design development allowance (10 percent)...............4,184,000
                                                       ________________

    Total other costs........................................39,334,000
                                                       ================

    Total estimated base construction cost...................46,030,000
                                                       ================

Construction contingency (5 percent)..........................2,302,000
Technical services (10 percent)...............................4,833,000

[[Page H 8043]]

Construction management firm costs............................1,367,000
                                                       ________________

  Total estimated base cost..................................54,532,000
                                                       ================

Inflation allowance to construction contract award............2,068,000
                                                       ________________

  Total estimated project cost...............................56,600,000

                 Phase II (Remainder of main building)

New construction (Hospital) 716,800 gross square feet @ $100.72,366,000
Alterations.........................................................N/A
                                                       ________________

  Subtotal...................................................72,366,000
                                                       ================

Other costs:
  Site work, utilities, demolition and surface parking.......10,029,000
  Allowance for specialized equipment...........................464,000
  Pre-design development allowance (10 percent)...............8,286,000
                                                       ________________

    Total other costs........................................18,779,000
                                                       ================

    Total estimated base construction cost...................91,145,000
                                                       ================

Construction contingency (5 percent)..........................4,557,000
Technical services (10 percent)...............................9,570,000
Impact cost allowance.........................................1,600,000
Construction management firm costs............................2,752,000
                                                       ________________

  Total estimated base cost.................................109,624,000
                                                       ================

Inflation allowance to construction contract award............5,676,000
                                                       ________________

  Total estimated project cost..............................115,300,000
       XI. Annual operating, staff and equipment costs.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Present  
                                                 Project      facility  
                                               activation     operating 
                                                  costs         costs   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment cost..............................   $30,000,000         (\1\)
One time non-recurring cost.................    17,937,420         (\1\)
Recurring costs:                                                        
    Staffing FTE: 1,329.....................    78,381,870            $0
    Other recurring.........................    17,584,390             0
                                             ---------------------------
      Total recurring.......................    95,966,260             0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Not applicable.                                                     

       This notification is made in accordance with Public Law 
     102-389, Title V, Section 516.

              LEASE NOTIFICATION--ALL LEASES OVER $300,000              
                         [Dollars in Thousands]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Fully serviced
          Location                   Description            annual rent 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bay Pines (Fort Myers), FL.  Satellite Outpatient Clinic          $1,036
Denver, CO.................  Distribution Center/                  1,426
                              Expansion (GSA).                          
Hilo, HI...................  Residential Facility.......             419
New York, NY...............  Footwear Center............             662
Rochester, NY..............  Outpatient Clinic/                      667
                              Relocation.                               
San Diego, CA..............  Outpatient Clinic/VBA                 3,750
                              Regional Office.                          
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Title 38, United States Code, Sections 8104(a)(2) (as 
     amended by section 301(a), Public Law 102-405) requires 
     statutory authorization for all major medical facility 
     construction projects and major medical facility leases 
     exceeding $300,000 (including parking facilities) prior to 
     appropriation of funds. In accordance with Title 38, United 
     States Code, Section 8104(h) prospectuses for the 
     construction projects are reflected on pages 2-11 through 2-
     26 and 2-31 through 2-34. Prospectuses for the VA direct 
     leases are reflected on pages 11-4 through 11-7. 
     Authorization for construction of the Replacement Bed 
     Building/Ambulatory Care Facility at Reno, NV, the VA/AF 
     Joint venture at Travis, CA, the lease for the Residential 
     Facility at Hilo, HI, and the lease for the Outpatient Clinic 
     portion of the San Diego Collocation is not required under 
     the exemption noted on page 11 (Paragraph 2). The Ambulatory 
     Care Addition at Boston, MA and the Outpatient Clinic/
     Relocation lease at Rochester, NY were authorized in a prior 
     year. VA is not requesting authorization for leases acquired 
     through the General Services Administration (GSA).

    FISCAL YEAR 1996 CONSTRUCTION, MAJOR PROJECT LEASE AUTHORIZATION    
                         [Dollars in thousands]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Authorization
          Location                   Description              Request   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     MAJOR CONSTRUCTION                                                 
                                                                        
Replacement and                                                         
 Modernization:                                                         
    Brevard County, FL.....  New Medical Center/NHCU....        $154,700
Patient Environment:                                                    
    Lebanon, PA............  Renovate Nursing Units.....           9,000
    Marion, IL.............  Environmental Improvements.          11,500
    Marion, IN.............  Replace Psychiatric Beds...          17,300
    Perry Point, MD........  Renovatre Psychiatic Wards.          15,100
    Salisbury, NC..........  Environmental Enhancements.          17,200
                             Total-Major................         224,800
Leases:                                                                 
    Bay Pines (Ft. Myers),   Satellite Outpatient Clinic           1,736
     FL.                                                                
    New York, NY...........  National Footwear Clinic...           1,054
      Total Leases.........  ...........................           2,790
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    AN ACT To amend title 38, United States Code, to extend certain 
    expiring veterans' health care programs, and for other purposes.

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Veterans 
     Health Programs Extension Act of 1994''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. References to title 38, United States Code.

                  TITLE I--GENERAL MEDICAL AUTHORITIES

Sec. 101. Sexual trauma counseling and services.
Sec. 102. Research relating to women veterans.
Sec. 103. Extension of expiring authorities.
Sec. 104. Facilities in Republic of the Philippines.
Sec. 105. Savings provision.

                  TITLE II--CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION

Sec. 201. Authorization of major medical facility projects and major 
              medical facility leases.
Sec. 202. Authorization of appropriations.
     SEC. 2. REFERENCES TO TITLE 38, UNITED STATES CODE.

       Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this 
     Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an 
     amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other provision, the 
     reference shall be considered to be made to a section or 
     other provision of title 38, United States Code.

                  TITLE I--GENERAL MEDICAL AUTHORITIES

     SEC. 101. SEXUAL TRAUMA COUNSELING AND SERVICES.

       (a) Authority To Provide Treatment Services for Sexual 
     Trauma; Repeal of Limitation on Time To Seek Services.--
     Subsection (a) of section 1720D is amended--
       (1) by striking out paragraph (2); and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph (2):
       ``(2) During the period referred to in paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary may provide appropriate care and services to a 
     veteran

                           *   *   *   *   *

     affect women or members of minority groups, as the case may 
     be, differently than other persons who are subjects of the 
     research.''.
       (b) Health Research.--(1) Such section is further amended 
     by adding after subsection (c), as added by subsection (a), 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(d)(1) The Secretary, in carrying out the Secretary's 
     responsibilities under this section, shall foster and 
     encourage the initiation and expansion of research relating 
     to the health of veterans who are women.
       ``(2) In carrying out this subsection, the Secretary shall 
     consult with the following to assist the Secretary in setting 
     research priorities:
       ``(A) Officials of the Department assigned responsibility 
     for women's health programs and sexual trauma services.
       ``(B) The members of the Advisory Committee on Women 
     Veterans.
       ``(C) Members of appropriate task forces and working groups 
     within the Department (including the Women Veterans Working 
     Group and the Task Force on Treatment of Women Who Suffer 
     Sexual Abuse).''.
       (2) Section 109 of the Veterans Health Care Act of 1992 
     (Public Law 102-585; 38 U.S.C. 7303 note) is repealed.
       (c) Population Study.--Section 110(a) of the Veterans 
     Health Care Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-585; 106 Stat. 4948) 
     is amended by adding at the end of paragraph (3) the 
     following: ``If it is feasible to do so within the amounts 
     available for the conduct of the study, the Secretary shall 
     ensure that the sample referred to in paragraph (1) 
     constitutes a representative sampling (as determined by the 
     Secretary) of the ages, the ethnic, social and economic 
     backgrounds, the enlisted and officer grades, and the 
     branches of service of all veterans who are women.''.

     SEC. 103. EXTENSION OF EXPIRING AUTHORITIES.

       (a) Authority To Provide Priority Health Care for Veterans 
     Exposed to Toxic Substances.--Chapter 17 is amended--
       (1) in section 1710(e)(3)--
       (A) by striking out ``June 30, 1994'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``June 30, 1995''; and
       (B) by striking out ``December 31, 1994'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``December 31, 1995''; and
       (2) in section 1712(a)(1)(D), by striking out ``December 
     31, 1994'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``December 31, 
     1995''.
       (b) Drug and Alcohol Abuse and Dependence.--Section 
     1720A(e) is amended by striking out ``December 31, 1994'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``December 31, 1995''.
       (c) Pilot Program for Noninstitutional Alternatives to 
     Nursing Home Care.--(1) Effective as of October 1, 1994, 
     subsection (a) of section 1720C is amended by striking out 
     ``During the four-year period beginning on October 1, 1990,'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``During the period through 
     September 30, 1995,''.
       (2) Such subsection is further amended by striking out 
     ``care and who--'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``care. The 
     Secretary shall give priority for participation in such 
     program to veterans who--''.
       (d) Enhanced-Use Leases of Real Property.--Section 8169 is 
     amended by striking out ``December 31, 1994'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``December 31, 1995''.

[[Page H 8044]]

       (e) Authority for Community-based Residential Care for 
     Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill Veterans and Other 
     Veterans.--Section 115(d) of the Veterans' Benefits and 
     Services Act of 1988 (38 U.S.C. 1712 note) is amended by 
     striking out ``September 30, 1994'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``September 30, 1995''.
       (f) Demonstration Program of Compensated Work Therapy.--
     Section 7(a) of Public Law 102-54 (105 Stat. 269; 38 U.S.C. 
     1718 note) is amended by striking out ``1994'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``1995''.
       (g) Report Deadlines.--Section 201(b) of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs Nurse Pay Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-366; 
     38 U.S.C. 1720C note) is amended by striking out ``February 
     1, 1994,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``February 1, 
     1995,''.

     SEC. 104. FACILITIES IN REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES.

       Notwithstanding section 1724 of the title 38, United States 
     Code, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs may contract with 
     facilities in the Republic of the Philippines other than the 
     Veterans Memorial Medical Center to furnish, during the 
     period from February 28, 1994, through June 1, 1994, hospital 
     care and medical services to veterans for nonservice-
     connected disabilities if such veterans are unable to defray 
     the expenses of necessary hospital care. When the Secretary 
     determines it to be most feasible, the Secretary may provide 
     medical services under the preceding sentence to such 
     veterans at the Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient 
     Clinic at Manila, Republic of the Philippines.

     SEC. 105. RATIFICATION OF ACTIONS DURING PERIOD OF LAPSED 
                   AUTHORITY.

       Any action of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs under 
     section 1710(e) of title 38, United States Code, during the 
     period beginning on July 1, 1994, and ending on the date of 
     the enactment of this Act is hereby ratified.

                  TITLE II--CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION

     SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION OF MAJOR MEDICAL FACILITY PROJECTS 
                   AND MAJOR MEDICAL FACILITY LEASES.
       (a) Projects Authorized.--The Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
     may carry out the major medical facility projects for the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs, and may carry out the major 
     medical facility leases for that Department, for which funds 
     are requested in the budget of the President for fiscal year 
     1995. The authorization in the preceding sentence applies to 
     projects and leases which have not been authorized, or for 
     which funds have not been appropriated, in any fiscal year 
     before fiscal year 1995 and to projects and leases which have 
     been authorized, or for which funds were appropriated, in 
     fiscal years before fiscal year 1995.

                           *   *   *   *   *

  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to compliment both of my colleagues from 
Florida on their tireless efforts to see that the veterans of Florida, 
the many thousands that are moving to Florida each and every week, are 
properly cared for. There is no question but there is a crying need for 
these facilities. I would, however, oppose this amendment very 
strongly, and particularly tonight, in that the funding would come out 
of FEMA.
  As we are seated in this Chamber tonight, a hurricane is bearing down 
on south Florida. That hurricane, we do not know whether it will come 
in somewhere in the Florida Keys, or whether it will come in somewhere 
south of Sebastian, but right now it is predicted it is going to hit 
somewhere in south Florida. This would make a drastic need for FEMA and 
the funds that it carries, and it also, I think, really amplifies the 
need not to raid FEMA.
  Several amendments have been offered under this bill that would raid 
these funds that will be desperately needed one day. Hopefully, south 
Florida will be spared tomorrow from the rages of this hurricane, but, 
nonetheless, it should underline to us our dependence in time of 
disaster upon FEMA.
  I would, therefore, reluctantly, but very strongly, oppose this 
amendment.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SHAW. I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is from Florida, 
and he knows we already have a disaster in Florida as far as the 
veterans and our lack of health care facilities in Florida. In the FEMA 
funds there is over $7 billion and an additional $700 million in 
discretionary funds.
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Chairman, If the gentlewoman has completed her remarks, 
I think it is just a question that the timing is entirely wrong. The 
funding for FEMA is too important. I would urge a ``no'' vote.
                             point of order

  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from California [Mr. Lewis] insist 
on his point of order?
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Yes. I do, Mr. Chairman.
  I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to 
change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriations 
bill, and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XI. The rule states no 
amendment to a general appropriations bill shall be in order if it is 
changing existing law. I ask for a ruling of the Chair.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Florida wish to be heard on the 
point of order?
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I wish to be heard on the 
point of order.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I would like to be heard on the 
point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will protect the gentlewoman's right. The 
gentleman from Florida [Mr. Weldon] is recognized.
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I believe that this project is 
an authorized project. Section 201 of Public Law 103-452, signed into 
law on November 2, 1994, states:

       The Secretary of Veterans Affairs may carry out the major 
     medical facility projects for the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs, and may carry out the major medical facility leases 
     for that Department, for which funds are requested in the 
     budget of the president for fiscal year 1995.

  In the President's fiscal year 1995 congressional submission for VA 
construction, major projects, pages 2-7 through 2-9, the budget 
requests $17.2 million for the design phase and $154.7 million for 
fiscal year 1996 and beyond for the complete construction. The budget 
submission goes on to describe the proposed hospital.
  It's clear to this Member that section 201 of the public law 
specifically authorizes all projects for which any funds were requested 
in the President's fiscal year 1995 budget request. Under this reading 
of the law, the committee, through Public Law 103-452, clearly provides 
an authorization for the full hospital, not simply the first phase--the 
design phase.
  Section 201 clearly authorizes the Secretary to carry out the major 
medical facility projects for which funds are requested. The 
President's fiscal year 1995 budget requests funds for the VA hospital 
in Brevard.
  Additionally, with regard to the chairman's statements that section 
202 places a limitation on section 201. I strongly disagree with his 
interpretation.
  The limitation may apply to the amounts that can be appropriated for 
these accounts in fiscal year 1995, however, the limitation in no way 
restricts the authorization of the project. This limitation is clearly 
limited only to the amount authorized in fiscal year 1995, not 1996 and 
beyond. The authorization for fiscal year 1996 and beyond remains 
intact. Section 202 does not affect this.
  On this basis, I ask the chair to rule against the point of order and 
allow for consideration of the amendment.

                              {time}  1930

  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I also want to go on record as 
saying this Brevard County project is more in order than other back-
door projects that have been allowed by the chairman and that are not 
authorized. I submit these projects for the Record. I know they are all 
worthwhile. However, they have not been authorized for this year. I am 
submitting those 5 projects.
  Further, I quote from the joint statement of the Committee on 
Veterans' Affairs which appears in the Record on October 7, 1994, 
regarding Public Law 103-452 title II, construction authorization: 
``The committee notes that some major medical facility projects in the 
VA fiscal year 1995 budget submission were authorized or partially 
funded in a prior year and therefore do not require authorization under 
section 8014 (a)(2) of title 38.''
  Mr. Chairman, it is a known fact that the hospital at Brevard County 
was partially funded in prior years. Therefore, based upon these facts, 
there should be no further need for authorization.
  I also submit a letter from General Earl Peck and a letter from 
Secretary Jesse Brown to Chairman Lewis stressing the need for this 
project.
  The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Combest). The Chair is prepared to rule.

[[Page H 8045]]

  The gentleman from California makes a point of order that the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida violates clause 2 of 
rule XXI by providing an unauthorized appropriation.
  The amendment proposes to insert a new paragraph at the end of the 
bill that would reduce the amount provided for Federal Emergency 
Management Agency--Disaster Relief and provide appropriations to the 
Department of Veterans Affairs for the construction of a medical 
facility in Brevard County, FL.
  The gentleman from Florida has not met his burden of proving that 
appropriations for fiscal year 1996 for the medical facility in Brevard 
County are authorized. Section 8104(a)(2) of title 38 precludes the 
appropriation of funds for a major medical facility project unless 
funds for that project have been specifically authorized by law. 
Section 201(a) of Public Law 103-452 authorizes any major medical 
facility project submitted by the President for fiscal year 1995. As 
mentioned by the gentleman from Florida, the Brevard County project was 
submitted in the President's 1995 budget request, as well as in his 
1996 budget request. However, the authorization carried in section 
201(a) of Public Law 103-452 is constrained by an accompanying 
limitation in section 202(b), which states that such projects may 
``only be carried out using funds appropriated for fiscal year 1995,'' 
thus limiting all authorizations for appropriations to fiscal year 1995 
funds.
  The Chair has not been provided with any documentation indicating 
that the medical facility in Brevard County is exempt from section 202 
of Public Law 103-452, which limits authorization of appropriations for 
such project to fiscal year 1995.
  The works-in-progress exception provided for in clause 2(a) of rule 
XXI may not be invoked for this project because the project is governed 
by a lapsed authorization and because actual construction has not yet 
begun.
  Accordingly, the Chair sustains the point of order.
  Are there other amendments to title V?
  Mr. BARRETT of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk that the gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Kleczka] and I had planned to offer.
  Last week I asked the Committee on Rules to craft the VA-HUD rule in 
a manner that would give the Members of this House the opportunity to 
vote up or down on our proposal. Unfortunately my request was denied. 
Because Members will not be permitted to vote on this issue, I would 
like to just take a moment to explain why it was proposed.
  Last year thousands of workers in my community got a major slap in 
the face when their employer told them their jobs would be moved to 
another part of the country.
  If that was not bad enough, these loyal employees had salt rubbed in 
their wounds a short time later when they learned that their own 
Federal tax dollars would be used to help move their jobs elsewhere. 
Nearly a quarter of a million dollars in Community Development Block 
Grant money would be used to help the company they worked for expand a 
plant and move the jobs to another State.
  Earlier this year, we learned that another company would be 
relocating its production facility to another State. At that time, it 
was announced that $500,000 in CDBG funds would be used as part of the 
incentive package which lured the company to move these jobs.
  These actions are dead wrong. The CDBG Program is designed to Foster 
Community and Economic Development, not to help move jobs around the 
country. Although we cannot reverse what has already happened, our 
amendment would stop this from happening again.
  Our amendment would add an antipiracy provision to the Community 
Development Block Grant Program administered by the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development. It would prevent the use of Federal 
funds from being used to move jobs from one part of the country to 
another.
  Congress and the executive branch have recognized the importance of 
preventing this type of economic relocation in the past. Similar 
antipiracy provisions are currently in effect for Economic Development 
Administration grants, Small Business Administration programs, and 
grant programs for dislocated workers.
  And, as you may recall, our amendment received solid bipartisan 
support and passed the House as part of a bill reauthorizing HUD 
programs last year.
  More recently, the White House Conference on Small Business 
overwhelminingly passed a resolution in June calling on Congress to ban 
the direct or indirect use of Federal funds of any kind that would lure 
existing jobs and businesses from one area to another. This issue is 
now one of 60 national issues endorsed by the Conference.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe the Members of the House should have been 
given the opportunity to vote on this important initiative. If adopted, 
Wisconsin taxpayers and other taxpayers across our country would no 
longer be forced to pick up the tab for transferring jobs from their 
State.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Kleczka].
  Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Chairman, it is too bad that the amendment before us 
is not in order on this bill. Let me just say a couple of words about 
the Community Development Block Grant Program.
  We are not here to decry the benefits because in our State and many 
other States it has worked so well. But it is not and it has never been 
incepted to be used as raiding jobs from one State to another. Last 
year it happened in Wisconsin on a couple of occasions. Maybe if it 
happens to the State of California and New York and some other States, 
we will get more support on the House floor to change this. I would 
hope the chairman of the committee, not only the appropriation 
committee but also the authorizing committee, will look at this and 
deem it to be an essential part of any reform of the CDBG Program.
  Again, it was never authorized and never meant to be a means of 
raiding jobs from one State to another. Maybe when it happens to 
Members from other States, you might be taking the floor and helping us 
out getting this amendment passed in a more appropriate way.
  I thank my colleague from Wisconsin for yielding.


          Sequential Votes Postponed in Committee of the Whole

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Thursday, July 
27, 1995 and today proceedings will now resume on those amendments on 
which further proceedings were postponed in the following order: 
Amendment No. 7 offered by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin]; 
amendment No. 38 offered by the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Dingell]; 
and an unnumbered amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. 
Ensign].
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                 Amendment no. 7 offered by mr. durbin

  The CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded 
vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
Durbin] on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 7 offered by Mr. Durbin: Page 59, line 3, 
     insert before the period the following:
       ``: Provided further, That any limitation set forth under 
     this heading on the use of funds shall not apply when it is 
     made known to the Federal official having authority to 
     obligate or expend such funds that the limitation would 
     restrict the ability of the Environmental Protection Agency 
     to protect humans against exposure to arsenic, benzene, 
     dioxin, led, or any known carcinogen''.

  Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to 
correct the numerous factual errors committed by the gentleman from 
Texas last Friday during last weeks debate on the Durbin-Wilson 
amendment to H.R. 2099.
  First, I would like to tell the distinguished gentleman from Texas 
that the Continental Cement plant he referred to is not located in 
Hanover, MO. In fact, there is no Hanover, MO. It is located in my 
hometown of Hannibal. However, this error was only the first of many in 
his statement about Continental Cement.
  The gentleman from Texas stated the EPA standard for arsenic emission 
is .4 parts per million and in 1993 the actual emission of the 

[[Page H 8046]]
plant was 97 parts per mission. He goes on to state the EPA standard 
for lead is 400 parts per million and the plant's actual emission in 
1993 was 2,700 parts per million. I would invite the gentleman from 
Texas to share his data with me on the 1993 test burn because the EPA 
did not even conduct arsenic or lead emissions tests at Continental 
Cement in 1993.
  The test burn my colleague from Texas is referring to occurred in May 
of 1992. This type of EPA test required thousands of gallons of waste 
material containing heavy metals to be pumped into the kiln. This 
procedure is known as ``spiking the kiln'' and under normal operating 
conditions the plant would never burn such a concentration of heavy 
metals. During the test the EPA allowed Continental to emit 241 parts 
per million of lead and 2,198 parts per million of arsenic.
  The kiln actually emitted 199.36 parts per million of lead and 33.83 
parts per million of arsenic. Both arsenic and lead levels were well 
within the guidelines established by the EPA for the test burn and show 
that Continental Cement in Hannibal is not shirking its responsibility 
to the people or the environment.
  Mr. GILLMOR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment and 
in support of the committee's provisions dealing with the combustion 
strategy. Let me briefly outline three reasons why.
  First, the committee's language reaffirms the original congressional 
intent. When Congress passed the 1990 Clean Air Act which directed EPA 
to establish a combustion strategy and maximum achievable control 
technology, we did not intend for EPA to circumvent the legal and 
procedural safeguards the law requires. Currently, EPA is operating 
under an open process which allows all parties to comment on these 
proposed rules. This is ``Big Brother'' government at its worst.
  Second, EPA has been zealous at best in setting standards for 
hazardous waste combustion that combine the authority of two dissimilar 
laws, one dealing with clean air and the other with recycling. The 
House Commerce Committee is slated to work on both bills this Congress. 
The power to draft the executive branch's enforcement options and 
procedures rests, constitutionally, with the Congress, not with the EPA 
by default.
  Finally, this Congress is, if nothing else, skeptical of further 
regulation. The Wilson amendment reinforces EPA's ability to regulate, 
obfuscate, and eventually strangulate at will. We should not allow EPA, 
through the combustion strategy, to go above and beyond its regulatory 
parameters. Congress must do more than provide a Band-Aid fix to an 
agency that requires major surgery.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
                             recorded vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Thursday, July 
27, 1995, the Chair announces that he will reduce to a minimum of 5 
minutes the period of time within which a vote by electronic device 
will be taken on each amendment on which the Chair has postponed 
further proceedings.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 188, 
noes 228, not voting 18, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 602]

                               AYES--188

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Beilenson
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bishop
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant (TX)
     Bunn
     Cardin
     Castle
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Davis
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Durbin
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Foglietta
     Forbes
     Fox
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Gutierrez
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Horn
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klug
     LaFalce
     Lantos
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lincoln
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McInnis
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Mfume
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Moran
     Morella
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Poshard
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reed
     Richardson
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Shays
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Spratt
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stupak
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weldon (PA)
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates
     Zimmer

                               NOES--228

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brewster
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chapman
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clinger
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooley
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Danner
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Fowler
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Funderburk
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gillmor
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Livingston
     Longley
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Murtha
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Paxon
     Payne (VA)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Portman
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Radanovich
     Regula
     Riggs
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Roth
     Royce
     Salmon
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stockman
     Stump
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Tejeda
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thornton
     Tiahrt
     Traficant
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Waldholtz
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff

                             NOT VOTING--18

     Becerra
     Dingell
     Flake
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Green
     Hall (OH)
     Hoke
     Hoyer
     Laughlin
     Meyers
     Moakley
     Reynolds
     Rush
     Stark
     Thurman
     Tucker
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1957

  Mr. EDWARDS changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
                amendment no. 38 offered by mr. dingell

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Dingell] 
on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             recorded vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 155, 
noes 261, not voting 18, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 603]

                               YEAS--155

     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baesler
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Beilenson
     Bentsen
     Berman
     Bishop
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant (TX)
     Cardin
     Chapman
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Conyers

[[Page H 8047]]

     Coyne
     de la Garza
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Durbin
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Foglietta
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Gutierrez
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Holden
     Horn
     Jackson-Lee
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E.B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klink
     LaFalce
     Lantos
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKinney
     Meehan
     Menendez
     Mfume
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Moran
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Richardson
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Shays
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stupak
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Traficant
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Ward
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weldon (PA)
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Zimmer

                               NAYS--261

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

                             NOT VOTING--18

     Becerra
     Edwards
     Ewing
     Flake
     Ford
     Green
     Hall (OH)
     Hoke
     Meyers
     Moakley
     Reynolds
     Rush
     Stark
     Thurman
     Tucker
     Weller
     Yates
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  2004

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
                    amendment offered by mr. ensign

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Ensign] on 
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             recorded vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were ayes 121, 
noes 296, not voting 17, as follows:
                             [Roll No. 604]

                               AYES--121

     Ackerman
     Allard
     Bilbray
     Bishop
     Bonior
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brownback
     Bryant (TX)
     Burr
     Camp
     Canady
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (MI)
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Danner
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dickey
     Dingell
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Engel
     Ensign
     Evans
     Fattah
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Foglietta
     Fox
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gilman
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Gutierrez
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hefner
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Holden
     Hostettler
     Hutchinson
     Jacobs
     Johnson (SD)
     Jones
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Latham
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Maloney
     Manton
     Martinez
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McNulty
     Menendez
     Mink
     Molinari
     Montgomery
     Myers
     Norwood
     Obey
     Orton
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (VA)
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Poshard
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Reed
     Riggs
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Sanders
     Saxton
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Stenholm
     Stupak
     Tate
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Traficant
     Velazquez
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Ward
     Waters
     Watts (OK)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wyden

                               NOES--296

     Abercrombie
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Beilenson
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunn
     Bunning
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chapman
     Chrysler
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clinger
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Combest
     Cooley
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeLay
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Eshoo
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Funderburk
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Goss
     Graham
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennelly
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lantos
     Largent
     LaTourette
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Lincoln
     Linder
     Livingston
     Lofgren
     Longley
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKeon
     McKinney
     Meehan
     Meek
     Metcalf
     Mfume
     Mica
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mollohan
     Moran
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Paxon
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rangel
     Regula
     Richardson
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Roth
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce

[[Page H 8048]]

     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stockman
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stump
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Upton
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waldholtz
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     White
     Wicker
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Wynn
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                             NOT VOTING--17

     Becerra
     Farr
     Flake
     Ford
     Green
     Hall (OH)
     Hoke
     Meyers
     Moakley
     Moorhead
     Reynolds
     Rush
     Stark
     Thurman
     Tucker
     Yates
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  2011

  Mr. FATTAH changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
                          Personal Explanation

  Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I was unavoidably detained during rollcall 
No. 604. Had I been present, I would have cast my vote in the 
affirmative.


                          Personal Explanation

  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I was unavoidably detained from voting last 
Friday, and had I been here, I would have voted on rollcall 596 
``yes,'' rollcall 597 ``yes,'' rollcall 598 ``no,'' rollcall 599, 
``yes,'' and rollcall 600 ``no.''
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that in a few minutes the House 
will be asked to vote again on the amendment I offered with the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Stokes] last Friday, an amendment that passed 
212 to 206.
  Just to remind my colleagues, in case you missed what took place 
across America this weekend, every major television network, every 
major newspaper in America, just to remind my colleagues, this 
amendment struck provisions that would have prohibited, prohibited the 
Environmental Protection Agency from enforcing provisions of the Clean 
Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and several 
other statutes that deal with the health and safety of the American 
family.
  This House sent the American public a clear, unequivocal bipartisan 
message on Friday, and it was this: The Congress cares about the 
environment. Republicans care about the environment. Democrats care 
about the environment. All Americans care about the environment.
  I think that that was a important message to send, and it was a 
message that caught the attention of the American people.
  I hope we repeat that message this evening. If we do not, if we fail, 
the burden will be on those who switched their votes.
  Exactly what did these Members learn over the weekend?

                              {time}  2015

  Did the environment suddenly become less fragile over the weekend? 
Did their constituents lose their fondness for clean air and water? Do 
their constituents no longer expect the Federal Government to ensure 
that the air that they breath and the water that they drink and the 
food that they eat will not injure them? I do not think so.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to follow their principles and 
once again, to prove to the American people that this Congress, and 
particularly the Republicans in this Congress, are committed to open 
political processes and environmental safeguards. Vote yes, once again, 
on the Stokes-Boehlert amendment.
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BOEHLERT. I yield to my colleague from Delaware [Mr. Castle], the 
former governor of Delaware and a trusted and loyal supporter of worthy 
causes, particularly those involving the environment.
  Mr. CASTLE. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I will be very 
brief. I rise in support of the Stokes-Boehlert amendment. I went home 
too, and we need to understand what this bill does. Basically the bill 
itself cuts funding for the EPA by 34 percent. It cuts funding for 
enforcement by the EPA by 50 percent. But the amendment before us would 
make sure that we do not cut 17 programs, because the bill itself also 
has in it 17 programs that will not be enforced by the EPA if the 
amendment does not get passed. We would not be able to enforce 
standards of air emissions, storm water runoff, wetlands, sewer 
overflows, and another 13 or so numbers which are in that particular 
bill.
  Mr. Chairman, the time has come for us to pay attention to our 
environment. This bill as it is written now effectively eliminates 
environmental enforcement on a Federal level. America must not tolerate 
this. We must support the Stokes-Boehlert amendment.
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Chairman, let me tell you, it has been suggested 
that we get on with it, and we will be glad to get on with it. We are 
dealing with the people's business.
  Mr. Chairman, I could bring before this body right now member after 
member that would give the same testimonial that was given by the 
gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle] and by others who support the 
Stokes-Boehlert amendment. If you voted yes on Friday, vote yes today 
for America.
  Mr. STOKES. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to take a moment to firstly express my 
appreciation to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Boehlert] for the 
strong leadership that he has given to the coalition force between the 
Democrats and Republicans of this House.
  Mr. Chairman, on Friday we saw one of those rare moments in the House 
where the Members of this body rose above partisan politics and put the 
people of this Nation first. We saw the environment of this Nation put 
above party politics. We saw men and women in this body who expressed 
themselves in a way that is seldom seen in this House. On both sides, 
we saw people who really cared about the people in this country.
  Mr. Chairman, when this matter is revoted, people in this country are 
going to be watching. All over the Nation this past weekend, as the 
gentleman from New York said, the Nation watched what happened here 
Friday. They are going to be watching again tonight, to see how many of 
us stand up for the principles that we showed here on Friday.
  This vote will never go away. Mr. Chairman, this vote is going to 
live with all of us for a long time. I would urge those Members who 
stood up on principle and put environment above party to stand up once 
again tonight and show that you care about clean water and clean air 
and pure food for the people of this country. I urge my colleagues to 
stand up as they did on Friday in support of the Stokes-Boehlert 
amendment.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  Mr. Chairman, it should be noted, and I appreciate the gentleman from 
California recognizing, that there is a very serious issue that is 
contained in the housing portion of this bill that affects 900,000 poor 
families in this country that benefit from the project-based Section 8 
program. Many of those families are elderly people. Under the wording 
that is contained in this bill, there is a presumption that it is 
cheaper to voucher these families out.
  Mr. Chairman, it is very important that we take action that sends a 
signal to HUD that they should only take actions that are going to 
provide protections to the families at risk at the cheapest possible 
cost to this Government. We should not be vouchering families out of 
project-based Section 8 housing if in fact that project-based Section 8 
is cheaper than the vouchering-out process.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to make it very clear, and I appreciate the 
gentleman from California, Chairman Lewis, making it very clear to HUD 
and to all of those associated with this program, that actions taken by 
this House do not in any way send a signal that people should be thrown 
out or moved out of project-based Section 8 just for the sake of 
getting rid of the project-based Section 8. So we ought to 

[[Page H 8049]]
be providing the cheapest possible protection for the greatest number 
of tenants in this country as our Nation's housing policy.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, this will not take very long. 
I do want the House to know that my colleague from Massachusetts brings 
up a very, very important point. It is an item that I have been 
concerned about in my own county in California. Literally, it is not 
our objective, as we try to streamline housing and the programs to 
negatively impact those people in Section 8 housing. There is little 
doubt that our bill moves in the direction of providing the kind of 
flexibility the gentleman is calling for within the department to 
ensure that they select those options that will not be less expensive, 
but also serve people better.
  So Mr. Chairman, I want to express my appreciation to my colleague 
and also say that we will evaluate this in depth and work with you as 
we go between here and conference.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the 
chairman's comments and look forward to working with him and other 
members of the committee.
  Mrs. ROUKEMA. Mr. Chairman, during debate on the VA/HUD 
appropriations bill, I have discussed several of its provisions with my 
colleague Mrs. Waters, with whom I worked last year when I was the 
ranking member of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community 
Development. I would like to assure my colleague that the rent reform 
provisions contained in H.R. 2099 are very similar though not identical 
to those contained in H.R. 3838.
  First, Federal preferences have been eliminated in favor of local 
preferences, enabling PHAs to establish a preference for working 
families. Second, ceiling rents have been included in the legislation 
so that families who live in public housing will never have to pay more 
of their income than the apartment is actually worth. These provisions 
will have several very important effects: working families will be 
encouraged to remain in public housing, providing role models for 
children as well as additional rental income for PHAs. Additionally 
Federal micromanagement of public housing will be reduced in favor of 
local decision-making.
  As the former ranking member of the Housing Subcommittee, I worked 
hard to include these provisions in last year's housing bill, H.R. 
3838. Unfortunately, H.R. 3838 did not become law because the 
legislation passed in the House but not the Senate. I was pleased, 
therefore, to see that the appropriations bill started the process of 
reforming this part of the public and assisted housing programs. It is 
my understanding that additional reforms will come when a comprehensive 
housing bill is introduced by Mr. Lazio, the new chairman of the 
subcommittee.
  In my statements last week, I also mentioned that the rent increases 
in the section 8 program did not affect the Section 202 and Section 811 
elderly and disabled housing programs. I want the record to be 
extremely clear. Though the vast majority of these projects have been 
built with grants, some buildings were financed with Section 8 
assistance. Only those projects financed with Section 8 will receive 
rent increases estimated to be about $12/month. This appropriations 
bill does not recognize the distinctions between the new grant program 
and the old Section 8 financing system. I believe this was an 
oversight. Nevertheless, rent increases would be inappropriate, and I 
will work assertively to see that they are dropped in the final 
conference report.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  Mr. Chairman, I will not take any time, but my colleagues, if you 
will, this has been a very very tough bill. The only chair that I would 
prefer not to be sitting near besides my own would be that of the 
gentleman who had the chair through this arduous process. I hope the 
entire House gives appreciation to the gentleman from Texas, Larry 
Combest, for truly a tremendous job, and we appreciate it.
  Mr. Chairman, during the consideration of this bill by the full 
committee, an amendment offered by Mr. Coleman to the VA part of the 
report was adopted. This language was inadvertently omitted in the 
printing of the report. The VA is to treat the following language as if 
it had been printed in House Report 104-201:


                    el paso va staffing flexibility

       The Committee is aware of the difficulty in staffing 
     several Veterans Administration Medical Facilities in the 
     southwest, particularly El Paso, Texas. This situation is 
     compounded by the budgetary constraints the VA faces in 
     allocating FTEEs among its facilities. The Committee urges 
     that the VA Regional Sectors, especially its Southern 
     Regional Sector, engage in intra-region FTEE transfers during 
     the fiscal year for purposes of staffing as warranted by 
     changing circumstances in VA medical facilities. The 
     Committee urges the VA to review the staffing situation in El 
     Paso and to move personnel as necessary to meet the new 
     service demands that will exist if veterans are not required 
     to travel to other VA facilities for treatment.

  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is much appreciative.
  If there are no further amendments, the Clerk will read the final 
three lines of the bill.
  The Clerk read as follows;

       This Act may be cited as the ``Departments of Veterans 
     Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Hastings of Washington) having assumed the chair, Mr. Combest, Chairman 
of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported 
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 
2099), making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs 
and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent agencies, 
boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1996, and for other purposes, pursuant to House 
Resolution 201, he reported the bill back to the House with sundry 
amendments adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
  Under the rule, the previous question is ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment?
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I demand a separate vote on the 
Amendment No. 66, the so-called Stokes amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is a separate vote demanded on any other 
amendment? If not, the Chair will put the remaining amendments en gros.
  The amendments were agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment on which 
a separate vote has been demanded.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment: Page 53, line 18, strike ``: Provided'' amd all 
     that follows through ``appropriate'' on page 55, line 9.
       Page 55, line 19, strike ``Provided'' and all that follows 
     through ``concerns'' on page 59, line 3.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             recorded vote

  Mr. STOKES. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 210, 
noes 210, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 605]

                               YEAS--210

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Bass
     Beilenson
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bishop
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant (TX)
     Cardin
     Castle
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Durbin
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Foglietta
     Forbes
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Goss
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Holden
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Jackson-Lee
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     LaFalce
     Lantos
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Longley
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Mfume
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Mink
     Moran
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey

[[Page H 8050]]

     Olver
     Orton
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Quinn
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reed
     Regula
     Richardson
     Rivers
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schiff
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Shaw
     Shays
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Spratt
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weldon (PA)
     White
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Young (FL)
     Zimmer

                               NAYS--210

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunn
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chapman
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clinger
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooley
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeLay
     Dickey
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Emerson
     Ensign
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Fowler
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Funderburk
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Geren
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Graham
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     Laughlin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Lincoln
     Linder
     Livingston
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Paxon
     Payne (VA)
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Portman
     Poshard
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Riggs
     Roberts
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Roth
     Royce
     Salmon
     Schaefer
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stockman
     Stump
     Talent
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Tejeda
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Traficant
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Waldholtz
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Zeliff

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Becerra
     Flake
     Ford
     Green
     Hall (OH)
     Hoke
     Meyers
     Moakley
     Reynolds
     Stark
     Thurman
     Tucker
     Yates
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  2043

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
                              {time}  2045

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The question is 
on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                motion to recommit offered by mr. stokes

  Mr. STOKES. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. STOKES. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. STOKES. Moves to recommit the bill to the Committee on 
     Appropriations with instructions to report it back forthwith 
     with an amendment, as follows:
       Page 59, line 3, before the period insert the following:
       : Provided further, That any limitation set forth under 
     this heading on the use of funds shall not apply when it is 
     made known to the Federal official having authority to 
     obligate or expend such funds that the limitation would 
     restrict the ability of the Environmental Protection Agency 
     to protect humans against exposure to arsenic, benzene, 
     dioxin, lead, or any known carcinogen.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Stokes] is 
recognized for 5 minutes on his motion to recommit.
  Mr. STOKES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the motion to recommit we submit is essentially the 
Durbin amendment, which was offered in the Committee of the Whole 
earlier.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
Durbin].
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Speaker, the House has now acted and reversed the 
position taken by a majority of the Members last Friday. Those who took 
the position that we should have 17 individual riders in this bill, 
which virtually weaken the environmental protection for families across 
America, have prevailed. They have had a big weekend. They have reached 
Members to solidify their votes and other Members to win their votes, 
but unfortunately, the real losers here are the families which count on 
this Government to protect them from unseen hazards in air and water.
  If we have made the decision this evening that this Environmental 
Protection Agency will not enforce the law, the question on this vote 
is whether or not this Environmental Protection Agency will still be 
able to protect American families from the dangers of cancer-causing 
substances: Arsenic, dioxin, benzene, lead, and known carcinogens.
  Mr. Speaker, it is clear that lobbyists and special interests are 
playing fast and loose with cancer and lead contamination. In the name 
of ending regulation, we are leaving American families vulnerable. We 
are exposing them to the risk of cancer, and our children to the danger 
of lead poisoning.
  For those who argue, Mr. Speaker, that this is part of the new 
revolution, let me tell them this is a no-course-correction when it 
comes to regulation. It is a full-scale retreat from environmental 
safeguards which have been accepted by responsible businesses, which 
have been implemented by public health officials across the Nation, and 
have been counted on by American families to protect them from these 
dangers. These Republican-inspired proposals will reduce environmental 
standards on deadly chemicals like arsenic, benzene, dioxin, lead, and 
other cancer-causing substances.
  This particularly endangers children in America and the elderly. They 
are the first to be vulnerable to this contamination. We now have a 
chance to at least demonstrate some conscience when it comes to 
environmental safeguards.
  For those who voted against my amendment earlier, the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Wilson], and I, saying the 167 
riders have been stricken, they are back in the bill; 17 exceptions, 17 
exceptions for special interest groups that want to get off the hook. 
We cannot get off the hook. We have to face the music. What we are 
facing here are the kinds of dangers which in fact will take human 
lives.
  I beg the Members, at the very least, make it clear. The 
Environmental Protection Agency can establish these standards and 
protect our families. Say to the lobbyists and special interest groups, 
We are going to draw the line at cancer. We are going to draw the line 
at contamination by lead poisoning. We are going to draw the line when 
it comes to the public health of America. That is the least we can do 
this evening. The question now for each of us is whether or not we can 
stand for that safeguard. I hope that we will.
  Mr. STOKES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, a few moments ago the Stokes-Boehlert amendment failed, 
but we did not really lose. We win anytime we stand up for people in 
this country. That is what we did. We stood up for the people in this 
country. The people who won on that amendment were the polluters of 
this Nation. They won that vote, and the people of this Nation lost, 
but I am going to tell the Members, as I said earlier, this is one that 
is not going to go away. People are going to remember this vote for a 
long time.
  This bill is bad enough with these riders stripped from the bill. Mr. 
Speaker, there is no way to vote for this bill now, with these riders 
in this bill. I urge my colleagues to recommit 

[[Page H 8051]]
this bill, and then if that fails, to defeat this bill on passage.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California [Mr. Lewis] is 
recognized for 5 minutes in opposition to the motion to recommit.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I do not rise to contest the comments of my colleague, 
the gentleman from Ohio, Lou Stokes, for we have worked extremely well 
together on this measure. His amendment was a very, very close 
amendment. I have not seen one closer since I have been in this body.
  However, having said that, the item that is before us by way of this 
recommital motion is an item that we did vote on earlier this evening. 
It is an item that gives EPA more authority, not less authority; more 
regulation, not less regulation. The House defeated that amendment by a 
vote of 228 to 189. I would suggest that we repeat that, get on with 
final passage, and move on to other business.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. STOKES. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 198, 
nays 222, not voting 14, as follows:
                             [Roll No. 606]

                               YEAS--198

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Bass
     Beilenson
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bishop
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Browder
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant (TX)
     Bunn
     Cardin
     Castle
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Durbin
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Foglietta
     Forbes
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Horn
     Hoyer
     Jackson-Lee
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klink
     LaFalce
     Lantos
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lincoln
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Longley
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Mfume
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Moran
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Orton
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Poshard
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Richardson
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Rose
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Shays
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Spratt
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weldon (PA)
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Zimmer

                               NAYS--222

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bentsen
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brewster
     Brown (CA)
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chapman
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clinger
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooley
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Fowler
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Funderburk
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gillmor
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Livingston
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Paxon
     Payne (VA)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Portman
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Riggs
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Royce
     Salmon
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shuster
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stockman
     Stump
     Talent
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Tejeda
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Traficant
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Waldholtz
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wolf
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Becerra
     Flake
     Ford
     Green
     Hall (OH)
     Hoke
     Meyers
     Moakley
     Reynolds
     Stark
     Thurman
     Tucker
     Yates
     Young (AK)
                              {time}  2110

  Mr. DOYLE changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The question is 
on the passage of the bill.
  Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XV, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 228, 
nays 193, not voting 13, as follows:
                             [Roll No. 607]

                               YEAS--228

     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bentsen
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunn
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chapman
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clinger
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooley
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Fowler
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Funderburk
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Geren
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Lincoln
     Linder
     Livingston
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Paxon
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Riggs
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Royce
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scarborough
     Schiff
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shaw

[[Page H 8052]]

     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stockman
     Stump
     Talent
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Upton
     Vucanovich
     Waldholtz
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wolf
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                               NAYS--193

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allard
     Andrews
     Baesler
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Beilenson
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bishop
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant (TX)
     Cardin
     Castle
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Foglietta
     Forbes
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gordon
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Holden
     Horn
     Hoyer
     Jackson-Lee
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E.B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klink
     LaFalce
     Lantos
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Longley
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McInnis
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Mfume
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Molinari
     Moran
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Poshard
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Richardson
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Rose
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaefer
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Shays
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Traficant
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weldon (PA)
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Becerra
     Flake
     Ford
     Green
     Hall (OH)
     Hoke
     Meyers
     Moakley
     Reynolds
     Thurman
     Tucker
     Yates
     Young (AK)

                             {time}   2128

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE and Mr. MATSUI changed their vote from ``yea'' to 
``nay.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  

                          ____________________