[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 205 (Wednesday, December 20, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H15295-H15308]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS TO ENSURE PAYMENTS OF VETERANS 
                                BENEFITS

  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 317, I call 
up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 134) making further continuing 
appropriations for the fiscal year 1996, and for other purposes, and 
ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
  The text of the joint resolution is as follows:

                             H.J. Res. 134

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are hereby appropriated, out of any money in 
     the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, and out of 
     applicable corporate or other revenues, receipts, and funds, 
     for the several departments, agencies, corporations and other 
     organizational units of Government for the fiscal year 1996, 
     and for other purposes, namely:

     Sec. 101. ENSURED PAYMENT DURING FISCAL YEAR 1996 OF 
                   VETERANS' BENEFITS IN EVENT OF LACK OF 
                   APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Payments Required.--In any case during fiscal year 1996 
     in which appropriations are not otherwise available for 
     programs, projects, and activities of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall 
     nevertheless ensure that--
       (1) payments of existing veterans benefits are made in 
     accordance with regular procedures and schedules and in 
     accordance with eligibility requirements for such benefits; 
     and
       (2) payments to contractors of the Veterans Health 
     Administration of the Department of Veterans Affairs are made 
     when due in the case of services provided that directly 
     relate to patient health and safety.
       (b) Funding.--There is hereby appropriated such sums as may 
     be necessary for the payments pursuant to subsection (a), 
     including such amounts as may be necessary for the costs of 
     administration of such payments.
       (c) Charging of Accounts When Appropriations Made.--In any 
     case in which the Secretary uses the authority of subsection 
     (a) to make payments, applicable accounts shall be charged 
     for amounts so paid, and for the costs of administration of 
     such payments, when regular appropriations become available 
     for those purposes.
       (d) Existing Benefits Specified.--For purposes of this 
     section, existing veterans benefits are benefits under laws 
     administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs that have 
     been adjudicated and authorized for payment as of--
       (1) December 15, 1995; or
       (2) if appropriations for such benefits are available 
     (other than pursuant to subsection(b)) after December 15, 
     1995, the last day on which appropriations for payment of 
     such benefits are available (other than pursuant to 
     subsection (b)).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 317, the 
gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston] will be recognized for 30 
minutes, and the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] will be recognized 
for 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston].
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Mr. LIVINGSTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I bring to the floor a continuing 
resolution for certain activities of the Department of Veterans 
Affairs. This continuing resolution would only have effect in fiscal 
year 1996 during periods when appropriations are otherwise not 
available. This is the situation we are in right now. If the regular 
bill or another CR is enacted, then this particular continuing 
resolution would not be operable.
  The activities provided for in this continuing resolution are 
payments for compensation, pensions, and educational benefits within 
the Department of Veterans Affairs. In addition, it also provides for 
payments to contractors for services that directly relate to patient 
health and safety. It also provides for the necessary administrative 
expenses to carry out these activities.
  Mr. Speaker, this continuing resolution will assure that veterans 
benefits checks will be received on time, at the end of the month, and 
in the full amount authorized. Let me stress, had the President not 
vetoed the VA-HUD bill, this continuing resolution would not have been 
necessary and these benefits would have been paid. These benefits would 
have been paid and this CR would not have been necessary if the 
President had not vetoed the VA-HUD bill. Once again, these benefits 
would have been paid if the President had not vetoed the VA-HUD bill. I 
want everybody to understand it. He vetoed it. That is why we are here 
today. The President vetoed it.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all my friends and colleagues to support this 
resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, two more points. This bill is necessary because the 
President vetoed the VA-HUD bill, but it would not be necessary to 
progress through both houses and be enacted into law if the President 
would, in good faith, come to the bargaining table, reach a final 
agreement on a 7-year balanced budget, according to Congressional 

[[Page H15296]]
Budget Office numbers, and put this whole deal to bed and let us get 
out of here. But so far that is not happening. We cannot get a deal 
from the President, so we progress into the Christmas holidays.
  Mr. Speaker, let me remind our colleagues, let me remind everyone 
here that the House went on record on Monday by a vote of 351 to 40 in 
favor of a balanced budget within 7 years as scored by the 
Congressional Budget Office. Yesterday, on Tuesday, the President's 
budget got zero votes, zero votes; none on the Republican side, none of 
the Democratic side. The President's budget got zero votes.

  Now we are on record for a 7-year balanced budget as scored by the 
CBO. His budget got zero. That leaves only one alternative. That leaves 
the alternative of the President coming to the bargaining table with 
the leaders of the Congress and reaching a deal, reaching a deal that 
allows us to fund government, to score the budget according to the 
Congressional Budget Office with a balanced budget for 7 years, and to 
go home. I hope that happens, Mr. Speaker.
  Today, today I might remind our colleagues, today we overrode his 
veto on the securities litigation bill. This place is not getting 
better for the President. He should come and cut a deal.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, let me simply say that nobody is opposed to this bill. 
This bill will pass, probably 435 to nothing. Our objection is not to 
this proposal. Our objection is to not going beyond this proposal.
  We are here because the appropriations legislation was delayed for 90 
days in this House because our friends on the Republican side of the 
aisle wanted first to adopt their contract. That is their privilege. 
They are in the majority. They run the House. But as a practical 
consequence of that, that meant that the appropriations bills were 
shoved back 90 days in the cycle. That meant that there was no possible 
way for the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston] to produce all of 
the appropriation bills on time.
  The when the bills were brought to the floor, a number of extraneous 
legislative items were added to the bills, and that slowed up 
consideration of those bills even more. That meant that by the time of 
October 1, the beginning of the new fiscal year, a huge number of 
appropriation bills had not yet become law. That and only that 
necessitated the passage of a continuing resolution. You do not need a 
continuing resolution to keep discussions going between the President 
and the Speaker on a 7-year budget proposal. You need a continuing 
resolution simply because the 1-year appropriations have not become 
law.

                              {time}  2045

  So tonight we have a proposition before us under which the majority 
party is saying that they will not allow the remainder of the 
Government to reopen; since they have been closed down this week, they 
only want us to allow the Veterans Department to reopen, and then only 
for certain purposes.
  Now, we think it is fine that this bill will say, OK, let us pay 
veterans' benefits, let us pay veterans' disability benefits, let us 
pay veterans' pensions, let us pay their education benefits, and also 
let us pay some contractors with the VA. But we would also ask the 
following questions:
  Why should we not also allow the Veterans Department to process 
legitimate new claims for veterans' benefits? Some 2,000 veterans will 
apply each week for benefits to which they are entitled by law. Why 
should not the Veterans Department be open to provide those services?
  Why should the Veterans Department not be open, further, to provide 
services for home loans? Veterans have earned the right to those home 
loans. Why should they not be allowed to have those claims processed?
  I would also ask, why should not veterans who want to go to Yosemite 
be able to get in?
  Why should not veterans who need education loans be able to have 
those processed, or to have the Pell grants open for application for 
everyone?
  Why should we only open up the Government for a very narrow band of 
American citizens?
  The taxpayers have paid their hard-earned money so that they might 
get all of the Government services to which they are entitled, and 
unless we go beyond this resolution tonight, they will not get those 
services. That is our objection.
  What is happening is very clear. There was an agreement yesterday 
that the President and the leaders of both parties would try to reopen 
discussions for a 7-year budget, and at the same time, they would 
explore ways to open the Government for all citizens. Instead, tonight, 
the network news tells us because that agreement blew up in the 
Republican caucus, again we face the prospect of not having any 
continuation of services from those departments shut down.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentlemen in the well here likes to laugh every time 
somebody else is speaking. I would ask him for the same courtesy I give 
him every time he speaks.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBEY. No, I will not, until the gentleman demonstrates some 
degree of courtesy.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The gentleman from Wisconsin 
has the time, and the Chair would ask Members to extend the same 
courtesy to speakers when they are in the well, speaking on this bill 
to all Members.
  Let us extend courtesy to one another.
  The gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey].
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, let me simply say that I think what is at 
stake here is that the American public is simply being held hostage to 
the power agenda of the new 73 freshmen who have come into this place 
on the Republican side of the aisle. They have a perfect right to be 
here and do anything they think is in the interests of their 
constituents, but the American citizens will judge the balance and the 
temperament that they bring to those efforts.
  I would simply say that what we really face was summed up by my very 
good friend, the chairman of the committee on Appropriations [Mr. 
Livingston].
  When the President signed the Defense appropriation bill, against my 
advice, because I warned him that he would then lose whatever leverage 
he had on the remainder of the appropriations bills, the President 
signed that bill for two reasons: because he wanted a bipartisan 
consideration of his policy in Bosnia, and because he thought that it 
would be taken as a sign of goodwill to our Republican friends in the 
majority on other appropriation items.
  Instead, the following day, the chairman of the Committee on 
Appropriations said as follows:

       The President is at our mercy. If the government shuts down 
     on December 15 and 300,000 people are again out of work, most 
     of the people going out will be his people. I think he is 
     going to care more than we do.

  Now, as everyone knows, I have a great deal of respect and affection 
for the chairman of this committee. We have been friends for years, and 
we have had a constructive working relationship for years. But I think 
that the leverage which other power centers in this body are bringing 
to bear on the appropriations process is making it very difficult for 
this House to do its duty to every single citizen in this country.
  We have a duty not just to disagree on what we disagree upon; we also 
have a duty to agree on that which we can agree upon. Right now, we 
ought to at least be able to agree upon the idea that every citizen of 
this country has a right to the full range of services that he has paid 
for. He cannot have access to those services when the Government is 
shut down.
  So what I ask my colleagues to do tonight is not only to support this 
resolution, but to support our efforts at the end of the debate in our 
recommittal motion to expand the services which are providing a narrow 
range for some veterans' programs, expand those to all veterans' 
programs and, indeed, all of the programs to which our citizens are 
entitled. if we do not do that, we are not earning our salaries; we are 
not providing the services which our taxpayers have a right to expect.
  Forget the leverage games, forget the zeal, remember your duty; open 
up the entire Government for the benefit of the American people.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 

[[Page H15297]]
  New York [Mr. Gilman] the distinguished chairman of the Committee on 
National Security.
  (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in strong support of House Joint 
Resolution 134, a continuing resolution to extend veterans' benefits 
for the month of January. I commend the distinguished gentleman from 
Louisiana [Mr. Livingston] for his worthy efforts in bringing this 
important measure to the floor at this time.
  In these days of fiscal debate and disagreement, it is crucial that 
we forget those who rely on us. There are millions of deserving 
veterans who depend upon their monthly pension or disability checks. It 
would be an injustice if we, in our current impasse over the budget, 
allow these veterans' checks, which contain a 2.6-cost-of-living 
adjustment, not to be processed due to a lack of authorized funds.
  Our Nation's veterans answered their country's call, sacrificing 
their time, quite often their health. They loyally fulfilled their duty 
to their Nation. In this holiday season, their Nation should fulfill 
its obligation to them. This resolution will fulfill that obligation, 
even as we continue our important debate over a balanced budget.
  Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to fully support this worthy 
measure designed to protect our veterans during this Government 
shutdown.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. Kennedy].
  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, this continuing resolution 
for one segment of our society, one category of our citizenry is 
symbolic of the destructive nature of the politics of division that our 
Republican colleagues are practicing so successfully, but just because 
it is successful does not make it right.
  This CR, for one group of our people over another, begins the 
Republican crusade to pit our American people against one another. It 
starts with this CR and it will end with the block grants. You will pit 
elderly people against poor kids. You are going to pit the veterans 
against children on AFDC.
  Why are you not giving a CR for AFDC recipients? It is because you 
are making a value judgment here that veterans count more than young 
kids.
  That is what is wrong with your approach, and that is what is wrong 
with your Contract With America.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Florida [Mr. Shaw].
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman from Rhode Island 
[Mr. Kennedy] that AFDC does not require a continuing resolution.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arkansas [Mr. Hutchinson], the distinguished chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Hospitals and Health Care of the Committee on Veterans 
Affairs.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman who just spoke that there 
is nothing that we can do for our children that is more important than 
balancing the budget. If you want to talk about pitting something 
against the young people of this country, then please talk about the 
crushing load of debt that we are transferring to them because of our 
selfishness. Talk about the $187,000 in taxes that they are going to 
pay during their lifetime to pay for our profligacy and our 
unwillingness to discipline ourselves.
  I say to my colleagues there is nothing more proveteran than 
balancing the budget. They know what it is to serve this country, and 
they could use the 2-percent lower interest rates that a balanced 
budget will mean.
  One of the speakers on the other side referred to the veterans of 
this country, the 2.2 million veterans who are going to be affected by 
this resolution this evening, as a narrow band of our society. Well, 
2.2 million veterans are not a narrow band, and they are the most 
deserving constituency in this country.
  What we are doing is right, and what we are doing is responsible.
  Mr. Speaker, 2.2 million veterans receiving compensation for their 
service-connected disabilities; 308,000 widows, children, and survivors 
of veterans who have died of service-connected disabilities; 450,000 
veterans receiving pensions for their wartime service; and thousands of 
veterans receiving the Montgomery GI bill payments each month, that is 
no narrow band of our country.
  It is a shame, it is a crying shame that what we are doing this 
evening is even necessary because this Congress did its business, it 
did its duty, it passed a VA appropriations bill, one that was good and 
fair to veterans, increasing veterans' spending over the next 7 years 
by $40 billion more than the last 7 years at the time that the veteran 
population is going down.
  Let us support our veterans.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Hefner].
  Mr. HEFNER. Mr. Speaker, I do not understand why we are here just a 
few days before Christmas, and I hope some of the rhetoric that I am 
hearing around here is just that.
  Let me just point out one thing. Sixty percent of the eligible voters 
in this country, where you hear about a mandate and a revolution, 60 
percent of the eligible voters in this country sent ``a pox on both our 
Houses.'' That is not a revolutionary number.
  Mr. Speaker, let me say one other thing. The gentleman talked about 
children. I would suspect that some of those 275,000 or 280,000 people 
that are going to be out of work have children and grandchildren that 
are going to be impacted because their parents and their grandparents 
are out of work; and I would suspect that there are some veterans, whom 
I strongly support and take no back seat to anybody in this building, 
that have children and grandchildren with jobs that are going to be 
impacted by this shutdown of government.
  I was watching television the other night, and I was watching some of 
the freshmen on the Republican side, which shows what kind of life I 
lead. But a young man from Tennessee said, we want to close the 
Government down. That is what we want to do, close this Government 
down.
  What do my colleagues have against those 270,000 people that have 
absolutely nothing to do with this budget argument? Absolutely nothing.
  Now, what we can do, we can do a resolution that lets these people go 
back to work, go to their jobs; and we will stay here all weekend, and 
my colleagues can take turns thrashing the President. Will that not 
serve the same purpose?
  These people have absolutely nothing to do with the budget 
negotiations. These people have been put out of work for absolutely no 
reason, and I challenge anybody on this side to give me a reasonable 
reason why we are putting these people out of work here 3 or 4 days 
from Christmas when they could be shopping with their children and 
their grandchildren and experiencing the spirit of Christmas.
  So let us get on with the continuing resolution. Let the people go 
back to work, and then we can continue to work on the budget.

                              {time}  2100

  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Indiana [Mr. Burton].
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding me the time.
  Let me just say, the gentleman from Wisconsin a few minutes ago, as 
others have, has made reference to the 73 freshmen we have on our side 
of the aisle, indicating that they are going off on a tangent and 
holding us all hostage and stopping progress on the negotiations.
  Many of us have been waiting for a long, long time to head this 
country toward a balanced budget. I have been here 13 years. We have 
waited and we have waited and we have waited for that additional cadre 
of people who are willing to fight with us to get to a balanced budget.
  We have heard all the rhetoric, all the arguments for years from the 
Democrat side of the aisle saying, ``We're going to do it, we're going 
to do it, we're going to do it'' but we never do it. The deficit 
continues to rise and rise and rise and we now have a $5 trillion 
national debt.

[[Page H15298]]

  So I would just like to say to my colleague from Wisconsin, thank God 
for the 73 new Republican freshmen because they speak for what we have 
been speaking for the past 13 years. They do not speak by themselves. 
They speak for all of us. We are all together on this and we are going 
to get the job done.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Miller].
  Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, the previous speaker in the 
well said that the most important thing we can do for our children is 
to give them this balanced budget.
  It is a strange notion of Christmas, as you gather your children 
around, and you say you gave them a balanced budget. But when your 
children ask you what is the price to other children, you tell them the 
children in foster care will not be able to receive placement, children 
who are abused are likely not to receive placement in a safe home away 
from the abuse, children that need health care because their parents 
lost their jobs will find that not there because of your cuts in 
Medicaid.
  They always say the children are not as cruel as adults, but they 
will find out how cruel it was. When you tell them the price for the 
other children in this Nation, they are going to say, ``Shame on you, 
Daddy. Shame on you, that you did that to the children of this 
Nation.'' Because children do not desire to see their colleagues hurt, 
to see their colleagues suffer that kind of pain, but that is what your 
budget does and that is why it should not be accepted.
  I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. Kennedy .
  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Florida 
[Mr. Shaw], who attempted to correct me, is not quite correct in his 
trying to correct me.
  If we do not complete the work on the Labor-HHS bill, States will not 
get the money that they need to provide for these dependent children, 
and that was the point I was trying to make. In fact, the point seems 
to have been lost here that we are trying to make a value judgment in 
passing a CR for one group of Americans and not another, because we all 
perceive this group to have political legitimacy but the children do 
not. That is the point I was trying to make.
  Mr. MILLER of California. The gentleman is exactly right.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, yielding myself 15 seconds, I am 
concerned for all of the poor people that the gentleman from California 
referred to. But the point is that if he would get on the phone and 
talk to his colleagues on the other side of the building, so they might 
release their filibuster and that Labor-Health and Human Services bill 
that has been filibustered for the last 6 months by the Democrats in 
the Senate might go forward.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. 
Montgomery].
  Mr. MONTGOMERY. Mr. Speaker I would really like to talk about what 
the resolution does. I rise in support of the continuing resolution 
that will assure that 3 million veterans will get their benefit checks 
on time. Two million of the 3 million veterans are service-connected 
either because of wounds or because of wounds or because they were hurt 
in the service. Also, the service-connected will get a 2.6 percent cost 
of living increase in their checks.
  Mr. Speaker, I have felt very strongly about this, that the Federal 
Government has a stronger responsibility to the persons who marched off 
to war and came home, or to the widows and orphans of those who did not 
come home. So let us vote for this veterans' resolution.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer].
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, the distinguished chairman of the committee has made the 
point on a number of occasions that the Labor-Health bill is held up 
because of a filibuster. But he never says why, the reason being, 
because the Republicans have put a provision on the Labor-Health bill 
that will make it easy to fire people, easy to get rid of people, easy 
to get them out of jobs. Is it not ironic that the CR that you will not 
allow us to pass does exactly the same thing, keeping people out of 
jobs? That is why the Labor-Health bill has not passed.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Florida [Mr. Bilirakis], a distinguished member of the Committee 
on Veterans' Affairs.
  (Mr. BILIRAKIS asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this 
legislation to ensure that veterans' programs will continue to be 
funded in the wake of the President's recent veto. Because President 
Clinton vetoed H.R. 2099, the 1996 VA-HUD Appropriations bill, as has 
been said so many times here tonight, veterans' benefit checks will not 
be paid on time next month unless a short-term spending measure is 
passed by 8 o'clock tomorrow morning.
  The President should have signed H.R. 2099 and avoided putting these 
benefits and services in jeopardy. However, since he did not, we in 
Congress must act to ensure this funding and protect the Nation's 
veterans.
  The question has been asked a few times tonight: Why do this special 
thing for the veteran? I will tell why. Because if history has taught 
us anything, it is that the American serviceman has borne any hardship, 
has overcome any obstacle and has conquered any foe in the defense of 
liberty, justice and freedom.
  I think that he and she, more than anyone, can understand our battle 
to balance the budget for the sake of our children and our 
grandchildren. We must maintain our commitment to them, and Congress is 
here tonight because we feel strongly that veterans' benefits must not 
get lost in the battle to balance the Nation's budget.
  America can never really fully repay our veterans and we will never 
be able to express our feelings to our fallen soldiers, but we can act 
to ensure that veterans will receive the benefit checks that they have 
earned. Our Nation's veterans deserve nothing less. I urge my 
colleagues to support this legislation and ensure its passage.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Fattah].
  Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, first of all I would like to associate 
myself with the remarks of the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. 
Kennedy]. Then I would like to get to this point at hand.
  There is no veteran in this country who has exhibited bravery and 
courage on behalf of our Nation who did that to protect or to defend 
themselves. They did that to protect and defend this country and the 
people who live here, the women and children and senior citizens of our 
land who are being victimized by this budget impasse and by this 
Government shutdown.
  So to come to the floor and say we want to honor the veterans by 
allowing their checks to go out, we should honor their bravery and 
their courage by putting this Nation's budget back in order and 
allowing the government to operate so that the children of these 
veterans, the parents and grandparents of these veterans, so that the 
communities that these veterans live in, can be the kind of Nation that 
may of them fought and gave so much for.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana [Mr. Buyer], the chairman of the Subcommittee on Education, 
Training, Employment and Housing of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I agree with the comments of my good friend, the 
gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. Montgomery], who said we really should 
be talking about what is before us. That is, as chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Education, Training, Employment and Housing of the 
Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I take my duty and responsibilities 
very seriously to the 26 million veterans.
  The bill which the President vetoed was very disappointing because we 
had over a $400 million increase in VA medical care. The research 
budget totaled $257 million. Veterans' benefits programs funding will 
increase from $36.9 billion in fiscal year 1996 to $41.8 billion in 
fiscal year 2002. So during the next 7 years, more than $275 billion 
will be 

[[Page H15299]]
spent on veterans' programs, $40 billion more than the previous 7 
years. I think that is very important.
  The Budget which is being attacked here all of a sudden, it fully 
funds the important veterans' compensation, pension programs, the GI 
bill, vocational rehabilitation insurance, the home loan program, and a 
COLA increase of 2.6 percent.
  The bill that is before us will ensure the on-time payment of 
benefits for compensation, pension, DIC, and the GI bill. It will also 
ensure that contractors who supply the services directly related to 
patient health and safety will be paid, and it will also ensure that 
such services as ambulance service and contract physician coverage for 
emergency care will continue.
  I also would like to share with my colleagues, as I witnessed the 
debate on the rule, I would almost caution my colleagues, my Republican 
colleagues and my Democratic colleagues, that I was disappointed in 
some of the lack of civility shown here in the House.
  No one in this Chamber by political party has a cornerstone on the 
concerns of veterans. Many of us in this body, when we wore the 
uniform, no one ever asked us were we a Republican or were we a 
Democrat. This is why we operate in the Committee on Veterans' Affairs 
in a tremendous bipartisan spirit, not only in the authorizing 
committee but in the appropriating committee.
  Here is what is going to happen here tonight. We are going to 
continue to play a little politics, but America will receive a message 
here tonight. This body will overwhelmingly support this because we 
believe in bipartisanship for veterans.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Skelton].
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, of course I intend to support this bill. I 
was sitting in the back of the Chamber listening to the rhetoric, and 
some of it rather fiery and some of it rather tough, and here in this 
season, the season supposed to be that of good will and peace, and I 
think that we lack that element here in this whole debate, that of good 
will.
  I hope that in the days ahead, not just for this body, a very special 
revered body in this country, but for the people back home, that we 
reexamine and have good will and work toether and get the people's work 
done.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, in the spirit of good will, I yield 2 
minutes to the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. Everett], chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Compensation, Pension, Insurance and Memorial Affairs 
of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  (Mr. EVERETT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. EVERETT Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, our Nation's veterans deserve better treatment than they 
have received from this President. President Clinton alone bears 
responsibility for the Government shutdown, since he vetoed the 
Veterans Administration appropriations bill earlier this week. This is 
a good bill. It added $400 million above last year's VA health care 
budget and increased overall VA spending while most departments of 
government face cuts.
  Mr. Clinton had a choice to put veterans first. Instead, he put tree-
huggers first. In his statement today, President Clinton spoke of 
protecting Medicare. He is going to leave saving Medicare to 
Republicans. Medicaid, education, and the environment. True to his 
principles, Mr. Clinton left out out Nation's veterans. He has lavished 
funding on his priorities, the paid volunteer AmeriCorps boondoggle, a 
Bosnian occupation, jet-setting Cabinet members, and a host of failed 
liberal social programs.
  But, sadly, the President has chosen to play politics with our 
Nation's veterans and to jeopardize the balanced budget which benefits 
our Nation and all Americans. Our bill corrects this. Rather than 
shortcutting our Nation's veterans as the President was willing to 
accept, this bill ensures that payment to some 3 million veterans and 
their dependents will continue to be made on schedule.
  Despite the utter lack of this President's leadership, Congress will 
look out for those who have worn our Nation's uniform. Though this 
President has avoided the tough choices required in restoring fiscal 
sanity needed to support our veterans, we will ensure their protection. 
I urge adoption of this legislation.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Klink].

                              {time}  2115

  Mr. KLINK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  I was in the district of the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. 
Mascara], my colleague, a couple of months ago. We were traveling with 
some hospital administrators in our area who were telling senior 
citizens the impact in a nonpartisan way. Many of them were 
Republicans. They were telling the senior citizens about the impact of 
the Republican cuts in Medicare and Medicaid on their hospitals. They 
were telling them in their own words. We did not coach them.
  At the end of it this exsteelworker looked up at me with a big broad 
smile that turned into a very sad face, and he actually started to cry. 
And I said, What is the matter? He said, You know, I have never asked 
this country for much of anything. I laid in the snow and I laid in the 
mud and the rain for 5 years in Europe. I was not wounded. I was one of 
the the fortunate ones. I never asked this country for anything except 
keep its promise to me. Give me Medicare and Medicaid, if I need it. Do 
not make my children have to give up educating my grandchildren because 
they have to pick up the bill because we no longer prohibit that sort 
of thing to occur.
  He was very sad. So I am glad that we are taking care of the veterans 
with this rifle shot CR. But there are so many things that we are doing 
that is hurting those same veterans. We are balancing the budget on 
their backs and they are being asked to fight again.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Oregon [Mr. Cooley], a member of the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs.
  Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in favor of House Joint 
Resolution 134--a bill to ensure that our Nation's veterans receive 
their compensation checks during this shutdown.
  I am firmly committed to balancing our Nation's budget, but our 
veterans are innocent victims of this shutdown.
  Those who have risked their lives and liberty in service of this 
Nation--those who depend on the monthly benefits that our Federal 
Government has contracted to give them--should not be cut off at any 
time.
  For all of us, this should be an easy vote. It would be immoral to 
turn our backs on our veterans.
  That said--I must say one thing. Let there be no mistake about it.
  This budget fight might be ugly--but the Republicans in Congress are 
waging this fight to preserve the strength and integrity of this 
Nation.
  As a veteran myself, I cannot sit back and watch our Nation become 
weaker--racking up trillions of dollars in debt.
  I hope and believe that other veterans throughout this great Nation 
agree with me.
  Congress must--for once--exercise some fiscal discipline.
  Meanwhile, we will provide for those who have served this Nation.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on the bill.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters].
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, as a ranking member of the Subcommittee on 
Education, Training, Employment, and Housing of the Committee on 
Veterans' Affairs, I am ashamed to hear the staging and profiling by 
too many of my Republican friends on the other side of the aisle 
proclaiming their love for our veterans.
  Where were they when the President needed them for resources for 
hospitals and medical care? He had to veto the VA-HUD bill and in his 
message he told them why he was doing it. They refused to support him 
for hospital resources for veterans.
  Besides that, where were they when the Republican-appointed Clerk 
just fired a veteran of 23 years who helped to install the electronic 
voting system for this House? A veteran who served in Vietnam, who was 
fired without cause, they just kicked him out before Christmas without 
cause. They just let go a 

[[Page H15300]]
veteran who served in Vietnam and told him they did not care about him 
or his family.
  With friends like you, the veterans do not need any enemies.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, wondering whether the preceding speaker 
voted for the defense appropriations bill, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Hayworth], a distinguished member of the 
Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Committee on 
Appropriations for yielding time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to endorse fully the remarks made in a 
bipartisan fashion by the gentleman from Missouri and the gentleman 
from Indiana. I, too, yearn for a return to civility, which is why I 
listened with great interest when my friend, the ranking member on the 
Committee on Appropriations, chose to attack me personally.
  Mr. Speaker, I think it must be forgiven when a web of fiction is so 
intricately weaved and pronounced here on the floor of this House that 
quite often it is my natural reaction to chuckle. If a smile or a 
chuckle at the absurdity is inappropriate, well, then I suppose I am 
guilty of having a sense of humor, but a sense of humor born of the 
fact that we have to laugh to keep from crying. Because once again, 
Members of the minority get up with a straight face and they ignore 
reality.
  The President of the United States vetoed veterans appropriations 
that were genuine increases in spending, $400 million over last year, 
fact. And the fact is that this new majority, working in concert with 
responsible Members of the minority, will pass this overwhelmingly. I 
dare say that was the one remark given by the ranking member of the 
Committee on Appropriations that I can agree with. This legislation 
will pass overwhelmingly because it is the right thing to do.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], former chairman of this committee, 
who would like to speak to the issue of veterans benefits.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I would simply comment on the comments of the 
previous speaker who addressed himself to something I said on the 
floor.
  I would simply note, I have observed him on three occasions this week 
sitting in the front row of the Chamber and loudly laughing at whoever 
it was who was speaking at the moment, disrupting their ability to 
speak. I think the House deserves better conduct than that from any 
Member.
  I would also make the point, if we want to talk about fiction, I 
would make the point that it was solid fact when we stated earlier in 
the day, and when I stated in that same statement, that the bill for 
veterans funding, for veterans health care was $213 million below the 
amount that the bill was when it left the House.
  That conference report contained a billion and a half dollars more in 
total funding, and yet they managed to cut the veterans funding by $213 
million.
  The gentleman may feel that that is an adequate level of funding. 
That is his prerogative. I happen to honestly disagree. It would be 
nice if we could honestly disagree without constantly demonstrating 
physical disrespect for each other.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Arizona [Mr. Hayworth].
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, good people can disagree. Good people can 
disagree about a great many subjects. But when repeated fiction is 
stated on the floor of this House, it is sad.
  Once again, the ranking member has chosen to personally attack this 
Member of the Congress. I just simply want to say that it is shameful 
that these people would rather engage in shenanigans than to confront 
the problems we have today.
  Once again, I reach out my hand to the minority side and indeed to 
the gentleman at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. Let us reason 
together and solve America's problems.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Murtha], a senior member of the 
Committee on Appropriations, former chairman of the Subcommittee on 
National Security.
  Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Speaker, one of the things I wanted to point out to 
the Members that I think is so important in the recommittal motion that 
we had, and this may not be the right time and I know the Members that 
voted for the authorization feel that they have taken care of the two 
problems that we have in this recommittal motion, but in this 
recommittal motion we have language which will take care of the 
disparity in the COLA between the military retiree and the civilian 
retiree. We think that is important. We also have in this legislation 
to take care of the increase in pay for the military.
  Now, I know the President is going to veto the bill. I know it passed 
by a slight majority in the Senate. As I understand it, the majority 
leader on the other side may add this to their bill at some point, but 
I just want the Members to realize, this is something that has to be 
done by the first of the year. If we do not take care of it, if we do 
not put this type of language in one of our appropriations bills, if 
the authorization is vetoed, then it means that the members of the 
armed services would not get their first month's increase or whatever 
increase it was or the COLA disparity would continue.
  For 3 years the Subcommittee on National Security has taken care of 
the COLA disparity. We put the money in, even though it was forced on 
the authorization. So I would hope as the Members vote they think about 
this one particular provision in this recommittal. It is a very simple 
provision that takes care of those two things.
  As I say, since the authorization has not been vetoed at this point, 
my colleagues may feel that this is not the time to do it. but at some 
point we have to do this. I would hope that the majority would 
recognize this so we could get it done before the first of the year.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute and 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Georgia, [Mr. Collins].
  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, there is only one person who stands between a balanced 
budget in this town and that is the President of the United States 
because he vetoed the balanced budget. There is only one person that 
stands between those employees of the Commerce and Justice Department 
being at work, and that is the gentleman who vetoed that bill, the 
appropriations that would have paid their wages. That is the President 
of the United States.
  There is only one person that stands between the national parks being 
open and the people who work for the Department of Interior, and that 
is the gentleman who vetoed that appropriation bill, the President of 
the United States. There is only one person who stands between those 
who work for VA and HUD and besides there would have been a 2.4-percent 
increase for our military had this bill been approved, and that is the 
President of the United States, the man who vetoed the appropriation 
bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I was reading the other day in Reader's Digest a quote 
that I think fits this area, this time very well. It was by the late 
Harry Truman. He said, it is not the hand that signs the laws that 
holds the destiny of America; it is the hand that cast the ballot.
  I think that we could say the same here. It is not the hand that 
vetoes the laws that holds the destiny of America; it is the hand that 
casts the ballot.
  I urge support of this continuing resolution to fund the benefits of 
our veterans.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Brown].
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill.
  The untold story of the Gingrich budget process is that this Congress 
simply did not get its work done on time. Thirteen appropriations bills 
were supposed to be completed by October 1. Not one of them was signed 
by the President into law by that deadline.
  This Congress has been badly run, poorly administered, extreme and 
radical. That is why we now have this absurd Government shutdown.
  The other reason American taxpayers have had to bear this ridiculous 
Gingrich Government shutdown is that the Speaker personally threatened 
over and over and over to shut down the 

[[Page H15301]]
Government so he could have his way to have a massive shift of money 
and resources from the poor and from the middle class to give to the 
rich; Medicare cuts so we could have tax breaks for the rich; student 
loan cuts so we could have tax breaks for the largest corporations in 
this country; education and environmental cuts so we could have tax 
breaks for billionaires who renounce their citizenship.
  It is wrong, and the Gingrich Republicans know it is wrong.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica].
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I get confused. Is this the same President 
that went on TV tonight and said, after vetoing the VA appropriations 
bill, we are going to delay veterans benefits?

                              {time}  2130

  Is this the same President that I recall that cooked with the other 
side a bill to delay military COLA's for months and months and would 
permanently have to reinstate it? Is this the same President that 
proposes better benefits for a volunteer program, a new volunteer 
program, than he does for our veterans? Is this the same President--I 
keep getting confused--who proposes better benefits for welfare 
recipients than our veterans? My goodness, am I confused. Is this the 
same President who offers better and cooked with the other side better 
benefits for illegal aliens who wash up on the shore and have never 
served the country? Is this the same President who just a few weeks ago 
threatened to veto the appropriations bill until he was going to send 
our troops into Bosnia? I get confused. Is this the same President that 
my colleagues have said he, as a candidate, he was going to have a 
plan, and he would get elected, and he would have a plan to balance the 
budget in 5 years? I get confused. Is this the same President who 
called the 73 freshmen extremists, the businessmen and women, people 
who have worked for a honest living and come to this place to 
straighten up its messed-up finances?
  Now who do my colleagues believe? I am telling my colleagues that 
there are over 230 of us who are prepared to stay here until 
Washington, or whatever, freezes over, until we get a balanced budget 
and until we treat our veterans right.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee].
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Needless to say by the previous speaker's antics, 
Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues are mired in confusion for they 
believe that they have the moral high ground, and yet I find them 
someplace that we would not want to proceed.
  The American people know where the trouble is. They realize that the 
President of the United States stands with opportunity. They also 
realize that there was a Congress here some years ago, a Democratic 
Congress with two Republican Presidents, and they recognize that there 
was great dispute on the budget, and under Reagan there was no historic 
shutdown, under Bush there was no long, extended shutdown.
  So, Mr. Speaker, we realize that politics of Republicans is to bring 
the country to its knees. The people realize that the Democrats offered 
to increase the pay of those in Bosnia; the Republicans rejected it. 
They realize that we can have a clean continuing resolution, and the 
Republicans rejected it so that we cannot keep this Government open. 
They realize that disabled children will not have their benefits 
because of the Republicans.
  This is not about the President of the United States. This is about 
no moral leadership with the Republicans.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hoke].
  Mr. HOKE. Mr. Speaker, I was surprised to hear earlier the question 
from the other side, of the wonderment from the other side, that we 
would actually prioritize a particular rifle-shot continuing resolution 
for veterans, that we should not somehow be putting them at the top 
priority, and I just want to remind my friends on both sides of the 
aisle that, if there is one group that we ought to, for heaven's sakes, 
prioritize as being No. 1, that we should take care of without any 
question before, yes clearly before we take care of other groups in our 
society, those are veterans.
  Think about the veterans who have spilled blood and are now on a 
pension, and think about that veteran's widow, that veteran's children. 
Why on Earth would it come as a surprise, why would it even be an 
issue? Where would the question ever come from?
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOKE. I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I have a great deal of respect for the 
gentleman from Cleveland, but I would like to ask him the question, 
``If you truly want to serve the veterans of this country, would you 
vote with me to pass the VA-HUD-EPA bill with the amendments that we 
have been trying to offer in the committee?''
  Mr. HOKE. Reclaiming my time, I did vote for the VA-HUD 
appropriations bill that was passed in this House that was vetoed by 
the President of the United States 2 days ago. I vote for it proudly. 
We would not be here tonight, we would not be doing this tonight, had 
the President not vetoed that bill.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Would the gentleman yield further?
  Mr. HOKE. No. I will not yield, but I will yield at the end if I have 
time.
  Clearly what disturbs me is that there would be a question as to why 
we would be here this evening to prioritize the needs of the Nation's 
veterans. It seems to me absolutely and utterly appropriate that we 
would do that, and it is only a very mean-spirited, very extreme 
liberal agenda that would not put that first.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey].
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, there is absolutely nothing wrong with putting 
veterans at the head of a line. We ought to put all of the veterans at 
the head of the line. What is wrong with making available Government 
services so that new veterans who are entitled to housing benefits, who 
are entitled to disability benefits, who are entitled to pensions; why 
do we not handle this resolution tonight so they can also get the 
services they need in order to get the aid that they have a right to 
expect from their Government? Why are our colleagues shutting the 
Government down to them and only opening it to people who already have 
those benefits?
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi].
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, listening to this debate tonight reminded me 
of when I was a small child. In the Catholic school I attended there 
was a framed picture on the wall, and it said, ``Suffer little children 
and come unto me.'' I could not understand it. I asked by parents and 
teacher who would want children to suffer, and then it was explained to 
me that the third or fourth meaning of suffer was permit, allow, 
children to come unto me.
  Listening to our colleagues exclude children from this continuing 
resolution goes to the first meaning of suffer little children, to hear 
our colleagues come to the well and say that they have to have it this 
way, only the veterans.
  By the way, I agree that the question here tonight is not why should 
we be doing this for the veterans. Of course we should. The question 
really is why should we not be doing it for children and others as 
well? But to hear our colleagues come to the well and say they are 
doing this so their children do not have to pay interest on the 
national debt 20 years from now, some children do not have anything to 
eat 20 minutes from now.
  The message is very clear, Republican majority: Suffer, little 
children.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Goodlatte].
  (Mr. GOODLATTE asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. 
Livingston], the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, for 
yielding me the time, and I rise in strong support of this resolution 
to get payment to our Nation's veterans. They have sacrificed for our 
country, they have laid their lives on the line, and this is a very 
important continuing 

[[Page H15302]]
resolution, and those on the other side of the aisle who pointed out 
that there are a number of other things that need to be resolved, they 
are absolutely right as well. As a matter of fact, there are a number 
of things that should be taken care of, and we pointed out on our side 
that many of them would have been taken care of if the President had 
signed into law the veterans appropriations, the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development appropriations, the Commerce Department 
appropriations, and State Department appropriations, the Justice 
Department appropriations, the Interior Department appropriations. But 
this week he vetoed every single one of those appropriation measures 
and has effectively closed down all of those agencies except for 
essential personnel.
  Now the President of the United States has a constitutional right to 
veto every single one of those pieces of legislation, but he also has a 
moral obligation and an obligation based on the law he signed over 30 
days ago to balance the budget in 7 years using real numbers, to come 
forward with his itemized response to everything he does not like in 
each one of those appropriations bills, in each one of the entitlement 
measures we have in the country, so that we can sit down with him and 
negotiate. It is time to stop name calling, it is time to get down and 
negotiate, but we have got to have a reasonable, responsible approach 
to do that, and both parties laying their cards on the table, and 
everybody sitting down and getting serious about this is exactly what 
is needed, and I call upon everybody, including the President of the 
United States, to stop the press conferences and start negotiating.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Texas, Mr. Gene Green.
  (Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am glad to follow the last 
speaker, because I hope we would put our cards on the table, and if the 
other side would do it and say, OK, let us take that tax cut off the 
table, $245 billion, $200 billion, we would not have to be worried 
about keeping the checks going to our veterans or veterans' widows.
  I had the opportunity tonight to talk to a widow of a veteran. She 
said she could not pay for her food, she could not pay for her 
utilities unless her check is there, and I am glad we are at least 
dealing with that.
  The reason we are here though is because this bill, the VA-HUD bill, 
was rejected by this Congress I do not know how many times because of 
the 20-percent cut in HUD, cuts in veterans' programs, cuts in lots of 
programs, and that is why we are here tonight on a stopgap measure.
  I hope we pass this, but let us remember the reason we are here is 
because the majority could not pass these bills by October 1, not 
because the President vetoed it, because they could not pass them, and 
now they are having to take care of it on this. I would hope we would 
take care of our veterans, but I hope we would also be able to take 
care of those who need housing.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Kingston], a member of the Committee on 
Appropriations.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. 
Livingston] for yielding this time to me.
  As my colleagues know, I hear a lot of partisan finger pointing 
tonight, but this is not about Democrats, it is not about Republicans. 
It is about veterans. Do my colleagues want to help those who have 
helped us? Do my colleagues want to honor what they have done for us in 
the past?
  Samuel Johnson said we should always remember our forefathers and our 
future generations, but, more importantly, we should remember the 
sacrifices of the former on behalf of the latter, and that is what we 
are doing tonight. We are remembering our veterans.
  Now I would say to the gentlewoman from San Francisco, CA [Ms. 
Pelosi] we are not forgetting our children, we are certainly not 
forgetting the children. Our colleagues are going to give them a $5 
trillion debt when they are through with their left-wing spending 
policies. If a child is born today, he or she owes $187,000 as his or 
her part of interest on the national debt over a 75-year working period 
of time. That is $187,000 above and beyond local, State, and Federal 
taxes. I say to my colleague, ``Boy, you have not forgotten the 
children, I must say, and I tell you what. If that's your idea of 
compassion, that's your idea of caring, if that's your idea of a great 
Christmas present, fast forward me and my kids to ground-hog day.''
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Slaughter].
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in 
expressing my concern and dismay that we must be here tonight to debate 
this mini CR. As we all know, this work should have been completed 
months ago.
  As we work tonight to ensure that our veterans receive the benefit 
checks they so deserve, I cannot help thinking about the over 250,000 
federal employees who are sitting in their homes, wondering and 
worrying about their fate and wondering if we care.
  Christmas is 5 days away. Yet the radical new Majority refuses to 
find a way to solve this budget impasse, and insists on holding 
hardworking federal workers--and their families--hostage to their 
misguided and unfair budget priorities.
  Let us stop the nonsense. Let us open the entire government. And let 
us finish our work so Federal employees can do their work.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I only have one more speaker, so I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Moran].

                              {time}  2145

  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking Democrat on the Committee 
on Appropriations for yielding time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, let me explain why we have problems with this bill. It 
is certainly not that this bill provides benefits for veterans. The 
problem with this bill is that it is shortsighted and insufficient. If 
we do not pass a continuing resolution by December 22, this Friday, 13 
million welfare checks cannot be processed by the Department of Health 
and Human Services. Are we going to pass a specific continuing 
resolution for welfare checks? I think not. But they cannot be 
processed if we do not have a CR by December 22. If we do not have a 
continuing resolution by next Wednesday, $11 million in checks cannot 
be sent to the States by the Medicaid program. The States cannot 
function without that $11 billion in Medicaid programs.
  Between votes I checked my message machine. I just want to share with 
you a little message that was on it. It said: ``Please tell Congressman 
Moran that we veterans have been hungry before, we veterans have been 
cold before, but we veterans have never put our interests ahead of the 
country's interests before.'' He said: ``As far as I am concerned, I do 
not want my benefit check until women and children get their checks 
first.''
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, let me take this time to point out that the recommit 
motion that I will offer would simply do everything that the motion 
before us purports to do. Our motion would open up the government for 
all of the veterans services described in the motion before us. We 
would add to that all other services to be provided, that could be 
provided by the Veterans Department, so the Veterans Department is open 
for all programs, for servicing all programs. We would expand that to 
provide, in fact, a clean CR through January 26 for all other functions 
of government, and we would at the same time authorize the 2.4 percent 
military pay raise for our servicemen and eliminate the 6-month 
disparity between COLA payment dates for military and civilian 
retirees, so we can assure that our military personnel will in fact be 
treated fairly, and will in fact receive their full COLA.
  As we know, Mr. Speaker, the authorization bill is expected to be 
vetoed. Without this language, we can, therefore, not guarantee our 
troops going to Bosnia that they will have the full COLA. We think we 
ought to do 

[[Page H15303]]
that and, most fundamentally, we think we ought to open all of the 
services of government because the taxpayers have paid for those 
services and they are entitled to receive them.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we have heard a number of arguments on this joint 
resolution. I am not sure they were in opposition to it, because it 
appears that everybody is going to vote for this bill. Some of the 
arguments were, ``We are not doing enough.'' Well, if the President had 
not vetoed the last three appropriations bills we sent him, we would be 
doing a heck of a lot more than we have done so far. The fact is, as 
was said in the well, the President has vetoed the Justice Department 
appropriation, the Commerce Department appropriation, the State 
Department appropriation, the Interior Department appropriation, the 
VA-HUD appropriation, the Judiciary appropriation, and the NASA 
appropriation. He has vetoed all of those in the last week. All the 
people that work for those agencies could have gone back to work and 
been paid. All of the benefits that accrue under those bills could have 
gone into effect if the President simply signed these bills. And for 
all of those people who say they are concerned about children, for 
crying out loud, do not direct your concern at us. Tell those people, 
your counterparts in the other body that filibustering the Labor-Health 
and Human Services bill in the Senate. It has been there for five 
months. It is about time to move that bill.
  As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, it would be real nice if they would 
all of a sudden lift that filibuster, and we could dispose of it 
through a conference report, send it to the President, and maybe he 
might sign that bill and maybe he might not. Listening to his messages 
that we hear on television day after day about the Republicans being 
extremists, I get a little confused, as the gentleman from Florida 
earlier pointed out. Who is on first base here?
  It is about time he starts getting the message. The Republican 
message is we want a balanced budget in 7 years, 2002. That is the only 
message. The rest of it is just quibbling about details. But the 
President has said on various times, ``I am for a 5-year balanced 
budget, I am for a 10-year balanced budget, I am for a 9-year balanced 
budget, I am for an 8-year balanced budget, and yes, I am even for a 7-
year balanced budget, but not that 7-year balanced budget.'' He does 
not have any details. He has come to us, he has given us, one after 
another, budgets that were imbalanced year after year after year, and 
he has not come to the table and bargained in good faith to give us 
what we are asking for, a 7-year balanced budget.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill. It may not cover everything we 
want, but it is a start. It gives the veterans the benefit payments 
that they need, and hopefully, if the President comes to the table, we 
can take care of the rest of the unfunded activities as well.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this 
continuing resolution to make sure that veterans receive their checks 
on time at the end of this month. There is no doubt that this Congress 
is concerned about our veterans. It is clear that this continuing 
resolution is important and I will vote for it.
  However, I must say that there is no reason why we can't pass a 
continuing resolution to keep the rest of the Government operating.
  More than a quarter of a million Federal workers who have been 
furloughed are important, too. They have families. They have children. 
Federal workers matter.
  Any yet the Republicans in this Congress refuse to pass a continuing 
resolution to keep our Government open because they want to force the 
President to accept their extreme agenda.
  Mr. Speaker, we were sent to Congress to do the work of the people. 
We know what we need to do--pass a responsible budget that protects 
seniors, protects children, protects veterans, and sends our federal 
employees back to work.
  Mr. Speaker, let's stop the partisan fighting. Let's get our work 
done and let's give the American people the best Christmas presents 
they could ask for--a holiday they can spend with their families and a 
Government that can work together to solve this budget crisis.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of 
House Joint Resolution 134, legislation to ensure that veterans, 
dependents, and survivors will continue to receive their well-earned 
benefits during this Government shutdown.
  I would like to recognize the dedicated efforts of Tim Hutchinson, 
who has been a tireless advocate for veterans and has introduced 
legislation to ensure that veterans receive the compensation they 
deserve even when the Government is closed. I would also like to thank 
Chairman Stump and Ranking Member Montgomery for their tireless work on 
behalf of this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation should never have been necessary. This 
week, the President had an opportunity to sign the VA-HUD 
appropriations bill, which would have secured the funding for veterans 
benefits. Instead, he vetoed it. President Clinton also has the 
unilateral authority to order the delivery of veterans' benefits during 
a Government shutdown. But he has not used it. Because of the 
administration's insistence on playing partisan politics with veterans, 
the livelihood of 3.3 million veterans, dependents and survivors is in 
jeopardy.
  No one in this country has a greater claim to his Nation's Treasury 
than veterans who have been disabled as a result of service in the 
Armed Forces and the survivors of those who made the ultimate sacrifice 
and gave their lives in the defense of our Nation. Keeping faith with 
these heroes, their widows and their orpahns--whatever our Nation's 
fiscal circumstance--is as important as anything we do in Congress.
  We must do what we can to guarantee that these brave men and women, 
who answered the call to duty and were willing to put their lives on 
the line in defense of their country, will receive what they deserve. 
This bill does that.
  Our veterans deserve better than to be sacrificed at the altar of 
partisan politics. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill, 
which will put veterans ahead of politics.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of the bill, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). Pursuant to House Resolution 
317, the previous question is ordered on the joint resolution.
  The question is on engrossment and third reading of the joint 
resolution.
  The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 
time, and was read the third time.


                           motion to recommit

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, at the direction of the minority leader, I 
offer a motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the joint 
resolution?
  Mr. OBEY. At this point, in its present form, Mr. Speaker, I 
certainly am.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

  Mr. Obey moves to recommit the resolution to the Committee on 
Appropriations with instructions to report back forthwith with an 
amendment as follows:
       Strike all after the resolving clause and insert:

     SEC. 101. ENSURED PAYMENT DURING FISCAL YEAR 1996 OF 
                   VETERANS' BENEFITS IN EVENT OF LACK OF 
                   APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Payments Required.--In any case during fiscal year 1996 
     in which appropriations are not otherwise available for 
     programs, projects, and activities of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall 
     nevertheless ensure that--
       (1) payments of existing veterans benefits are made in 
     accordance with regular procedures and schedules and in 
     accordance with eligibility requirements for such benefits; 
     and
       (2) payments to contractors of the Veterans Health 
     Administration of the Department of Veterans Affairs are made 
     when due in the case of services provided that directly 
     relate to patient health and safety.
       (b) Funding.--There is hereby appropriated such sums as may 
     be necessary for the payments pursuant to subsection (a), 
     including such amounts as may be necessary for the costs of 
     administration of such payments.
       (c) Charging of Accounts When Appropriations Made.--In any 
     case in which the Secretary uses the authority of subsection 
     (a) to make payments, applicable accounts shall be charged 
     for amounts so paid, and for the costs of administration of 
     such payments, when regular appropriations become available 
     for those purposes.
       (d) Existing Benefits Specified.--For purposes of this 
     section, existing veterans benefits are benefits under laws 
     administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs that have 
     been adjudicated and authorized for payment as of--
       (1) December 15, 1995; or
       (2) if appropriations for such benefits are available 
     (other than pursuant to subsection (b)) after December 15, 
     1995, the last day on which appropriations for payment of 
     such benefits are available (other than pursuant to 
     subsection (b)).
     
[[Page H15304]]


     SEC. 102 FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 106(c) of Public Law 104-56 is amended by striking 
     ``December 15, 1995'' and inserting ``January 26, 1996''.

     SEC. 103. MILITARY PAY RAISE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996.

       (a) Waiver of Section 1009 Adjustment.--Any adjustment 
     required by section 1009 of title 37, United States Code, in 
     elements of compensation of members of the uniformed services 
     to become effective during fiscal year 1996 shall not be 
     made.
       (b) Increase in Basic Pay and BAS.--Effective on January 1, 
     1996, the rates of basic pay and basic allowance for 
     subsistence of members of the uniformed services are 
     increased by 2.4 percent.
       (c) Increase in BAQ.--Effective on January 1, 1996, the 
     rates of basic allowance for quarters of members of the 
     uniformed services are increased by 5.2 percent.

     SEC. 104 ELIMINATION OF DISPARITY BETWEEN EFFECTIVE DATES FOR 
                   MILITARY AND CIVILIAN RETIREE COST-OF-LIVING 
                   ADJUSTMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996.

       (a) In General.--The fiscal year 1996 increase in military 
     retired pay shall (notwithstanding subparagraph (B) of 
     section 1401a(b)(2) of title 10, United States Code) first be 
     payable as part of such retired pay for the month of March 
     1996.
       (b) Definitions.--For the purposes of subsection (a):
       (1) The term ``fiscal year 1996 increased in military 
     retired pay'' means the increase in retired pay that, 
     pursuant to paragraph (1) of section 1401a(b) of title 10, 
     United States Code, becomes effective on December 1, 1995.
       (2) The Term ``retired pay'' includes retainer pay.
       (c) Financing.--The Secretary of Defense shall transfer, 
     from any other funds made available to the Department of 
     Defense, such sums as may be necessary for payment to the 
     Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund solely for the 
     purpose of offsetting the estimated increase in outlays to be 
     made from such Fund in fiscal year 1996 by reason of the 
     provisions of subsection (a). Nothwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, the transfer authority made available to 
     the Secretary in Public Law 104-61 or any other law shall be 
     increased by the amounts required to carry out the provisions 
     of this section.

  Mr. OBEY (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that the motion be considered as read and printed in the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that I may be 
permitted to explain the amendment.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, if the 
gentleman would explain which motion to recommit he is talking about.
  Mr. OBEY. No. 1.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's motion.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. A point of order is reserved on the motion 
to recommit.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I think the purpose of this motion is quite 
clear. As I said earlier, this motion would incorporate the provisions 
of the Veterans Department which are included in the original 
legislation before us. We would open up the Government for those 
services, but we would add to that the following: We would add all 
remaining services to be provided by the Veterans Department.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I must insist on my point of order.
  Mr. OBEY. We would also add all other remaining functions of the 
Government which have been closed down up until now. We would also, as 
I said, guarantee that the military receive their 2.5 percent pay 
raise, and correct the differential that now exists between civilian 
pay and military pay, so that the military pay would be provided in the 
same terms and conditions as civilian pay.
  Mr. Speaker, I would urge the adoption of the motion to recommit.


                             point of order

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. 
Livingston] insist on his point of order?
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order against the 
motion to recommit with instructions because it is not germane to the 
underlying resolution, and as such in violation of clause 7 of rule 
XVI.
  Mr. Speaker, I quote from the Precedents of the House:
  ``It is not in order to do indirectly by a motion to commit with 
instructions what may not be done directly by way of amendment.''
  Mr. Speaker, a specific proposition cannot be amended by another 
proposition broader in scope. The motion to recommit deals with funding 
and authorizing activities outside the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
and therefore is not germane to the underlying resolution which deals 
only with funding for selected activities in this department.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman's motion to instruct is not germane, Mr. 
Speaker, and I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Obey, 
wish to be heard on the point of order?
  Mr. OBEY. Yes, I do, Mr. Speaker, I would simply say the purpose of 
the resolution before us this evening is to provide additional services 
to taxpayers. The purpose of my motion is to provide additional 
services to taxpayers. It simply expands the number of services 
available. It is the same taxpayers we are talking about, and I think 
they are entitled to a full range of services. I would therefore urge 
the Chair support the germaneness of the proposition.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is prepared to rule.
  The pending joint resolution continues the availability of 
appropriations for a specified fiscal period to fund certain activities 
of the Department of Veterans' Affairs.
  The amendment proposed in the motion to recommit offered by the 
gentleman from Wisconsin seeks to continue the availability of 
appropriations for a similar fiscal period to fund the activities of 
other departments and agencies for which regular appropriations for 
fiscal year 1996 have not yet been enacted.
  One of the important lines of precedent under clause 7 of rule 16--
the germaneness rule--holds that a proposition addressing a specific 
subject may not be amended by a proposition more general in nature.
  For example, the Chair held on September 27, 1967, that an amendment 
applicable to all departments and agencies was not germane to a bill 
limited in its applicability to certain departments and agencies of 
Government. That precedent is annotated in section 798f of the House 
Rules and Manual.
  The Chair notes another illustrative ruling that is recorded in the 
Deschler-Brown precedents of the House at volume 10, chapter 28, 
section 9.22. On that occasion in 1967 the House was considering a 
joint resolution continuing appropriations for a portion of a fiscal 
year. An amendment was offered to restrict total administrative 
expenditures for the fiscal year. Noting that the amendment affected 
funding beyond that continued by the joint resolution, the Chair 
sustained a point of order that the amendment was not germane.
  The amendment proposed in the motion to recommit offered by the 
gentleman from Wisconsin addresses funding not continued by the pending 
joint resolution. Where the joint resolution confines itself to funding 
within one department, the amendment ranges to at least six others. As 
such, the amendment is not germane.
  The point of order is sustained. The motion to recommit is ruled out 
of order.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I most respectfully and reluctantly appeal the 
ruling of the Chair.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is: ``shall the decision of the 
Chair stand as the judgment of the House?''


                    motion offered by mr. livingston

  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to lay the appeal on the table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston] to lay the appeal of the 
ruling of the Chair on the table.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             recorded vote

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 236, 
noes 176, not voting 21, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 872]

                               AYES--236

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     
[[Page H15305]]

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

                               NOES--176

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

                             NOT VOTING--21

     Beilenson
     Berman
     Chapman
     Conyers
     Edwards
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Gilchrest
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Lantos
     Myers
     Payne (VA)
     Rose
     Skaggs
     Stark
     Weldon (PA)
     Williams
     Wilson
     Yates

                              {time}  2217

  Miss COLLINS of Michigan changed her vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the motion to table the appeal of the ruling of the Chair was 
agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.


                 Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Obey

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, at the direction of the minority leader, I 
offer a motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). Is the gentleman opposed to the 
joint resolution?
  Mr. OBEY. In its present form, yes, I am, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Obey moves to recommit the resolution to the Committee 
     on Appropriations with instructions to report back forthwith 
     with an amendment as follows:
  Strike all after the resolving clause and insert:

     Sec. 101. ENSURED PAYMENT DURING FISCAL YEAR 1996 OF 
                   VETERANS' BENEFITS IN EVENT OF LACK OF 
                   APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Payments Required.--In any case during fiscal year 1996 
     in which appropriations are not otherwise available for 
     programs, projects, and activities of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall 
     nevertheless ensure that--
       (1) payments of existing veterans benefits are made in 
     accordance with regular procedures and schedules and in 
     accordance with eligibility requirements for such benefits; 
     and
       (2) payments to contractors of the Veterans Health 
     Administration of the Department of Veterans Affairs are made 
     when due in the case of services provided that directly 
     relate to patient health and safety.
       (b) Funding.--There is hereby appropriated such sums as may 
     be necessary for the payments pursuant to subsection (a), 
     including such amounts as may be necessary for the costs of 
     administration of such payments.
       (c) Charging of Accounts When Appropriations Made.--In any 
     case in which the Secretary uses the authority of subsection 
     (a) to make payments, applicable accounts shall be charged 
     for amounts so paid, and for the costs of administration 
     of such payments, when regular appropriations become 
     available for those purposes.
       (d) Existing Benefits Specified.--For purposes of this 
     section, existing veterans benefits are benefits under laws 
     administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs that have 
     been adjudicated and authorized for payment as of--
       (1) December 15, 1995; or
       (2) if appropriations for such benefits are available 
     (other than pursuant to subsection (b)) after December 15, 
     1995, the last day on which appropriations for payment of 
     such benefits are available (other than pursuant to 
     subsection (b)).

     SECTION 201. PAY FOR FEDERAL AND DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
                   EMPLOYEES DURING LAPSE IN APPROPRIATIONS FOR 
                   FISCAL YEAR 1996.

       (a) Provisions Relating to Those Who Are Permitted or 
     Required to Serve.--Any officer or employee of the United 
     States Government or of the District of Columbia government 
     who is permitted or required to serve during any period in 
     which there is a lapse in appropriations with respect to the 
     agency in or under which such officer or employee is employed 
     shall be compensated at the standard rate of compensation for 
     such officer or employee for such period.
       (b) Provisions Relating to Those Who Have Been 
     Furloughed.--
       (1) In general.--Any officer or employee of the United 
     States Government or of the District of Columbia government 
     who is furloughed for any period as a result of a lapse in 
     appropriations shall not be entitled to basic pay with 
     respect to any portion of such period, except as provided in 
     paragraph (2)
       (2) Exception.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     any officer or employee referred to in paragraph (1) who is 
     willing and able to serve during the period of the lapse in 
     appropriations--
       (A) shall be permitted to serve; and
       (B) shall be compensated for any such service in accordance 
     with subsection (a).
       (c) Definition.--For the purpose of this section, the term 
     ``agency'' includes any employing entity of the United States 
     Government or of the District of Columbia government.
       (d) Applicability.--This section shall apply with respect 
     to any lapse in appropriations for fiscal year 1996 occurring 
     after December 15, 1995.
  Mr. OBEY (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that the motion to recommit be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order but reserve that 
point of order if the gentleman will make a brief explanation.

[[Page H15306]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Louisiana reserves a 
point of order.
  The gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] will be recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I will not take the 5 minutes I will only take 
1.
  Mr. Speaker, as it now stands, government workers cannot volunteer to 
come in to work during the shutdown, but the Speaker has announced 
tonight that they will nonetheless be paid. What this motion would 
simply do, at the suggestion of the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. 
Moran], is that we simply say that since workers will be paid, the 
ought to be allowed to come in and work if they want to. That is in 
essence all this does.
  Mr. Speaker, let me simply, in asking for a ruling from the Chair, 
indicate that I think on both sides of the aisle we recognize that you 
have tried to do an extremely fair job tonight, and we congratulate you 
for it.


                             point of order

  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I echo the gentleman's remarks about the 
way the Speaker has maintained order throughout this debate.
  Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order against the motion to recommit 
with instructions because it is not germane to the underlying 
resolution, and as such is in violation of clause 7, of Rule XVI.
  Mr. Speaker, I quote from the Precedents of the House:

       It is not in order to do indirectly by a motion to commit 
     with instructions what may not be done directly by way of 
     amendment.

  Mr. Speaker, a specific proposition can not be amended by another 
proposition broader in scope. The motion to recommit deals with funding 
and authorizing activities outside the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
and therefore is not germane to the underlying resolution which deals 
only with funding for selected activities in this department.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman's motion to instruct is not germane, and I 
ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Wisconsin desire to 
be heard on the point of order?
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I would simply say that the purpose of this 
resolution tonight is to open certain functions of the veterans 
Department so that the public can receive the benefit of the services 
from that department.
  We are simply saying that since it has already been announced that 
government workers will be paid afterwards, whether they work or not, 
that we think they ought to be allowed to work, and I will leave the 
ruling in the hands of the Chair.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Using the same reasoning as in the case of 
the previous point of order, the Chair finds that the amendment 
proposed in this second motion to recommit exceeds the relatively 
narrow ambit of the joint resolution by addressing the compensation of 
Federal employees on government-wide bases. Accordingly, the point of 
order is sustained, and the motion to recommit is ruled out of order.


                 Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Obey

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, at the direction of the minority leader, I 
offer a third motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman remains opposed to the joint 
resolution?
  Mr. OBEY. I do, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Obey moves to recommit the resolution to the Committee 
     on Appropriations with instructions to report back forthwith 
     with an amendment as follows:
       Strike all after the resolving clause and insert:

     SEC. 101. ENSURED PAYMENT DURING FISCAL YEAR 1996 OF 
                   VETERANS' BENEFITS IN EVENT OF LACK OF 
                   APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Payments Required.--In any case during fiscal year 1996 
     in which appropriations are not otherwise available for 
     programs, projects, and activities of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall 
     nevertheless ensure that--
       (1) payments of existing veterans benefits are made in 
     accordance with regular procedures and schedules and in 
     accordance with eligibility requirements for such benefits; 
     and
       (2) payments to contractors of the Veterans Health 
     Administration of the Department of Veterans Affairs are made 
     when due in the case of services provided that directly 
     relate to patient health and safety.
       ``(3) all other authorized activities of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs including processing of existing and new 
     applications for benefits and pensions, processing of 
     certificates of eligibility for homeownership loans and loan 
     guarantees, and payment of salaries of federal government 
     personnel providing health care for our nation's veterans, 
     are continued at a rate for operations not to exceed the rate 
     in existence on December 15, 1995.
       (b) Funding.--There is hereby appropriated such sums as may 
     be necessary for the payments pursuant to subsection (a), 
     including such amounts as may be necessary for the costs of 
     administration of such payments.
       (c) Charging of Accounts When Appropriations Made.--In any 
     case in which the Secretary uses the authority of subsection 
     (a) to make payments, applicable accounts shall be charged 
     for amounts so paid, and for the costs of administration of 
     such payments, when regular appropriations become available 
     for those purposes.
       (d) Existing Benefits Specified.--For purposes of this 
     section, existing veterans benefits are benefits under laws 
     administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs that have 
     been adjudicated and authorized for payment as of--
       (1) December 15, 1995; or
       (2) if appropriations for such benefits are available 
     (other than pursuant to subsection (b)) after December 15, 
     1995, the last day on which appropriations for payment for 
     such benefits are available (other than pursuant to 
     subsection (b)).

  Mr. OBEY (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that the motion to recommit be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, this amendment is very simple. The proposition 
now before the House allows the Veterans Department to open for the 
purpose of payments of existing veterans' benefits and to provide 
payments to contractors of the Veterans Health Administration of the 
Department of Veterans Affairs when due in the case of services, 
provided that those services directly relate to patient health and 
safety.
  All we would do is add the following language. We would add language 
saying that the Veterans Department would also be open for all other 
authorized activities of the Department of Veterans Affairs, including 
the processing of existing and new applications for benefits and 
pensions, processing of certificates of eligibility for home ownership 
loans and loan guarantees, and payment of salaries of Federal 
Government personnel providing health care for our Nation's veterans.
  And that they would be continued at a rate for operations not to 
exceed the rate in existence on December 15, 1995.
  That is all it does. It simply says if you are going to open up the 
Veterans Department, open it up to everyone.
  I would urge the Members of the majority, in the interest of comity, 
in the interest of rationality, to accept this amendment.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Louisiana [Mr. Livingston] for 5 minutes.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I am compelled to oppose this motion, 
and I ask that it be defeated. We have made a good-faith effort to 
address the specific veterans' problems that were included in this 
bill, so that they can get their checks next week. We should pass this 
bill.
  We want to work with all parties, the White House, the minority, and 
various members of our committee to take care of the balance of the 
other concerns down the line. But let us defeat this motion, let us 
pass the bill, let us conclude our business and let us go home for the 
night.
  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.


                             recorded vote

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 178, 
noes 234, not voting 21, as follows:

[[Page H15307]]


                             [Roll No. 873]

                               AYES--178

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

                               NOES--234

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

                             NOT VOTING--21

     Beilenson
     Chapman
     Conyers
     Edwards
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Gilchrest
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Lantos
     Myers
     Olver
     Payne (VA)
     Rose
     Skaggs
     Stark
     Weldon (PA)
     Williams
     Wilson
     Yates

                              {time}  2242

  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on the passage 
of the joint resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. 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 411, 
nays 1, not voting 21, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 874]

                               YEAS--411

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allard
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bryant (TX)
     Bunn
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clinger
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Coleman
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooley
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Durbin
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Frost
     Funderburk
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Johnston
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Lincoln
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Longley
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McDermott
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Meyers
     Mfume
     Mica
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Moran
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Parker
     Pastor
     Paxon
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reed
     Regula
     Richardson
     Riggs
     Rivers
     Roberts
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     
[[Page H15308]]

     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stockman
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stump
     Stupak
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Tejeda
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Traficant
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Waldholtz
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                                NAYS--1

       
     Obey
       

                             NOT VOTING--21

     Beilenson
     Chapman
     Conyers
     Edwards
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Lantos
     Myers
     Payne (VA)
     Rose
     Skaggs
     Stark
     Weldon (PA)
     Williams
     Wilson
     Yates

                              {time}  2258

  So the joint resolution was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________