Congressional Record, Volume 142 Issue 10 (Thursday, January 25, 1996)

[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 10 (Thursday, January 25, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H882-H900]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

THE BALANCED BUDGET DOWNPAYMENT ACT, I

Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the previous order of the
House, I call up the bill (H.R. 2880) making appropriations for fiscal
year 1996 to make a downpayment toward a balanced budget, and for other
purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

[[Page H883]]

The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of H.R. 2880 is as follows:

H.R. 2880

Be it enacted 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:

TITLE I

Sec. 101. (a) Such amounts as may be necessary under the
authority and conditions provided in the applicable
appropriations Act for the fiscal year 1995 including the
authority and conditions provided in emergency supplemental
appropriations Acts for fiscal year 1995 for continuing
projects or activities, except for those projects and
activities provided for in Public Law 104-91 and Public Law
104-92, including the costs of direct loans and loan
guarantees (not otherwise specifically provided for in this
Act) which were conducted in the fiscal year 1995 and for
which appropriations, funds, or other authority would be
available in the following appropriations Act as passed each
House, excluding conference reports:
The Department of the Interior and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 1996; and
The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996:
Provided, That whenever the amount which would be made
available or the authority which would be granted in these
Acts is greater than that which would be available or granted
under current operations, the pertinent project or activities
shall be continued at a rate for operations not exceeding the
current rate.
(b) Whenever the amount which would be made available or
the authority which would be granted under an Act listed in
this section as passed by the House as of the date of
enactment of this Act, is different from that which would be
available or granted under such Act as passed by the Senate
as of the date of enactment of this Act, the pertinent
project or activity shall be continued at a rate for
operations not exceeding the current rate or the rate
permitted by the action of the House or the Senate, whichever
is lower, under the authority and conditions provided in the
applicable appropriations Act for the fiscal year 1995:
Provided, That where an item is not included in either
version or where an item is included in only one version of
the Act as passed by the House as of the date of enactment of
this Act, the pertinent project or activity shall not be
continued except as provided for in section 111 under the
appropriation, fund, or authority granted by the applicable
appropriations Act for the fiscal year 1995 and under the
authority and conditions provided in the applicable
appropriations Act for the fiscal year 1995.
(c) Whenever an Act listed in this section has been passed
by only the House or only the Senate as of the date of
enactment of this Act, the pertinent project or activity
shall be continued under the appropriation, fund,
or authority granted by the one House at a rate for
operations not exceeding the current rate or the rate
permitted by the action of the one House, whichever is
lower, and under the authority and conditions provided in
the applicable appropriations Act for the fiscal year
1995: Provided, That where an item is funded in the
applicable appropriations Act for the fiscal year 1995 and
not included in the version passed by the one House as of
the date of enactment of this Act, the pertinent project
or activity shall not be continued except as provided for
in section 111 under the appropriation, fund, or authority
granted by the applicable appropriations Act for the
fiscal year 1995 and under the authority and conditions
provided in the applicable appropriations Act for the
fiscal year 1995.
Sec. 102. Appropriations made by section 101 shall be
available to the extent and in the manner which would be
provided by the pertinent appropriations Act.
Sec. 103. No appropriations or funds made available or
authority granted pursuant to section 101 shall be used to
initiate or resume any project or activity for which
appropriations, funds, or other authority were not available
during the fiscal year 1995.
Sec. 104. No provision which is included in an
appropriations Act enactment in section 101 but which was not
included in the applicable appropriations Act for fiscal year
1995 and which by its terms is applicable to more than one
appropriation, fund, or authority shall be applicable to any
appropriation, fund, or authority provided in this title of
this Act.
Sec. 105. Appropriations made and authority granted
pursuant to this title of this Act shall cover all
obligations or expenditures incurred for any program,
project, or activity during the period of which funds or
authority for such project or activity are available under
this Act.
Sec. 106. Unless otherwise provided for in this title of
this Act or in the applicable appropriations Act,
appropriations and funds made available and authority granted
pursuant to this title of this Act shall be available until
(a) enactment into law of an appropriation for any project or
activity provided for in this title of this Act, or (b) the
enactment into law of the applicable appropriations Act
without any provision for such project or activity, or (c)
March 15, 1996, whichever first occurs.
Sec. 107. This title of this Act shall be implemented so
that only the most limited funding action of that permitted
in this title of this Act shall be taken in order to provide
for continuation of projects and activities.
Sec. 108. Expenditures made pursuant to this title of this
Act shall be charged to the applicable appropriation, fund,
or authorization whenever a bill in which such applicable
appropriation, fund, or authorization is contained is enacted
into law.
Sec. 109. No provision in the appropriations Act for the
fiscal year 1996 referred to in section 101 of this Act that
makes the availability of any appropriation provided therein
dependent upon the enactment of additional authorizing or
other legislation shall be effective before the date set
forth in section 106(c) of this Act.
Sec. 110. Appropriations and funds made available by or
authority granted pursuant to this title of this Act may be
used without regard to the time limitations for submission
and approval of apportionments set forth in section 1513 of
title 31, United States Code, but nothing herein shall be
construed to waive any other provision of law governing the
apportionment of funds.
Sec. 111. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act, except section 106, whenever an Act listed in
section 101 as passed by both the House and the Senate as of
the date of enactment of this Act, does not include funding
for an ongoing project or activity for which there is a
budget request, or whenever an Act listed in section 101 has
been passed by only the House or only the Senate as of the
date of enactment of this Act, and an item funded in fiscal
year 1995 is not included in the version passed by the one
House, or whenever the rate for operations for an ongoing
project or activity provided by section 101 for which
there is a budget request would result in the project or
activity being significantly reduced, the pertinent
project or activity may be continued under the authority
and conditions provided in the applicable appropriations
Act for the fiscal year 1995 by increasing the rate for
operations provided by section 101 to a rate for
operations not to exceed one that provides the minimal
level that would enable existing activities to continue.
No new contracts or grants shall be awarded in excess of
an amount that bears the same ratio to the rate for
operations provided by this section as the number of days
covered by this title of this Act bears to 366. For the
purposes of this title of this Act, the minimal level
means a rate for operations that is reduced from the
current rate by 25 percent.
Sec. 112. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act, except section 106, whenever the rate for
operations for any continuing project or activity provided by
section 101 or section 111 for which there is a budget
request would result in a furlough of Government employees,
the rate for operations may be increased to the minimum level
that would enable the furlough to be avoided. No new
contracts or grants shall be awarded in excess of an amount
that bears the same ratio to the rate for operations provided
by this section as the number of days covered by this
resolution bears to 366.
Provided, That the first sentence of section 112 shall not
apply except to furloughs that exceed one workday per pay
period for the affected workforce during the period of
January 26, 1996 through March 15, 1996.
Sec. 113. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act, except sections 106 and 111, for those programs
that had high initial rates of operations or complete
distribution of funding at the beginning of the fiscal year
in fiscal year 1995 because of distributions of funding to
States, foreign countries, grantees, or others, similar
distributions of funds for fiscal year 1996 shall not be made
and no grants shall be awarded for such programs funded by
this title of this Act that would impinge on final funding
prerogatives.
Sec. 114. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act, except section 106, any distribution of funding
under the Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research
account in the Department of Education may be made up to an
amount that bears the same ratio to the rate for operation
for this account provided by this title of this Act as the
number of days covered by this title of this Act bears to
366.
Sec. 115. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act,
except section 106, the rate for operations of the following
projects or activities shall be only the minimum necessary to
accomplish orderly termination:
Child Development Associate Scholarships in the Department
of Health and Human Services;
Dependend Care Planning and Development in the Department
of Health and Human Services;
Law Related Education in the Department of Education;
Dropout Prevention Demonstrations in the Department of
Education;
Aid for Institutional Development--Endowment Grants in the
Department of Education;
Aid for Institutional Development--Evaluation in the
Department of Education;
Native Hawaiian and Alaska Native Cultural Arts;
Innovative Projects in Community Service in the Department
of Education;
Cooperative Education in the Department of Education; and

[[Page H884]]

Douglas Teacher Scholarships in the Department of
Education.
Sec. 116. Compensation and Ratification of Authority.--(a)
Any Federal employees furloughed as a result of a lapse in
appropriations, if any, after midnight November 13, 1995,
until the enactment of this Act shall be compensated at their
standard rate of compensation for the period during which
there was a lapse in appropriations.
All obligations incurred in anticipation of the
appropriations made and the authority granted by this title
of this Act for the purposes of maintaining the essential
level of activity to protect life and property and bring
about orderly termination of Government functions are hereby
ratified and approved if otherwise in accord with the
provisions of this title of this Act.
Sec. 117. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act, except section 106, upon enactment of this Act
any new grants or contracts for the following programs shall
be made at a level act to exceed a rate of 75 percentum of
prior monthly awards:

department of health and human services

Health Resources and Services Administration:
Health Resources and Services: Trauma Care; Health Care
Facilities.
Assistant Secretary for Health:
Offic of the Assistant Secretary for Health: National
Vaccine Program; Health Care Reform Data Analysis; National
AIDS Program Office.
Health Care Financing Administration:
Program Management: Essential Access Community Hospitals.
Administration for Children and Families:
Children and Families Services Program: Youth Gang
Substance Abuse; Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect;
Child Welfare Research; Social Services Research; Homeless
Service Grants; Community Schools (crime trust fund).
Administration on Aging:
Aging Services Programs: Pension Counseling; Federal
Council on Aging; White House Conference on Aging.

Department of Education

Education for the Disadvantaged: State School Improvement.
School Improvement Programs: Safe and Drug Free Schools and
Communities: National Program; Women's Educational Equity.
Bilingual and Immigrant Education: Bilingual Education
Support Services.
Higher Education: Faculty Development Fellowships; School,
College, and University Partnerships.

Related Agencies

Corporation for National and Community Service: Domestic
Volunteer Service Programs, Operating Expenses: Senior
Demonstration Program.
National Education Standards and Improvement Council.
Sec. 118. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or
this Act, upon enactment of this Act the Secretary of each
cabinet level department other than State, Defense,
Ambassador to the United Nations, and Central Intelligence
shall not obligate a total amount of funds for their
individual official travel expenses for fiscal year 1996 that
would be greater than 110 per centum of the average total
amount of the individual official travel expenses of the
relevant departmental secretary for the fiscal years 1990
through 1995.
Sec. 119. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of
this title of this Act, the maximum Pell Grant for which a
student shall be eligible under the Higher Education Act of
1965, as amended, during award year 1996-1997 shall be at
least $2,440.
Sec. 120. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
first proviso under the heading ``Education for the
disadvantaged'' in title III of H.R. 2127, as passed by the
House of Representatives, shall take effect upon enactment of
this Act.
Sec. 121. 501 First Street SE., District of Columbia.
(a) Disposal of Real Property.--
(1) In general.--The Architect of the Capitol shall dispose
of by sale at fair market value all right, title, and
interest of the United States in and to the parcel of real
property described in paragraph (9), including all
improvements to such real property. Such disposal shall be
made by quitclaim deed.
(2) House office building commission.--The Architect of the
Capitol shall carry out this section under the direction of
the House Office Building Commission.
(3) Procedures.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the disposal under paragraph (1) shall be made in
accordance with such procedures as the Architect of the
Capitol determines appropriate.
(4) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the child care center of the House of Representatives should
remain in operation during the implementation of this
section.
(5) Terms and conditions.--The deed of conveyance for the
property to be disposed of under paragraph (1) shall contain
such terms and conditions as the Architect of the Capitol
determines are necessary to protect the interests of the
United States.
(6) Deposit of proceeds.--All proceeds from the disposal
under paragraph (1) shall be deposited in the account
established by subsection (b).
(7) Advertising and marketing.--The Architect of the
Capitol shall begin advertising and marketing the property to
be disposed of under paragraph (1) not later than 30 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(8) Local zoning and occupancy requirements.--Until such
date as the purchaser of the property to be disposed of under
paragraph (1) takes full occupancy of such property, such
property and the tenants of such property shall be deemed to
be in compliance with all applicable zoning and occupancy
requirements of the District of Columbia.
(9) Property description.--The parcel of real property
referred to in paragraph (1) is the approximately 31,725
square feet of land located at 501 First Street, SE., on
square 736 S, Lot 801 (formerly part of Reservation 17) in
the District of Columbia. Such parcel is bounded by E Street,
SE., to the north, First Street, SE., to the east, New Jersey
Avenue, SE., to the west, and Garfield Park to the south.
(b) Separate Account in the Treasury.--
(1) Establishment.--There is established in the Treasury of
the United States a separate account which shall consist of
amounts deposited into the account by the Architect of the
Capitol under subsection (a).
(2) Availability of funds.--Funds in the account
established by paragraph (1) shall be available, in such
amounts as are specified in appropriations Acts, to the
Architect of the Capitol for--
(A) payment of expenses associated with relocating the
tenants of the property to be disposed of under subsection
(a)(1);
(B) payment of expenses associated with renovating
facilities under the jurisdiction of the Architect for the
purpose of accommodating such tenants; and
(C) reimbursement of expenses incurred for advertising and
marketing activities related to the disposal under subsection
(a)(1) in a total amount of not to exceed $75,000.

Funds made available under this paragraph shall not be
subject to any fiscal year limitation.
(3) Reporting of transactions.--Receipts, obligations, and
expenditures of funds in the account established by paragraph
(1) shall be reported in annual estimates submitted to
Congress by the Architect of the Capitol for the operation
and maintenance of the Capitol Buildings and Grounds.
(4) Termination of account.--Not later than 2 years after
the date of settlement on the property to be disposed of
under subsection (a)(1), the Architect of the Capitol
shall terminate the account established by paragraph (1)
and all amounts remaining in the account shall be
deposited into the general fund of the Treasury of the
United States and credited as miscellaneous receipts.
(c) Authority To Furnish Steam and Chilled Water.--
(1) In general.--The Architect of the Capitol is authorized
to furnish steam and chilled water from the Capitol Power
Plant to the owner of the property to be disposed of under
subsection (a)(1) if the owner agrees to pay for such steam
and chilled water at market rates, as determined by the
Architect of the Capitol.
(2) Authority limited to existing facilities.--The
Architect of the Capitol may furnish steam and chilled water
under paragraph (1) only with respect to facilities which, on
the date of the enactment of this Act, are located on the
property to be disposed of under subsection (a)(1).
(3) Proceeds.--All proceeds from the sale of steam and
chilled water under paragraph (1) shall be deposited into the
general fund of the Treasury of the United States and
credited as miscellaneous receipts.
Sec. 122. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act except section 106, such sums as necessary are
hereby appropriated for all projects and activities funded
under the account heading ``Office for Civil Rights'' under
the Office of the Secretary in the Department of Health and
Human Services at a rate for operations not to exceed an
annual rate for new obligational authority of $16,153,000 for
general funds together with not to exceed an annual rate for
new obligational authority of $3,314,000 to be transferred
and expended as authorized by section 201(g)(1) of the Social
Security Act from the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund and the
Supplemental Medical Insurance Trust Fund.
Sec. 123. Activities necessary to effect the following
program eliminations and transfers of selected functions are
funded under the terms and conditions and at a rate of
operations, notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act, provided for in the conference report and joint
explanatory statement of the Committee of Conference (House
Report 104-402) on the Department of the Interior and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996 (H.R. 1977), as passed by
the House of Representatives on December 13, 1995:
All projects and activities under the account heading
``Public Development'' under the Pennsylvania Avenue
Development Corporation;
All projects and activities under the account heading
``Mines and Minerals'' under the Bureau of Mines in
Department of the Interior;
All activities related to the transfer of functions from
the Bureau of Mines under the account heading ``Management of
Lands and Resources'' under the Bureau of Land Management in
the Department of the Interior;
All activities related to the transfers of functions from
the Bureau of Mines and from

[[Page H885]]
the National Biological Service under the account heading ``Surveys,
Investigations, and Research'' under the United States
Geological Survey in the Department of the Interior; and
All activities related to the transfer of functions from
the Bureau of Mines under the account heading ``Fossil Energy
Research and Development'' in the Department of Energy.
Sec. 124. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act, the appropriations and funds made available and
authority granted pursuant to the preceding section shall be
available until (a) enactment into law of an appropriation
for any project or activity provided for in that section, or
(b) the enactment into law of the applicable appropriations
Act without any provision for such project or activity, or
(c) September 30, 1996, whichever first occurs.
Sec. 125. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act, except section 106, such amounts as may be
necessary are hereby appropriated to effect the sale of Weeks
Island oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve under the
terms and conditions and at a rate of operations provided for
in the conference report and joint explanatory statement of
the Committee of Conference (House Report 104-402) on the
Department of the Interior and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 1996 (H.R. 1977), as passed by the House
of Representatives on December 13, 1995.
Sec. 126. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act, such amounts as may be necessary are hereby
appropriated under the authority and conditions provided in
the applicable appropriations Act for the fiscal year 1995
for continuing, at a rate for operations provided for in the
conference report and joint explanatory statement of the
Committee of Conference (House Report 104-402) on the
Department of the Interior and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 1996, (H.R. 1977) as passed by the House
of Representatives on December 13, 1995, for the following
projects or activities including the costs of direct loans
and loan guarantees (not otherwise specifically provided for
in this Act) which are conducted in the fiscal year 1995: all
projects or activities of the Indian Health Services, Indian
Health Service Facilities Bureau of Indian Affairs, National
Park Service, notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, notwithstanding any
other provision of law, and the Forest Service,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, Provided, That
appropriations and funds made available and authority granted
pursuant to this section shall be available until (a)
enactment into law of an appropriation for any project or
activity provided for in this section, or (b) the enactment
into law of the applicable appropriations Act without any
provision for such project or activity, or (c) March 15,
1996, whichever first occurs.
Sec. 127. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act except section 106, projects and activities under
the account heading ``Salaries and expenses'' under the
National Labor Relations Board shall be subject to the
provisions of section 112 of Public Law 104-56.
Sec. 128. None of the funds made available by Public Law
104-91 may be used for--
(1) the creation of a human embryo or embryos for research
purposes; or
(2) research in which a human embryo or embryos are
destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of
injury or death greater than that allowed for research on
fetuses in utero under 45 CFR 46.208(a)(2) and 42 U.S.C.
289g(b).

For purposes of this section, the phrase ``human embryo or
embryos'' shall include any organism, not protected as a
human subject under 45 CFR 46 as of the date of enactment of
this Act, that is derived by fertilization, parthenogenesis,
cloning, or any other means from one or more human gametes.

SEC. 129. TECHNICAL AMENDMENT TO PROHIBITION OF GRANTS FOR
501(c)(4) ORGANIZATIONS ENGAGING IN LOBBYING
ACTIVITIES.

(a) In General.--Section 18 of the Lobbying Disclosure Act
of 1995 is amended by striking ``award, grant, contract,
loan, or any other form'' and inserting ``award, grant, or
loan''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect as if included in the Lobbying Disclosure
Act of 1995 on the date of the enactment of such Act.
Sec. 130. No funds appropriated under this or any other Act
shall be used to review or modify sourcing areas previously
approved under section 490(c)(3) of the Forest Resources
Conservation and Shortage Relief Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-
382) or to enforce or implement Federal regulations 36 CFR
part 223 promulgated on September 8, 1995. The regulations
and interim rules in effect prior to September 8, 1995 (36
CFR 223.48, 36 CFR 223.87, 36 CFR 223 Subpart D, 36 CFR 223
Subpart F, and 36 CFR 261.6) shall remain in effect. The
Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior
shall not adopt any policies concerning Public Law 101-382 or
existing regulations that would restrain domestic
transportation or processing of timber from private lands or
impose additional accountability requirements on any timber.
The Secretary of Commerce shall extend until September 30,
1996, the order issued under section 491(b)(2)(A) of Public
Law 101-382 and shall issue an order under section
491(b)(2)(B) of such law that will be effective October 1,
1996.
Sec. 131. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act,
an additional $2,000,000 is hereby appropriated for the
National Park Service, Park Service construction for repair
of flood damage to the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National
Historical Park.

TITLE II--DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY,
AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS

Sec. 201. (a) Such amounts as may be necessary under the
authority and conditions provided in the applicable
appropriations Act for the fiscal year 1995 for projects or
activities, except for those projects and activities provided
for in Public Law 104-91 and Public Law 104-92, including
costs of direct loans and loan guarantees (not otherwise
specifically provided for in this Act) at a rate for
operations provided for in the conference report and joint
explanatory statement of the Committee of Conference,
House Report 104-378, on the Departments of Commerce,
Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 1996 (H.R. 2076), as passed the House
of Representatives on December 6, 1995, notwithstanding
section 15 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act
of 1956, section 701 of the United States Information and
Educational Exchange Act of 1948, section 313 of the
Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and
1995 (Public Law 103-236), and section 53 of the Arms
Control and Disarmament Act: Provided, That,
notwithstanding any other provision of this title of this
Act, the rate for operations only for program
administration and the continuation of grants awarded in
fiscal year 1995 and prior years of the Advanced
Technology Program of the National Institute of Standards
and Technology, and the rate for operations for the Ounce
of Prevention Council, Drug Courts, Global Learning and
Observations to Benefit the Environment and for the Cops
on the Beat Program may be increased up to a level of 75
per centum of the final fiscal year 1995 appropriated
amount: Provided further, That, under the previous
proviso, no contracts or grants shall be awarded in excess
of an amount that bears the same ratio to the rate for
operations provided by the previous proviso as the number
of days covered by this resolution bears to 366: Provided
further, That any costs incurred by a Department or agency
funded under this subsection resulting from personnel
actions taken in response to funding reductions resulting
from this Act shall be absorbed within the total budgetary
resources available to such Department or agency: Provided
further, That the authority to transfer funds between
appropriations accounts as may be necessary to carry out
the preceding proviso is provided in addition to
authorities provided elsewhere in this subsection:
Provided further, That funds to carry out the preceding
two provisos shall not be available for obligation or
expenditure except in compliance with established
reprogramming procedures: Provided further, That,
notwithstanding any other provision of this title of this
Act, the amount of funds obligated or expended by the
Legal Services Corporation shall not exceed an amount that
bears the same ratio to the rate for operations available
to the Legal Services Corporation as the number of days
covered by this resolution bears to 366: Provided further,
That, notwithstanding any other provision of this title of
this Act, funding provided for Violent Offender
Incarceration and Truth in Sentencing Incentive Grants,
with the exception of funds available to States for
incarceration of criminal aliens and the Cooperative
Agreement Program, shall be withheld, pending enactment of
revisions to subtitle A of title II of the Violent Crime
Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, so as not to
impinge upon final funding prerogatives: Provided further,
That, notwithstanding any other provision of this title of
this Act, sufficient funds shall be provided to continue
the Office of Inspector General of the United States
Information Agency, to be derived from funds otherwise
available to the Office of Inspector General of the
Department of State.

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

(b) Such amounts as may be necessary under the authority
and conditions provided in the applicable appropriations Act
for the fiscal year 1995 for continuing projects or
activities, except for those projects and activities provided
for in Public Law 104-91 and Public Law 104-92, including the
costs of direct loans and loan guarantees (not otherwise
specifically provided for in this Act) at a rate for
operations provided for in the conference report and joint
explanatory statement of the Committee of Conference, House
Report 104-384, on the Departments of Veterans Affairs and
Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies
Appropriations Act, 1996 (H.R. 2099), as passed the House of
Representatives on December 7, 1995: Provided, That Senate
amendment 63 shall be disposed of in the manner passed by the
House on December 7, 1995, as if enacted into law: Provided
further, That, notwithstanding any other provision of this
title of this Act, the rate for operations for the
Corporation for National and Community Service, the Community
Development Financial Institutions Fund, and the Office of
Consumer Affairs may be increased up to a level of 75 per
centum of the fiscal year 1995 level: Provided further, That,
under the previous proviso, no new contracts or grants

[[Page H886]]
shall be awarded in excess of an amount that bears the same ratio to
the rate for operations provided by the previous proviso as
the number of days covered by this resolution bears to 366:
Provided further, That the penultimate proviso under the
heading ``General Operating Expenses'' and sections 107 and
109 under the heading ``Administrative Provisions'' in the
Department of Veterans Affairs are effective to the extent
and in the manner, notwithstanding any other provision of
this Act, provided for in the conference report and joint
explanatory statement of the Committee of Conference (House
Report 104-384) on the Departments of Veterans Affairs and
Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies
Appropriations Act, 1996 (H.R. 2099), as passed by the House
of Representatives on December 7, 1995.
Sec. 202. Unless otherwise provided for in this title of
this Act or in the applicable appropriations Act,
appropriations and funds made available and authority granted
pursuant to this title of this Act shall be available until
(a) the enactment into law of an appropriation for any
project or activity provided for in this title of this Act,
or (b) the enactment into law of the applicable
appropriations Act by both Houses without any provision for
such project or activity, or (c) March 15, 1996, whichever
first occurs.
Sec. 203. Appropriations made and authority granted
pursuant to this title of this Act shall cover all
obligations or expenditures incurred for any program,
project, or activity during the period for which funds or
authority for such project or activity are available under
this title of this Act.
Sec. 204. Expenditures made pursuant to this title of this
Act shall be charged to the applicable appropriation, fund,
or authorization whenever a bill in which such applicable
appropriation, fund, or authorization is contained is enacted
into law.
Sec. 205. Appropriations made by section 201 shall be
available to the extent and in the manner which would be
provided by the pertinent appropriations Act.
Sec. 206. No provision in the appropriations Act for the
fiscal year 1996 referred to in section 201 of this Act that
makes the availability of any appropriation provided therein
dependent upon the enactment of additional authorizing or
other legislation shall be effective before the date set
forth in section 202(c) of this Act.
Sec. 207. Appropriations and funds made available by or
authority granted pursuant to this title of this Act may be
used without regard to the time limitations for submission
and approval of apportionments set forth in section 1513 of
title 31, United States Code, but nothing herein shall be
construed to waive any other provision of law governing the
apportionment of funds.
Sec. 208. Public Law 104-92 is amended by repealing Title
II and by inserting in section 101(a) after the paragraph
ending with ``under the Railroad Retirement Board;'' the
following paragraphs: ``All activities, including
administrative and beneficiary travel expenses of all
veterans benefit programs, necessary for the provision of
veterans benefits funded in the Department of Veterans
Affairs under the headings ``Compensation and pensions'',
``Readjustment benefits'', ``Veterans insurance and
indemnities'', ``Guaranty and indemnity program account'',
``Loan guaranty program account'', ``Direct loan program
account'', ``Education loan fund program account'',
``Vocational rehabilitation loans program account'', ``Native
American veteran housing loan program account'', and
``Administrative provisions, Sec. 107'' to the extent and in
the manner and at the rate of operations, notwithstanding any
other provision of this joint resolution, provided for in the
conference report and joint explanatory statement of the
Committee of Conference (House Report 104-384) on the
Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban
Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act,
1996 (H.R. 2099), as passed by the House of Representatives
on December 7, 1995;
All payments to contractors of the Veterans Health
Administration of the Department of Veterans Affairs for
goods and services that directly relate to patient health and
safety to the extent and in the manner and at the rate for
operations, notwithstanding any other provision of this joint
resolution, provided for in the conference report and joint
explanatory statement of the Committee of Conference (House
Report 104-384) on the Departments of Veterans Affairs and
Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies
Appropriations Act, 1996 (H.R. 2099), as passed by the House
of Representatives on December 7, 1995;''.
Sec. 209. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act, except section 202, the amount made available to
the Securities and Exchange Commission, under the heading
Salaries and Expenses, shall include, in addition to direct
appropriations, the amount it collects under the fee rate and
offsetting collection authority contained in Public Law 103-
352, which fee rate and offsetting collection authority shall
remain in effect during the period of this title of this Act.
Sec. 210. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act, except section 202, funds for the Environmental
Protection Agency shall be made available in the
appropriation accounts which are provided in H.R. 2099 as
reported on September 13, 1995.
Sec. 211. Public Law 104-91 is amended by inserting after
the words ``the protection of the Federal judiciary'' in
section 101(a), the following: ``to the extent and in the
manner and'', and by inserting at the end of the paragraph
containing those words, but before the semicolon, the
following: ``: Provided, That, with the exception of section
114, the General Provisions for the Department of Justice
included in Title I of the aforementioned conference report
are hereby enacted into law''.
Sec. 212. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or
regulation, the National Aeronauties and Space Administration
shall convey, without reimbursement, to the State of
Mississippi, all rights, title and interest of the United
States in the property known as the Yellow Creek Facility and
consisting of approximately 1,200 acres near the city of
Iuka, Mississippi, including all improvements thereon and
also including any personal property owned by NASA that is
currently located on-site and which the State of Mississippi
requires to facilitate the transfer: Provided, That
appropriated funds shall be used to effect this conveyance:
Provided further, That $10,000,000 in appropriated funds
otherwise available to the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration shall be transferred to the State of
Mississippi to be used in the transition of the facility:
Provided further, That each Federal agency with prior contact
to the site shall remain responsible for any and all
environmental remediation made necessary as a result of its
activities on the site: Provided further, That in
consideration of this conveyance, the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration may require such other terms and
conditions as the Administrator deems appropriate to protect
the interests of the United States: Provided further, That
the conveyance of the site and the transfer of the funds to
the State of Mississippi shall occur not later than thirty
days from the date of enactment of this Act.
Sec. 213. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act except section 202, projects and activities under
the account heading ``Council on Environmental Quality and
Office of Environmental Quality'' shall be subject to the
provisions of section 112 of Public Law 104-56.
Sec. 214. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title
of this Act, except section 202, whenever the rate for
operations for any continuing project or activity provided by
section 201 for which there is a budget request would result
in a furlough of Government employees, that rate for
operations may be increased to the minimum level that would
enable the furlough to be avoided. No new contracts or grants
shall be awarded in excess of an amount that bears the same
ratio to the rate for operations provided by this section as
the number of days covered by this resolution bears to 366:
Provided further, That the first sentence of section 214
shall not apply except to furloughs that exceed one workday
per pay period for the affected workforce during the period
of January 26, 1996 through March 15, 1996.

TITLE III--FOREIGN OPERATIONS EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
APPROPRIATIONS

Sec. 301. Such amounts as may be necessary for programs,
projects, or activities provided for in the Foreign
Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs
Appropriations Act, 1996 (H.R. 1868), at a rate for
operations and to the extent and in the manner provided for
in the conference report and joint explanatory statement of
the Committee of Conference (House Report 104-295) as passed
by the House of Representatives on October 31, 1995, as if
enacted into law, notwithstanding any other provision of this
title of this Act: Provided, That Senate amendment numbered
115 shall be disposed of as follows, as if enacted into law:
In lieu of the matter proposed by the Senate in amendment
numbered 115, insert the following:

authorization of population planning

Sec. 518A. Notwithstanding section 526 of this Act, none of
the funds made available in this Act for population planning
activities or other population assistance pursuant to section
104(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act or any other provision
of law, or funds made available in title IV of this Act as a
contribution to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)
may be obligated or expended prior to July 1, 1996, unless
such funding is expressly authorized by law: Provided, That
if such funds are not authorized by law prior to July 1,
1996, funds appropriated in title II of this Act for
population planning activities or other population assistance
may be made available for obligation and expenditure in an
amount not to exceed 65 percent of the total amount
appropriated or otherwise made available by P.L. 103-306 and
P.L. 104-19 for such activities for fiscal year 1995, and
funds appropriated in title IV of this Act as a contribution
to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) may be made
available for obligation and expenditure in an amount not to
exceed 65 percent of the total amount appropriated or
otherwise made available by P.L. 103-306 and P.L. 104-19 for
a contribution to UNFPA for fiscal year 1995: Provided
further, That, pursuant to the previous proviso, such funds
may be apportioned only on a monthly basis, beginning July 1,
1996 and ending September 30, 1997, and such monthly
apportionments may not exceed 6.67 percent of the total
available for such activities: Provided further, That
notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, funds
appropriated by this Act for the United Nations Population
Fund (UNFPA) shall remain available for obligation until
September 30, 1997.

[[Page H887]]

Sec. 302. Unless otherwise provided for in this title of
this Act or in the applicable appropriations Act,
appropriations and funds made available and authority granted
pursuant to this title of this Act shall be available until
(a) the enactment into law of an appropriation for any
project or activity provided for in this title of this Act,
or (b) the enactment into law of the applicable
appropriations Act by both Houses without any provision for
such project or activity, or (c) September 30, 1996,
whichever first occurs.
Sec. 303. Appropriations made and authority granted
pursuant to this title of this Act shall cover all
obligations or expenditures incurred for any program,
project, or activity during the period for which funds or
authority for such project or activity are available under
this title of this Act.
Sec. 304. Expenditures made pursuant to this title of this
act shall be charged to the applicable appropriation, fund,
or authorization whenever a bill in which such applicable
appropriation, fund, or authorization is contained is enacted
into law.

TITLE IV--HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Sec. 401. During fiscal year 1996, the Secretary of
Housing, and Urban Development may manage and dispose of
multifamily properties owned by the Secretary, including the
provision for grants form the General Insurance Fund (12
U.S.C. 1735c) for the necessary costs of rehabilitation and
other related development costs and multifamily mortgages
held by the Secretary without regard to any other provision
of law.

public and assisted housing rents, income adjustments, and preferences

Sec. 402. (a) Minimum Rents.--Notwithstanding sections 3(a)
and 8(o)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as
amended, effective for fiscal year 1996 and no later than
October 30, 1995--
(1) public housing agencies shall require each family who
is assisted under the certificate or moderate rehabilitation
program under section 8 of such Act to pay a minimum monthly
rent of not less than $25, and may require a minimum monthly
rent of up to $50;
(2) public housing agencies shall reduce the monthly
assistance payment on behalf of each family who is assisted
under the voucher program under section 8 of such Act so that
the family pays a minimum monthly rent of not less than $25,
and may require a minimum monthly rent of up to $50;
(3) with respect to housing assisted under other programs
for rental assistance under section 8 of such Act, the
Secretary shall require each family who is assisted under
such program to pay a minimum monthly rent of not less than
$25 for the unit, and may require a minimum monthly rent of
up to $50; and
(4) public housing agencies shall require each family who
is assisted under the public housing program (including
public housing for Indian families) of such Act to pay a
minimum monthly rent of not less than $25, and may require a
minimum monthly rent of up to $50.
(b) Establishment of Ceiling Rents.--
(1) Section 3(a)(2) of the United States Housing Act of
1937 is amended to read as follows:
``(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a public housing
agency may--
``(A) adopt ceiling rents that reflect the reasonable
market value of the housing, but that are not less than the
monthly costs--
``(i) to operate the housing of the agency; and
``(ii) to make a deposit to a replacement reserve (in the
sole discretion of the public housing agency); and
``(B) allow families to pay ceiling rents referred to in
subparagraph (A), unless, with respect to any family, the
ceiling rent established under this paragraph would exceed
the amount payable as rent by that family under paragraph
(1).''.
(2) Regulations.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall, by regulation, after
notice and an opportunity for public comment, establish such
requirements as may be necessary to carry out section
3(a)(2)(A) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as
amended by paragraph (1).
(B) Transition rule.--Prior to the issuance of final
regulations under paragraph (1), a public housing agency may
implement ceiling rents, which shall be not less than the
monthly costs to operate the housing of the agency and--
(i) determined in accordance with section 3(a)(2)(A) of the
United States Housing Act of 1937, as that section existed on
the day before enactment of this Act;
(ii) equal to the 95th percentile of the rent paid for a
unit of comparable size by tenants in the same public housing
project or a group of comparable projects totaling 50 units
or more; or
(iii) equal to the fair market rent for the area in which
the unit is located.
(c) Definition of Adjusted Income.--Section 3(b)(5) of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 is amended--
(1) at the end of subparagraph (F), by striking ``and'';
(2) at the end of subparagraph (G), by striking the period
and inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (G) the following:
``(H) for public housing, any other adjustments to earned
income established by the public housing agency. If a public
housing agency adopts other adjustments to income pursuant to
subparagraph (H), the Secretary shall not take into account
any reduction of or increase in the public housing agency's
per unit dwelling rental income resulting from those
adjustments when calculating the contributions under section
9 for the public housing agency for the operation of the
public housing.''.
(d) Repeal of Federal Preferences.--
(1) Public housing.--Section 6(c)(4)(A) of the United
States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437d(c)(4)(A)) is
amended to read as follows:
``(A) the establishment, after public notice and an
opportunity for public comment, of a written system of
preferences for admission to public housing, if any, that is
not inconsistent with the comprehensive housing affordability
strategy under title I of the Cranston-Gonzalez National
Affordable Housing Act;''.
(2) Section 8 existing and moderate rehabilitation.--
Section 8(d)(1)(A) of the United States Housing Act of 1937
(42 U.S.C. 1437f(d)(1)(A)) is amended to read as follows:
``(A) the selection of tenants shall be the function of the
owner, subject to the provisions of the annual contributions
contract between the Secretary and the agency, except that
for the certificate and moderate rehabilitation programs
only, for the purpose of selecting families to be assisted,
the public housing agency may establish, after public notice
and an opportunity for public comment, a written system of
preferences for selection that is not inconsistent with the
comprehensive housing affordability strategy under title I of
the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act;''.
(3) Section 8 voucher program.--Section 8(o)(3)(B) of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(3)(B))
is amended to read as follows:
``(B) For the purpose of selecting families to be assisted
under this subsection, the public housing agency may
establish, after public notice and an opportunity for public
comment, a written system of preferences for selection that
is not inconsistent with the comprehensive housing
affordability strategy under title I of the Cranston-Gonzalez
National Affordable Housing Act.''.
(4) Section 8 new construction and substantial
rehabilitation.--
(A) Repeal.--Section 454(c) of the Cranston-Gonzalez
National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 1437f note) is
amended to read as follows:
``(c) [Reserved.]''.
(B) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, no Federal tenant selection preferences under the United
States Housing Act of 1937 shall apply with respect to--
(i) housing constructed or substantially rehabilitated
pursuant to assistance provided under section 8(b)(2) of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 (as such section existed on
the day before October 1, 1983); or
(ii) projects financed under section 202 of the Housing Act
of 1959 (as such section existed on the day before the date
of enactment of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable
Housing Act).
(5) Rent supplements.--Section 101(k) of the Housing and
Urban Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s(k)) is amended
to read as follows:
``(k) [Reserved.]''.
(6) Conforming amendments.--
(A) United states housing act of 1937.--The United States
Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) is amended--
(i) in section 6(o), by striking ``preference rules
specified in'' and inserting ``written system of preferences
for selection established pursuant to'';
(ii) in the second sentence of section 7(a)(2), by striking
``according to the preferences for occupancy under'' and
inserting ``in accordance with the written system of
preferences for selection established pursuant to'';
(iii) in section 8(d)(2)(A), by striking the last sentence;
(iv) in section 8(d)(2)(H), by striking ``Notwithstanding
subsection (d)(1)(A)(i), an'' and inserting ``An'';
(v) in section 16(c), in the second sentence, by striking
``the system of preferences established by the agency
pursuant to section 6(c)(4)(A)(ii)'' and inserting ``the
written system of preferences for selection established by
the public housing agency pursuant to section 6(c)(4)(A)'';
and
(vi) in section 24(e)--
(I) by striking ``(e) Exceptions'' and all that follows
through ``The Secretary may'' and inserting the following:
``(e) Exceptions to General Program Requirements.--The
Secretary may''; and
(II) by striking paragraph (2).
(B) Cranston-gonzalez national affordable housing act.--
Section 522(f)(6)(B) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National
Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12704 et seq.) is amended
by striking ``any preferences for such assistance under
section 8(d)(1)(A)(i)'' and inserting ``the written system of
preferences for selection established pursuant to section
8(d)(1)(A).''
(C) Housing and community development act of 1992.--Section
655 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (42
U.S.C. 13615) is amended by striking ``the preferences'' and
all that follows up to the period at the end and inserting
``any preferences''.
(D) References in other law.--Any reference in any Federal
law other than any provision of any law amended by paragraphs
(1) through (5) of this subsection to the preferences for
assistance under section

[[Page H888]]
6(c)(4)(A)(i), 8(d)(1)(A)(i), or 8(o)(3)(B) of the United States
Housing Act of 1937 (as such sections existed on the day
before the date of enactment of this Act) shall be considered
to refer to the written system of preferences for selection
established pursuant to section 6(c)(4)(A), 8(d)(1)(A), or
8(o)(3)(B), respectively, of the United States Housing Act
of 1937, as amended by this section.
(e) Applicability.--In accordance with section 201(b)(2) of
the United States Housing Act of 1937, the amendments made by
subsection (a), (b), (c), (d), and (f) of this section shall
also apply to public housing developed or operated pursuant
to a contract between the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development and an Indian housing authority.
(4) This section shall be effective upon the enactment of
this Act and only for fiscal year 1996.

section 8 fair market rentals, administrative fees, and delay in
reissuance

Sec. 403. (a) Fair Market Rentals.--The Secretary shall
establish fair market rentals for purposes of section 8(c)(1)
of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, that
shall be effective for fiscal year 1996 and shall be based on
the 40th percentile rent of rental distributions of standard
quality rental housing units. In establishing such fair
market rentals, the Secretary shall consider only the rents
for dwelling units occupied by recent movers and may not
consider the rents for public housing dwelling units or newly
constructed rental dwelling units.
(b) Administrative Fees.--Notwithstanding sections 8(q) (1)
and (4) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, for fiscal
year 1996, the fee for each month for which a dwelling unit
is covered by an assistance contract under the certificate,
voucher, or moderate rehabilitation program under section 8
of such Act shall be equal to the monthly fee payable for
fiscal year 1995: Provided, That this subsection shall be
applicable to all amounts made available for such fees during
fiscal year 1996, as if in effect on October 1, 1995.
(c) Delay Reissuance of Vouchers and Certificates.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a public housing
agency administering certificate or voucher assistance
provided under subsection (b) or (o) of section 8 of the
United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, shall delay
for 3 months, the use of any amounts of such assistance (or
the certificate or voucher representing assistance amounts)
made available by the termination during fiscal year 1996 of
such assistance on behalf of any family for any reason, but
not later than October 1, 1996; with the exception of any
certificates assigned or committed to project-based
assistance as permitted otherwise by the Act, accomplished
prior to the effective date of this Act.

repeal of provisions regarding income disregards

Sec. 404. (a) Maximum Annual Limitation on Rent Increases
Resulting from Employment.--Section 957 of the Cranston-
Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act is hereby repealed,
retroactive to November 28, 1990, and shall be of no effect.
(b) Economic Independence.--Section 923 of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1992 is hereby repealed,
retroactive to October 28, 1992, and shall be of no effect.

section 8 contract renewals

Sec. 405. (a) For fiscal year 1996 and henceforth, the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may use amounts
available for the renewal of assistance under section 8 of
the United States Housing Act of 1937, upon termination or
expiration of a contract for assistance under section 8 of
such Act of 1937 (other than a contract for tenant-based
assistance and notwithstanding section 8(v) of such Act for
loan management assistance), to provide assistance under
section 8 of such Act, subject to the Section 8 Existing Fair
Market Rents, for the eligible families assisted under the
contracts at expiration or termination, which assistance
shall be in accordance with terms and conditions
prescribed by the Secretary.
(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a) and except for projects
assisted under section 8(e)(2) of the United States Housing
Act of 1937 (as it existed immediately prior to October 1,
1991), at the request of the owner, the Secretary shall renew
for a period of one year contracts for assistance under
section 8 that expire or terminate during fiscal year 1996 at
the current rent levels.
(c) Section 8(v) of the United States Housing Act of 1937
is amended to read as follows: ``The Secretary may extend
expiring contracts entered into under this section for
project-based loan management assistance to the extent
necessary to prevent displacement of low-income families
receiving such assistance as of September 30, 1996.''.
(d) Section 236(f) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C.
1715z-1(f)) is amended:
(1) by striking the second sentence in paragraph (1) and
inserting in lieu thereof the following: ``The rental charge
for each dwelling unit shall be at the basic rental charge or
such greater amount, not exceeding the lower of (i) the fair
market rental charge determined pursuant to this paragraph,
or (ii) the fair market rental established under section 8(c)
of the United States Housing Act of 1937 for the market area
in which the housing is located, as represents 30 per centum
of the tenant's adjusted income,''; and
(2) by striking paragraph (6).''.

extension of home equity conversion mortgage program

Sec. 406. Section 255(g) of the National Housing Act (12
U.S.C. 1715z-20(g)) is amended--
(1) in the first sentence, by striking ``September 30,
1995'' and inserting ``September 30, 1996''; and
(2) in the second sentence, by striking ``25,000'' and
inserting ``30,000''.

fha single-family assignment program reform

Sec. 407. (a) Foreclosure Avoidance.--Except as provided in
subsection (e), the last sentence of section 204(a) of the
National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1710(a)) is amended by
inserting before the period the following: ``: And provided
further, That the Secretary may pay insurance benefits to the
mortgagee to recompense the mortgagee for its actions to
provide an alternative to the foreclosure of a mortgage that
is in default, which actions may include special foreclosure,
loan modification, and deeds in lieu of foreclosure, all upon
terms and conditions as the mortgagee shall determine in the
mortgagee's sole discretion, within guidelines provided by
the Secretary, but which may not include assignment of a
mortgage to the Secretary: And provided further, That for
purposes of the preceding proviso, no action authorized by
the Secretary and no action taken, nor any failure to act, by
the Secretary or the mortgagee shall be subject to judicial
review.''.
(b) Authority To Assist Mortgagors in Default.--Except as
provided in subsection (e), section 230 of the National
Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715u) is amended to read as follows:

``authority to assist mortgagors in default

``Sec. 230. (a) Payment of Partial Claim.--The Secretary
may establish a program for payment of a partial claim to a
mortgagee that agrees to apply the claim amount to payment of
a mortgage on a 1- to 4-family residence that is in default.
Any such payment under such program to the mortgagee shall be
made in the sole discretion of the Secretary and on terms and
conditions acceptable to the Secretary, except that--
``(1) the amount of the payment shall be in an amount
determined by the Secretary, not to exceed an amount
equivalent to 12 of the monthly mortgage payments and any
costs related to the default that are approved by the
Secretary; and
``(2) the mortgagor shall agree to repay the amount of the
insurance claim to the Secretary upon terms and conditions
acceptable to the Secretary.

The Secretary may pay the mortgagee, from the appropriate
insurance fund, in connection with any activities that the
mortgagee is required to undertake concerning repayment by
the mortgagor of the amount owed to the Secretary.
``(b) Assignment.--
``(1) Program authority.--The Secretary may establish a
program for assignment to the Secretary, upon request of the
mortgagee, of a mortgage on a 1- to 4-family residence
insured under this Act.
``(2) Program requirements.--The Secretary may accept
assignment of a mortgage under a program under this
subsection only if--
``(A) the mortgage was in default;
``(B) the mortgagee has modified the mortgage to cure the
default and provide for mortgage payments within the
reasonable ability of the mortgagor to pay, at interest rates
not exceeding current market interest rates; and
``(C) the Secretary arranges for servicing of the assigned
mortgage by a mortgagee (which may include the assigning
mortgagee) through procedures that the Secretary has
determined to be in the best interests of the appropriate
insurance fund.
``(3) Payment of insurance benefits.--Upon accepting
assignment of a mortgage under a program established under
this subsection, the Secretary may pay insurance benefits to
the mortgagee from the appropriate insurance fund, in an
amount that the Secretary determines to be appropriate, not
to exceed the amount necessary to compensate the mortgagee
for the assignment and any losses and expenses resulting from
the mortgage modification.
``(c) Prohibition of judicial review.--No decision by the
Secretary to exercise or forego exercising any authority
under this section shall be subject to judicial review.
``(d) Savings Provision.--Any mortgage for which the
mortgagor has applied to the Secretary, before the date of
enactment of the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing
and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies
Appropriations Act, 1996, for assignment pursuant to
subsection (b) of this section as in effect before such date
of enactment shall continue to be governed by the provisions
of this section, as in effect immediately before such date of
enactment.
``(e) Applicability of Other Laws.--No provision of this
Act, or any other law, shall be construed to require the
Secretary to provide an alternative to foreclosure for
mortgagees with mortgages on 1- to 4-family residences
insured by the Secretary under this Act, or to accept
assignments of such mortgages.''.
(c) Applicability of Amendments.--Except as provided in
subsection (e), the amendments made by subsections (a) and
(b) shall apply only with respect to mortgages insured under
the National Housing Act that are originated before October
1, 1995.
(d) Regulations.--Not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the

[[Page H889]]
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall issue interim
regulations to implement this section and the amendments made
by this section.
(e) Effectiveness and Applicability.--If this Act is
enacted after the date of enactment of the Balanced Budget
Act of 1995--
(1) subsections (a), (b), (c), and (d) of this section
shall not take effect; and
(2) section 2052(c) of the Balanced Budget Act of 1995 is
amended by striking ``that are originated on or after October
1, 1995'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``that are originated
before, during, and after fiscal year 1996.''.
This Act may be cited as ``The Balanced Budget Downpayment
Act, I''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of today,
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 recognized the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston].
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, once again I want to commend the gentleman from
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], my colleague and the distinguished ranking member
on the committee, for working closely with me to make sure that we had
a bill that would not only pass this House, but will pass the other
body and go to the President and, in fact, will be signed into law so
the Government can continue.
Mr. Speaker, I am particularly pleased that although this was a hard-
fought negotiation, it is one that we can all go back to our respective
constituencies and be proud of. And I hope, that it will also lead to a
long-term solution, so that we do not have to close down the Government
or send more agency employees out to the streets while we conduct our
business.
The fact is that seven appropriations bills have been signed into law
for the current fiscal year, fiscal year 1996. In addition, the
District of Columbia has authority to use local funds through September
30, so all of the programs under those seven bills and the District of
Columbia are virtually funded.
We hope to come before the Congress within the next week and pass a
District of Columbia bill. So the District of Columbia with provision
for a portion of the Federal payment in this bill, but for the purposes
of the remaining five appropriations bills, they are covered in one
fashion or another by this Balanced Budget Donwpayment Act.
Mr. Speaker, the activities in two appropriations acts are provided
for through March 15. That is the operative date at the level of
funding specified in the respective fiscal year 1996 conference
agreements, but under the terms and conditions provided for, as I
pointed out to the gentlewoman from Texas, in the applicable fiscal
year 1995 Appropriations act. They are the Commerce, Justice, State,
and Judiciary; and the VA-HUD bills.
The Foreign Operations bill, which has passed this House on numerous
occasions in one form or another, is likewise provided for in its
entirety through September 30, not March 15, at the level specified in
the conference agreement and under the terms and conditions of that
agreement as if enacted into law.
Funding for population planning activities, or funds made available
to the U.N. Population Fund, are not made available for expenditure
unless authorized prior to July 1, 1996. If an authorization is not
enacted by that date, then no more than 65 percent of the current rate
may then be obligated.
In addition to those three bills, the activities in the following two
appropriations bills, the Labor-HHS and Education bill and the Interior
and related agencies bill, are provided for also through March 15, but
at a level of funding that is the lower of either the House-passed, the
Senate passed, or fiscal year 1995 current rate, but under the terms
and conditions provided for in the applicable 1995 Appropriations Act.
Programs that were terminated or would be severely impacted may be
funded at a rate of operations not to exceed 75 percent of the current
rate. That is a 75 percent cap.
In addition, the following programs are funded at levels not to
exceed 75 percent of the current rate of operations. They a re
specifically picked out. Those are AmeriCorps, ATP, Cops on the Beat,
Ounce of Prevention Council, Drug Courts, Community Development
Financial Institutions, and the Office of Consumer Affairs.
The bill would provide a restriction that would prohibit excessive
travel by Cabinet-level Secretaries, except State, Defense, CIA, and
the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, for obvious reasons
involving national security. That level would be arrived at by
computing 110 percent of the average of travel expenditures made by the
Secretaries of those Departments between the years 1990 and 1995.

Let me stress, even though only certain bills are covered in this
Balanced Budget Downpayment Act, I, the fact is the travel of all of
the Secretaries, all of the Cabinet Secretaries, other than State,
Defense, CIA, and U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, will actually
be covered by this provision. So if their travel expenditures exceed
110 percent of the mean of Secretarial travel between 1990 and 1995,
they could well be in trouble and would be told by the U.S. Congress
through this provision to stop traveling. I would like to restate that.
They could be, and they will be.
Section 128 of the bill prohibits the use of funds for embryo
research, and the bill also increases the maximum Pell grant award to
at least $2,440 per individual.
I would like to pause on that. I know the gentleman from Pennsylvania
[Mr. Goodling] is keenly concerned about this. I would like to tell the
gentleman and any others that are concerned about it that we have
reached an agreement that can be confirmed by the gentleman from
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], that the $2,440 per individual is a figure that
is not intended by the administration to be exceeded unless there is
agreement among all of the parties on both sides, Democrat and
Republican, with the White House, and with the Department of Education.
That was emphatically repeated to us, the gentleman from Wisconsin
and to myself, within the last hour. And I know the gentleman from
Pennsylvania is here, and I would like to yield to the gentleman from
Wisconsin for his understanding on that conversation.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that the gentleman is
correct. We had conversation with the President's chief of staff, Mr.
Panetta, and he indicated although the administration certainly would
like to go above the $2,440 level which is presently in the bill, and
they want the flexibility for that to be considered, that they in fact
have no intention of proceeding with any number that is higher than the
one stipulated in this proposal, unless it is mutually agreed upon.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LIVINGSTON. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I just want to make sure that if we do not
have it in blood, we have to understand that any time we go up 100
bucks in a Pell grant, and we have already raised it higher than it has
ever been in the history of Pell grants, we are talking about $300
million. If we go up $200, we are talking about $600 million-plus, and
that has to come from every other education program, and we have
already lost in many other education programs.
Now, when the gentleman says ``the parties have to agree,'' does it
come back through committee? What does that mean?
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would say to the
gentleman that in our conversations and Mr. Panetta, he swore to us
that the administration would not raise the level per pupil under the
Pell grants without the joint agreement of the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, myself, the gentleman from Wisconsin, the gentleman's
counterpart on his committee and counterparts in the Senate.
That is basically the tenor of the conversation I got. And I might
add that even the $2,440 per individual which we have provided in this
bill and has been provided in the conference report is $100 per
individual more than was provided in any previous year. So we have gone
up. On Pell grants we will actually expend a tremendous amount more
money in the aggregate sense than has ever been provided before in
previous years. So nobody can say we are cutting Pell grants.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, I think that
sooner or later in this place somebody has to

[[Page H890]]
trust somebody, and while we certainly did not have a long conversion,
because we did not have the time to give him, there was a time squeeze
on people today, it was very clear and explicit that there would have
to be widely reached understanding before any number other than $2,440
would be pursued by the administration. Obviously, knowing Mr.
Panetta's integrity, he certainly intends to live up to that agreement.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would continue to yield,
I just want to make sure. I want to make very, very sure that we are
thoroughly convinced that the administration understands that they will
not publish anything above $2,440, unless they have the permission of
those who are negotiating this issue.
Mr. OBEY. That was absolutely my understanding.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, it is my
understanding as well, I would tell the gentleman.
Moving right along, Mr. Speaker, the bill directs the Architect of
the Capitol to sell a House office building that has been declared
excess and enacts into law $1.2 billion in legislative savings from the
various housing programs under the VA-HUD appropriations bill, as
shepherded by the distinguished and very capable gentleman from
California [Mr. Lewis].
It provides for the sale of 7 million barrels of oil from the
strategic petroleum reserve, which results in increased Federal
revenues of $100 million. There are additional program terminations; in
addition to those eight programs that were terminated by an earlier
continuing resolution, House Joint Resolution 122, there are 10
programs which I will incorporate in the Record which are terminated by
this act.
Finally, as was pointed out in one of the reservations of objection
to the previous unanimous consent request, the bill proposes to freeze
new grant activities at a level not exceed 75 percent of the prior
monthly rate for the duration of this continuing resolution for various
activities which will be made part of the Record. I might add, those
activities all come under the Labor and Health and Human Services
appropriations bill and, therefore, are already capped at 75 percent
funding at the very most, but this would mean on a monthly basis the
grants would be frozen at 75 percent of that.
I would point out that with respect to the Interior bill, all
programs in the Interior bill will, in fact, be funded at the lowest of
the low levels, with the exception of the Park Service, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Forest Service,
The Indian Health Services, and Indian Health Service Facilities, which
will be funded at conference levels.

{time} 1800

The recent C&O Canal flood damage will be repaired to the tune of $2
million. Programs not at conference levels but at 75 percent include
the Cops on the Beat, ATP, Drug Courts, GLOBE, Community Development
Financial Institutions Fund, and Office of Consumer Affairs. The NLRB
and the Council of Environmental Quality get special rates as well.
There is changed furlough language. The previous continuing
resolutions provided enough funding so that we did not have to furlough
people. We did not lay people off. Obviously, in view of the passage of
time, one-third of the fiscal year, that language is outdated.
We are reducing many agencies and departments by 5 percent, at least
5 percent of their funding. And unless we begin to start to lay off
people or furlough them, if necessary, then any savings that we might
have received by virtue of the cuts become moot because everybody is
still on the job. So it is important that we, in a methodical and
careful way, allow the administration to go forward and start to tell
those people that they can no longer afford to be carried.
I have to tell Members that the fact is, though, that we have been
doing that in a workable fashion. The programs managed by the agencies
and departments should not be penalized because we have not been doing
it in the past and, therefore, they should not have to double up their
efforts to furlough people or RIF people for the second quarter or
second third of the year. Instead, we have a reasonable formula arrived
at in consultation with the minority and with the administration which
allows for a methodical approach in those RIF's or furloughs. So no
agency, no department is unduly damaged by this provision.
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier, at this point, I would like to
insert a summary of the bill.

H.R. 2880--Balanced Budget Downpayment Act, I

background

Seven Appropriations bills have been signed into law for
the full fiscal year; in addition the District of Columbia
has authority to use local funds through September 30th.
Numerous ``targeted appropriations'' have been funded
through previous continuing resolutions.

levels of funding provided in this act

The following two Appropriations Acts are provided for,
through March 15th, at a level of funding specified in the
respective FY 1996 Conference agreements but under the terms
and conditions provided for in the applicable FY 1995
Appropriations Act:

commerce--justice--state & the judiciary--va--hud

The Foreign Operations Appropriations Act is provided for,
through September 30th, at the level specified in the
Conference agreement and under the terms and conditions of
that agreement. Funding for population planning activities or
funds made available to the UN Population Fund are not
available for expenditure unless authorized prior to July 1,
1996. If an authorization is not enacted by that date, then
no more than 65 percent of the current rate may be obligated.
The following two Appropriations Acts are provided for,
through March 15th, at a level of funding that is the LOWER
of either the House passed, Senate passed, or FY 1995 current
rate but under the terms and conditions provided for in the
applicable FY 1995 Appropriations Act. Programs that were
terminated, or would be ``severely impacted'' may be funded
at a rate of operations not to exceed 75 percent of the
current rate:

labor--hhs & education--interior & related agencies--activities funded
at specific levels

In addition, the following items are funded at levels not
to exceed 75 percent of the current rate of operations:
Americorp, ATP, Cops on the Beat, Ounce of Prevention
Council, Drug Courts, Community Development, Financial
Institutions, and the Office of Consumer Affairs.

restriction on cabinet travel

The bill provides a restriction that would prohibit
excessive travel by cabinet level Secretaries (except State,
Defense, CIA & the U.S. Ambassador to the UN) that exceeds
110% of the average of travel expenditures between 1990 and
1995.

limitation on embryo research

Section 128 of the bill prohibits the use of funds for
embryo research.

miscellaneous provisions

The bill increases the maximum Pell Grant award to $2,440
per individual.
The bill directs the Architect of the Capitol to sell a
House Office building that has been declared excess.
The bill enacts into law $1.2 billion in legislative
savings from various housing programs in the VA-HUD
appropriations bill.
The bill provides for the sale of 7 million barrels of oil
from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which results in
increased federal revenues of $100 million.

additional program terminations

In addition to the eight programs that were terminated by
an earlier continuing resolution (H.J. Res. 122), the
following 10 programs are terminated by this Act:
Child Development Associate Scholarships in the Department
of Health and Human Services; Dependent Care Planning and
Development in the Department of Health and Human Services;
Law Related Education in the Department of Education; Dropout
Prevention Demonstrations in the Department of Education; Aid
for Institutional Development--Endowment Grants in the
Department of Education; Aid for Institutional Development--
Evaluation in the Department of Education; Native Hawaiian
and Alaska Native Cultural Arts; Innovative Projects in
Community Service in the Department of Education; Cooperative
Education in the Department of Education; and Douglas Teacher
Scholarships in the Department of Education.

freeze grant funding

The bill proposes to freeze new grant activities at a level
not to exceed 75% of the prior monthly rate for the duration
of this continuing resolution for the following activities:

Department of Health and Human Services

Health Resources and Services Administration: Health
Resources and Services: Trauma Care, Health Care Facilities.
Assistant Secretary for Health: Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Health: National Vaccine Program, Health Care
Reform Data Analysis, National AIDS Program Office.
Health Care Financing Administration: Program Management:
Essential Access Community Hospitals.

[[Page H891]]

Administration for Children and Families: Children and
Families Services Program: Youth Gang Substance Abuse,
Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect, Child Welfare
Research, Social Services Research, Homeless Service Grants,
Community Schools (crime trust fund).
Administration on Aging: Aging Services Programs: Pension
Counseling, Federal Council on Aging, White House Conference
on Aging.

Department of Education

Education for the Disadvantaged: State School Improvement.
School Improvement Programs: Safe & Drug Free Schools &
Communities: National Program Women's Educational Equity.
Bilingual and Immigrant Education: Bilingual Education
Support Services.
Higher Education: Faculty Development Fellowships, School,
College and University Partnerships.

Related Agencies

Corporation for National and Community Service: Domestic
Volunteer Service Programs, Operating Expenses: Senior
Demonstration Program, and the National Education Standards
and Improvement Council.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 7 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I would simply like to urge support for this
proposition.
As I said earlier, this is a result of a great deal of bipartisan
work with many people involved, and no one who I know agrees with every
single recommendation in the bill. I do not. I know the gentleman from
Louisiana does not.
But I think by passing this bill we will all meet our higher
obligation to keep the Government functioning again for at least the
next 45 days, and in the case of at least one bill before us, the
foreign operations bill, it will dispose of that bill for the entire
year.
I am happy to report to the House, despite deep divisions which
normally accompany the issue, we have with the assistance of many
people on both sides of the aisle reached agreement on the family
planning/abortion cluster of issues, which so often accompany that
bill. And we have managed to reach common ground even though we have
many differing views about how those issues ought to be handled.
I think we have found a solution which is acceptable to everyone. I
would point out there are some concerns about programs such as LIHEAP,
which will undoubtedly be raised by the gentleman from Vermont, but I
simply want to say that I would urge support. We have had a lot of
acrimony over the past several months in this House. This bill should
not be an occasion for that acrimony today because it is a reasonable
compromise.
I do want to say, however, that I think there are several serious
problems with it. I do have strong disagreement with the fact that this
level will in fact mean that we are funding education at $3.1 billion
less that we were funding it last year. If that were to remain the case
for the entire year, it would mean that we would be eventually placing
a great additional burden on local property taxpayers, and I do not
believe that we ought to be doing that.
I would point out that whether we are talking about school-to-work
programs or title I or professional development programs or safe and
drug-free schools or Gallaudent University or vocational education, I
do not believe that we should be funding these programs at a level
which is this low. I hope that we can get agreement down the line to
change that.
I do not want to shut down the Government over that. I do not want to
shut the Government over that because I do not believe in holding my
breath and turning blue every time I lose an argument. But I do think
that this is an issue that the House needs to make a choice on. I
should announce, therefore, that the distinguished minority whip, the
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior], will be offering in his
recommittal motion a proposition which would return these education
programs to the 1995 fiscal year level, which means in essence that it
would eliminate the $3.1 billion reduction which we have in these
education programs.

Mr. Speaker, I know the President is concerned about that reduced
level of funding; certainly we are on this side of the aisle. I know a
great many other Members, including Senator Kennedy, are concerned
about it on the Senate side. I would urge support for that recommittal
motion when it is offered by the distinguished minority whip. But no
matter how that motion goes, I would then urge support for this bill in
the interest of demonstrating to the American people that, if we
disagree on some basics, we can also agree on some fundamentals. That
is what we are supposed to be able to do in a legislative body.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman from Vermont.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to engage in a colloquy with the
chairman of the Committee on Appropriations.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would ask the gentleman
if he could withhold. I thought the gentleman had a question of me. I
will be happy to yield him time. I do not want to be stuck in a
triangular colloquy. I agree with the gentleman's concern on the
program, the concerns which he has raised.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the Department
of Education will be funded at the House-passed level, except for those
programs that were not funded by the House, in which case they will be
funded at 75 percent. According to my calculations then, that means
that, if we were to extend this CR for the rest of the year at that
rate of funding, that would be a $3.1 billion cut from 1995.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Goodling] knows that we forward
fund education, so these dollars are for the school year 1996-97, the
school year starting in September. By next month, school districts will
be starting to write their budgets for that school year. How in the
world will they know how much money they will have when they are
threatened with a possible $3.1 billion cut? Will this require in some
States like Michigan, where they have to pink slip teachers at a
certain time if they feel there will not be enough money, will this
require certain States to pink slip teachers?
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I cannot answer what it will require in
specific States. Let me simply say that I agree with the concerns the
gentleman expresses. I do not believe that these are the appropriate
levels at which education ought to be funded. I think it will cause a
great deal of turmoil at the local level.
Keep in mind that, while the Federal Government only provides a small
share of the overall education budget, it provides a very high
percentage, well over 50 percent, in virtually all districts, of the
cost of meeting the education needs of children who are served by title
I. I think that is going to be a big hole in those local school
budgets, and that is something that the Congress ought to do something
about. I know the President very badly wants to see that changed.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, it is important then that we support the
Bonior amendment to recommit to restore those funds, at least to the
1995 level for education.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree.
Mr. KILDEE. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Vermont [Mr. Sanders].
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to engage in a colloquy with the
gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], the chairman of the
Committee on Appropriations.
As the chairman knows, I am particularly concerned with the Low-
Income Home Energy Assistance Program. It has been very cold in my part
of the country, and during earlier CR's there have been disruptions in
funding for this vital program.
The administration has released $810 million to the States, but I am
concerned that the flow of funds to the States could again be
disrupted. Generally I would like to know whether this CR will affect
the full commitment of funds to the--funds of LIHEAP--to the States.
Specifically, is it the chairman's understanding that under the current
bill before the House, funds for LIHEAP will be allocated to the States
and be available for distribution to the States in the normal fashion?
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SANDERS. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.

[[Page H892]]

Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the distinguished chairman
of the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education,
the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter], I would say that it is my
understanding and his that the gentleman is correct.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from California [Mr. Lewis], chairman of the Subcommittee on
VA, HUD and Independent Agencies.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for
yielding time to me. I certainly will not take the 2 minutes.
I did, as the chairman may have noted, stand, thinking about being
recognized during the objection opportunity that we had earlier. It
certainly was not my intention to object.
The reason for my considering doing that was because, as the chairman
has indicated, a significant portion of my own VA-HUD bill is within
this short-term appropriations. The process that we went through in our
subcommittee to begin the pattern of reducing spending was a very, very
difficult process, of which I am very proud. I am particularly proud of
the Members who themselves had to make many a sacrifice by way of
cutting back that spending.
It is important to note that we were among those who actually went
about terminating some programs, the most difficult of processes. The
concern that I want to express here as I praise both my colleague and
my ranking member for the difficult process they have been through is
the fact that this bill does for a short-term period reverse some of
those very difficult decisions, a process that is not very helpful to
the committee's work. I want, beyond praising the committee, to have
others around here at a higher level than those of us in the committee
to know that we intend to look very carefully when we come toward March
15 regarding any similar pattern.
Mr. Speaker, this bill provides funding for the departments and
agencies under the jurisdiction of the VA, HUD, and Independent
Agencies Subcommittee until March 15 or the enactment of the regular
appropriations act.
The funding amount for each appropriation account will be the level
agreed to in the conference on H.R. 2099. Exceptions are being made for
the Corporation for National and Community Service and the community
development financial institutions fund which are being continued at 75
percent of the 1995 appropriation levels.
The departments and agencies are expected to administer the programs
and activities consistent with the directions contained in the 1996
statement of the managers and other relevant legislative history.
The approved major construction projects for the Department of
Veterans Affairs are those referenced in the conference report.
Further, it is intended that under section 107 of the VA's
administrative provisions that the general operating expenses
appropriation be reimbursed from the insurance funds for the entire
fiscal year's administrative costs.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I have a concern here.
The new majority wanted to dispose of property and real estate at 501
First Street. It came through the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, and it was handled in the Subcommittee on Public
Buildings and Economic Development.
I notice now that this property, the conveyance and sale of it, is in
this continuing resolution. I am certainly not going to try and
obstruct this particular measure but I would like to say this. This
sets a precedent, and the subcommittee had, in fact, placed into that
particular language that there would be a net gain from the sale of
this and it would not cost the people of the United States money to
convey property for the sake of getting rid of it.
Second of all, the welfare of those children in that day care center
would, in fact, be addressed and handled properly in an orderly
fashion. I would like to state that the welfare of those children has
not been addressed in the sense of the Congress situation in here and
the language relating to the fact that there shall be a net gain from
the sale of this has also been removed.
I want to state that this is not the way to set a precedent for the
types of action that has been taken by the new majority. I supported
the sale of this transaction, but I believe that the language that has
been removed is not in the good interest of precedent-setting policy in
the handling of real estate by our committee.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from California
[Mr. Packard].

{time} 1815

Mr. PACKARD. Mr. Speaker, the language, we worked hard to get the
appropriate language in this bill. The language simply authorizes the
Architect of the Capitol to consummate the sale under the direction of
the House Office Building Commission, but it does not create the sale.
We do not consummate the sale in the language of this bill. It leaves
that judgment yet to the leadership of the House. Frankly, we think it
is good language that still leaves the option open whether it is right
to sell property or not. We are not selling property in the language in
this bill.

{time} 1815

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. TRAFICANT. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. GILCHREST. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
Mr. Speaker, I know there is some concern. The gentleman from Ohio
[Mr. Traficant] and I sat through the hearings. We sat through both
markups.
I know there are some reservations about the cost of marketing. That
is still limited at $75,000. There is some concern about the
profitability of this sale. With new estimates, I give the gentleman
assurances that when this building is sold there is going to be a
profit to the Federal Government, there is going to be a $300,000
savings on annual maintenance to the Government, and you can be firmly
assured that the day care center will be retained.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I am glad to accept
that and hear that from the subcommittee Chair, but I think for the
sake of precedents, we should have had that type of defining language
clearly delineated.
I will not oppose it, and I will support the measure without any
further obstruction here, but I think that was a very important
precedent-setting transaction.
I commend the majority for looking toward those savings, but we could
have done that, I think, with better language from the authorizing end
that would have been included in the appropriators' language.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that we have
contained the entire foreign operations bill in the appropriations
cycle for 1996 in this bill, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Alabama [Mr. Callahan], the distinguished chairman of
that subcommittee.
(Mr. CALLAHAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. CALLAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and the gentleman
from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], as well as the staff, for reaching this
agreement and including our bill in the resolution. I urge my
colleagues to vote for this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my chairman for yielding me time
to address the foreign operations portion of the bill before us. As my
colleagues know, the fiscal year 1996 foreign operations appropriations
conference report was approved by the House of Representatives nearly 3
months ago by a bipartisan vote of 351 to 71. Working together with all
of my colleagues on the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, and I might
add, with a great deal of help from the gentleman from Wisconsin, we
were able to fashion a bipartisan bill. It is significantly below the
administration's request levels, yet I believe we were very fair in
determining how those cuts were apportioned. It wasn't easy but we did
it.
I would like to emphasize three things for my colleagues. First, The
conference report cited in this bill is the identical language passed
by the House last October. There have been no changes in the agreed
upon conference report language. Second, let me just remind my
colleagues of some key facts. At $12.1 billion, it is nearly 19 percent
below

[[Page H893]]
the President's requested level and 11 percent below the fiscal year
1995 levels. At the same time, the bill provides $500 million for child
survival and disease prevention programs, with child survival
activities funded at $25 million over the fiscal year 1995 level. We
also provide the traditional amounts for Israel and Egypt. Prime
Minister Rabin's tragic death reinforces the need for a peaceful
settlement in the Middle East. In this respect, the subcommittee's
bipartisan support for Middle East Peace Process is reflected in the
conference report agreement.
But we did have one issue which was not so easy to resolve. It was
the question of abortion funding and the Mexico City policy. This issue
is of critical importance to me, therefore I was very disappointed that
the Senate did not accept the House-passed language on this issue the
very first time we sent it to them. But that is the nature of the
Congress.
After months of hard work an agreement has been reached on a formula
which strongly supports the House position and the authorizing
committee's responsibility for this issue. The language in the bill
before you is a critical two-part formula--it delays obligation of
international population planning funds until July 1, 1996, unless an
authorization is enacted prior to then. After July, if an authorization
is not enacted, 1996 population funds will be limited to 65 percent of
the 1995 level and available for obligation on a monthly basis over 2
years at a rate no greater than 6.67 percent of the total amount
available under this limitation. The intent of this provision is to
give the authorizers and the administration an incentive to come to
agreement promptly on the issue of Mexico City and abortion.
To help understand this concept, let's assume that for every dollar
for population planning activities in 1995, 75 cents would be available
in 1996 under the terms of the continuing resolution that we have been
operating under. Under the 1996 conference agreement, family planning
activities would get approximately 81 cents on the dollar, compared to
1995, if an authorization is enacted into law. This would be the same
level as other development assistance activities, assuming all programs
are treated equally, except for child survival programs which will
increase over the 1995 level. However, if an authorization is not
enacted into law, the proposal would generate 65 cents to the dollar
over the 15 months that the funds would be available for obligation.
These funds would become available at the rate of a little over 4
cents per month over these 15 months. That way the administration will
not obligate and expend all the funds at once, which would remove any
incentive for opponents of the Mexico City policy to negotiate in good
faith on the authorization bill. At the same time, funds will continue
to flow even in the absence of an agreement on Mexico City.
I think this 65-cents-to-the-dollar solution is the best outcome
either side could hope for; it provides an ``in-cent-tive'' for both
sides, and makes good ``cents.''
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, to answer those who have concerns that
agriculture is not addressed in this bill, I yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Nussle].
Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding time to
me. I know it is typical that you yield to members of the Committee on
Appropriations, so I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this.
When the gentleman talks about wanting to run over here and objecting
to this bill, I came over here on pretty quick notice when I heard this
was coming up. I heard that negotiations had broken down in trying to
get agriculture authorization onto this bill.
It is very disturbing to me that, first of all, we had to go through
this because the President vetoed the bill. We are now operating under
the 1949 act because the President vetoed the bill. We hear that, over
in the other body today, the majority leader, the gentleman from Kansas
[Mr. Dole], wanted to bring up authorization language for agriculture,
farmers that are talking to their bankers as we speak, making planting
decisions, talking to their suppliers, and that there is one Member of
the other body sitting over there dragging his feet, objecting to this
coming up, objecting to the negotiations so we could put this on this
bill and calm the fears of many farmers out there that are trying to
dig up someplace in their attic or basement a copy of the 1949 act.
Mr. Speaker, it would be one thing to shut down the Government, I
suppose, on some farmer's whim because they are having a difficult time
understanding the 1949 act, if it was not for the fact that we know
that the leadership in the House, in a bipartisan fashion, are working
to figure out a way to deal with this problem possibly as soon as next
week.
But we have got to, I would say to my colleagues, stress to the
minority leader in the Senate, Mr. Daschle, who continues to object to
this change, continues to object to allowing farmers the kind of
confidence that they need when they talk to their lenders, when they
talk to their suppliers that they know what they are going to have to
deal with next year.
I am not going to object to this. I am going to support it. I urge
Members from the farm country to do so. But we have to put pressure on
those folks in the other body.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Texas
[Mr. Coleman].
(Mr. COLEMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, let me say to the gentleman who was just in
the well, a part of the problem is not that it is one Member in the
other body. The fact of the matter is it is February, just about, is it
not, of 1996. I thought we were supposed to be working on a farm bill
in 1995. We were supposed to pass one in 1995. We were supposed to have
all of these appropriations bills done in 1995. We have been doing that
for years, whether we agreed with the administration or disagreed with
the administration. Do you know what we do? We sit down and try to work
those matters out.
I want to get to the point I wanted to make and the reason I got up
here. You preceded me, and I wanted to address that issue. I want to
ask the chairman of my committee, I have served on the Committee on
Appropriations now for a dozen years, I will tell Members, I have never
seen a procedure or process like this, and I want to ask, who in the
world was representing Illinois, New York, New Jersey, California,
Texas, Florida, places that have a great need for bilingual education,
in this closed meeting that I was not invited to? Who was representing
them?
You all cut some bilingual education programs. I just want to say
right now, here in public, that as the rhetoric becomes more harsh
about immigrants in America, it is strange to me that these are the
very programs we are going to be cutting are the ones that integrate
immigrants into our society.
Districts like I am honored to represent need these kinds of
programs. I understand that there are huge cuts in this continuing
resolution.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLEMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Do I understand, Mr. Speaker, from the gentleman's
question, that he is concerned about the funding of education in
America, is that correct, by the U.S. Congress?
Mr. COLEMAN. Let me tell you what I understood happened: that you
froze the new grant activities for support services for bilingual
education.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. If the gentleman will yield further, I know the
gentleman has paid attention. He knows that the Labor-Health-Education
bill has passed the House of Representatives as long ago as July 1995,
I would remind the gentleman.
Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, then why in the world,
I understand when you pass authorization bills, but I understand,
though, that you have frozen some of the programs or made cuts in some
of the programs for bilingual education? True or false?
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Does the gentleman want an answer to his questions?
Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to have an answer to my questions.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. If the gentleman would yield to me to answer the
question.
Mr. COLEMAN. I will yield to the chairman so I can get a yes or no
answer.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, my answer to the gentleman is that when
the Democrats in the Senate will vote this bill through the Senate and
we can go to conference and send the bill to the President, then we can
get all the funding that the conference will allow.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLEMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to repeat, I think we need to pass this
bill

[[Page H894]]
today. I hope we can keep things as calm as possible, but I do take
issue with the description of what has happened to the Labor-Health-
Education bill in the Senate that has just been given by my good
friend, the gentleman from Louisiana.
The situation on the Education appropriation bill is simply this: The
bill which was produced, or I mean the 602 allocation, which defines
what the spending levels are, that allocation process which defines the
ceilings for all 13 appropriation bills, was set so low in that process
that the bill that the Senate produced in the committee cannot be
brought up on the floor except by unanimous consent, under Senate
rules. That is the problem.
The problem is that unanimous consent has been objected to by Members
of both parties. That bill has not, as has often been suggested, been
subjected to a filibuster. I do not support filibusters on anything
except constitutional issues.
But it seems to me important to understand, Mr. Speaker, that what
has been holding up the Education appropriation bill in the Senate is
the fact that the bill itself exceeds the spending level allocated to
it by the Republican leadership in the Senate and, therefore, they
cannot get the bill up except by unanimous consent, and there have been
objections to that on both sides of the political aisle.
Without getting into a political heat wave here today, I do want to
make clear that the record shows accurately what has happened in the
Senate, and that is why we will be supporting the Bonior motion to
recommit, which tries to do what we can on this side to correct that
problem.
Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, that is the reason that
we ought to be for the Bonior motion to instruct, with language of that
kind, so we can address an issue that is of great importance to many
Members on both sides of the aisle on issues that are now going to be
either defunded or cut so dramatically that we cannot carry out those
programs appropriately.
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLEMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the gentleman
from Texas, pointed to the cuts in bilingual education. But let me go
down the list of the cuts.
I agree with our ranking member, we have to pass this, but some of
the cuts, 25 percent for Education 2000: Title I gets 17 percent, safe
and drug-free schools, a 25-percent cut. That is what we are talking
about.
We are up against the wall because these programs cannot function,
and yet they are taking a 25-percent cut because the majority is
cutting education funding that 80 percent of the people in our country
support.
Mr. COLEMAN. In closing, Mr. Speaker, let me only say to the chairman
that he knows and I know that part of the problem has been with the
process.
The gentleman from Iowa, if he is still on the floor, I will be happy
to yield to him, I understand that he is concerned that we were here at
the end of the year, in fact several months, nearly half a year into
the new fiscal year. The problem is you have to get these things
resolved a lot earlier than this.
Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLEMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.
Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, regardless of the state of the history,
which, of course, is a Presidential veto, the fact of the matter is we
are here today. There appears to be bipartisan support to attach
language to make sure we have authorization for agriculture. There is
one person over in the Senate who is blocking this.
Mr. COLEMAN. Reclaiming my time, that is the problem that you
continue to have with the process. You do not wait until it is the
following year after you are supposed to have passed the normal
appropriations.
Mr. NUSSLE. We have a President that vetoes everything.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Missouri [Mr. Volkmer].
(Mr. VOLKMER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Speaker, I just want to tell the gentleman from
Iowa, if he is still present, that I would have objected if the
provision he wants had been in this bill.
I, for one, do not agree with the welfare bill that was tried to be
passed, that could not come out of the Committee on Agriculture. They
stuck it on the reconciliation package, which the President rightfully
vetoed. It is nothing but a welfare bill for big farmers. Farmers get
$120,000 a year and do not even have to farm under that bill.
Mr. Speaker, I did not want to talk about it, but the gentleman
brought it up. What I really wanted to talk about is I want the people
to know that this bill really is one that I am going to vote for
because I see the need for it, but I am going to hold my nose real good
when I vote for it, because it smells, it stinks for what it does to
education. It is terrible for education.
I want to tell everybody that if you think this is bad for education,
which my educators say is bad for education, then if the President had
signed their reconciliation package, which they called the Balanced
Budget Act of 1995, they would have seen the same cuts in Medicare,
Medicaid, and everything down the line, just like they are cutting
education in this. This is a terrible bill, but it is the only thing we
have. That is the only reason I am going to be voting for it. It smells
to high heaven. It cuts education.
It means a lot of my students that are in higher education next year
are going to have a tough time returning. It means that a lot of kids
going out of high school this year are going to have a terrible time
being able to get that education next year. It means that many of my
elementary and secondary institutions, schools in my district, are not
going to be able to have the funds that they need that they have had in
the past for necessary programs under title I. I think this should be
corrected. That is why I am going to strongly support the motion to
recommit.
I ask anybody that is really interested in education to support that
motion. I will return now to agriculture and tell again the gentleman
from Iowa, yes, I have been told, I will tell you how it goes up here,
folks.

{time} 1830

That bill was not reported out of the Committee on Agriculture
because it was a smelly bill, a terrible bill, so they stuck it in the
reconciliation.
Now they tell me, I just got word today, that next week on Tuesday we
are supposed to bring it up in committee and mark it up, a different
bill. I just got a copy of it today, but now my staff tells me this
evening that this is not the bill we are going to mark up, we are going
to have a different one, we are going to have the chairman's mark when
we do it, and I will not see that until Tuesday.
That is the way they work down here. You do not even have an
opportunity to read a bill much before you vote on it or act on it. It
is terrible.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
California [Mr. Fazio].
Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I certainly rise in support of
the motion to recommit to hold funding of education as the highest
possible priority. The American people need assistance in keeping their
schools functioning and operating at the best possible level that we
could help them attain.
But I want to follow my colleague from Missouri on the issue of
agriculture. I heard the gentleman from Iowa commenting earlier about
how the Senate minority leader was somehow preventing us from having a
farm bill. If there is an example of inability to manage an issue, it
has to be on how the new Republican majority in this Congress has
mismanaged agriculture.
We are confronted at the moment with a situation where the gentleman
from Kansas, Mr. Roberts, the chairman of the committee, and Senator
Dole, his close personal friend from Kansas, cannot even agree on a
proper approach to deal with the agricultural crisis that is about to
occur across this land as people have to make decisions about cropping.
Now, this is ludicrous. We have not been able to get a Republican
majority on the farm authorizing committee of the Committee on
Agriculture to put together a bill that can attain a majority of their
own members.
There is no question we are cutting funding for agriculture
subsidies. We

[[Page H895]]
have cut 50 percent in the last decade. The question is, are we going
to have a soft landing or are we going to have a crash?
Now, the Freedom to Farm bill was unanimously trashed by almost every
commodity group in this country. It may have had some supporters among
Kansas wheatgrowers, but it did not really go much further than that.
And here we have, at the last minute, an attempt to somehow imply that
a Democrat in the Senate, in the minority, is holding up having a farm
bill. This is an absolute travesty.
What we face is catastrophe in commodity after commodity, going back
to laws that have been on the books for years, but which we have
amended essentially in every farm authorization we have enacted. We are
going to give, I think probably our only hope, the Secretary of
Agriculture the opportunity to run these programs because Congress
cannot speak on one of the most fundamental industries that faces
disaster here in this country.
Now, what we ought to do is what we have always done, and that is put
a farm bill together on a bipartisan basis that can come to the floor,
have broad support not only in rural communities, but in urban America
where we do for nutrition and for food stamps the right thing, and pass
that bill, send it to the President, let it be signed. We will take our
budget savings, but we will not create catastrophe in agricultural
communities across this country.
The Republicans have failed to manage one of the most important
authorizations that comes before this Congress probably every 5 years.
They have been unable to put their own majority together, and now they
want to throw the blame at somebody else. It is a shameful act.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Florida [Mrs. Meek].
Mrs. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am just appalled to see what is
going on here with the CR, particularly with education, and I do hope
that the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations and the majority
party will consider the fact that if we do not do something to change
the education system in this country, we will be doing more to promote
the problems that we already have.
Why should we retreat on education? We have never been fully funded
on the State level or in this country for education. Therefore, I think
it is criminal to cut these programs such as you have, particularly in
areas where there are inner-city children, poor children, disadvantaged
children. I would appeal to your sensitivity to human nature.
You have cut title I programs when young students were getting a
start in life. You cut Safe and Drug-Free Schools in some of these
districts where the drug problem is really, really accelerating instead
of decelerating. So you must know them, if you are ever going to have
good programs, they must start in schools, they must start with
education.
To think that you are going to cut bilingual and immigrant programs
when this country has added an influx, particularly in areas such as
mine in Florida, the influx of immigrants, they must be educated, and
that, I think, you should consider immediately.
The vocational education has been cut. We have so many people who are
jobless in this country. They may not be in your district, but they are
in a lot of Members' Districts, particularly those of us who are from
urban areas. We need consideration of that.
I see what you are doing where there has been some progress in this
country in education programs, and you have cut those programs, and you
have labeled them for termination.
Mr. Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, Mr. Chairman of the
Committee on Appropriations, you are not listening, but I am saying to
you, now is the time to listen up. It may be too late.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas
[Ms. Jackson-Lee].
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from
Wisconsin for yielding me this time, and I rise only to make two very
brief points that I think are very important.
First of all, I did offer a reservation because I was concerned
specifically about impacts in the Texas area that were unclear in this
very lengthy document that we had seen. But I am rising to support the
motion to recommit, even though the first vote of concern is to ensure
that this Government never shuts down. It is important that as we stand
here, we are also recognizing that we must negotiate. The reason is
because, as we look at what is coming out of this CR, we see that there
is targeted pain.
Very often I have had the opportunity to talk to experts in education
in my district, Alma Allen, for example, and I realize the impact of
Federal education dollars. What we are doing here is that we are
shutting down education for our States, for many of the dollars that
are being cut are impacting programs that are impacted or paid for only
by Federal dollars; and that includes our special education, our safe
and drug-free schools.
It is important than that we vote for the motion to recommit and that
we establish that we are going to negotiate and not have this as the
final budget for the upcoming year.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, first of all, I had not expected that there would be a
debate on farm policy on this bill today. Let me simply say, as an
upper Midwesterner, I think both parties have done a rotten job of
dealing with the problems of farmers, certainly dairy farmers in the
upper Midwest. I think the existing dairy law has been a joke. I have
not voted for farm bills in almost 10 years because they are wildly
discriminatory against the region that I represent.
I hope that the new dairy agreement, which has been announced by the
Subcommittee on Agriculture, will improve the situation. I remain ready
to be convinced and persuaded. I am convinced that the only way we can
get a decent dairy program in this country is if we have a radical
reform of the milk marketing order system which plagues this country
and should have been abolished a long time ago.
Having said that, I want to make clear that that issue is not
involved in this bill. The failure of the Congress to correct that
problem is a failure of the Committee on Agriculture; it is not a
failure of the gentleman from Louisiana or anyone else on the Committee
on Appropriations, because we do not have the authority to deal with
that.
I simply want to take the remaining time to discuss the motion to
recommit of the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior]. We all want to
save dollars, but I think we have a fundamental obligation to, at the
same time that we are doing that, do everything we can to try to make
the economy grow, and most of all, to try to give working people some
greater opportunity than they have had in recent years to raise their
own family income by dint of their own hard work.
It is tough out there. You have working families who struggle to pay
their bills, who struggle to get a little bit ahead in savings, who
struggle to find a way to pay for their kids' education, and through
all of life's struggles, I think they understand that education and
training is one of the few ways that you can get off the treadmill,
that you can make something of yourself and your family through your
own hard work.
I think it is a fundamental mistake for this Congress to make things
more difficult for those working families. There ought to be a rule
which says that if the Congress cannot help somebody on the economic
road that they are traveling, that they at least not make things more
difficult; and I think Congress does make things more difficult when
they do not meet their obligation to strengthen education and training
in this country. And that goes for early education, it goes for
elementary and secondary, and it goes for higher education.

We have an obligation to help every kid in this country prepare for
the economic race that he or she is going to have to run in a very
tough world. We have an obligation to help middle-class families find
ways to get their kids' college educations and community college and
technical school educations, and this bill does not meet that
responsibility.
We have to pass this legislation, because if we do not, the
Government will once again close down, and that would be an immense
tragedy for the people of this country. But I do think it is also
necessary to try to improve

[[Page H896]]
it. That is what the Bonior amendment, or what the Bonior motion will
do in the motion to recommit.
I would urge very strong support for the Bonior motion, which will
restore $3.1 billion in education funding, and then I would urge that
you support this bill so we can meet our basic obligation to govern.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remainder of my time.
(Mr. LIVINGSTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. LIVINGSTON. My friends, the hour is late and this will be the
last time I will have a chance to address this bill, because the
distinguished gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] and the gentleman
from California [Mr. Cunningham], will talk on the motion to recommit.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill. If you do,
and I suspect the majority will vote for it, it will go to the other
body, it will pass, and the President will get it on his desk. He has
agreed to the conditions and terms, and he will sign the bill, at least
according to my expectations.
Mr. Speaker, the appropriations process for fiscal year 1996 is long
overdue. The fact is we have gotten through 7 bills; they have become
law. Of the 6 remaining which have not, 3 were voted, 3 are still
working their way through the process, and 1 is included here tonight.
I think that we could all say we have certainly put enough time into
this process.
We have, through lack of agreement or whatever, found that closing
the Government was not fun, was not tasteful, and perhaps caused a lot
of suffering and hardship for people at an unfortunate time of the
calendar year.

{time} 1845

We do not want to repeat that experience. That is why I am proud of
the committee, Republicans and Democrats alike, in this body and in the
other, for finally coming together and working out their differences.
There is plenty to complain about in this bill, from the conservative
side, from the liberal side, perhaps even in the middle.
The fact of the matter is, the 104th Congress came in here with a
mandate. The mandate is to get this country in working order, get this
country on a fiscally sound basis, to start putting ourselves on a
glidepath toward a balanced budget.
We have worked our way through the entitlements debate. We have not
scored so well. Liberals want to spend more, conservatives want to
spend less. We have not quite gotten an agreement on the entitlements
on the mandatory side of the budget. That is two-thirds of the budget.
But on the discretionary side, that discretionary one-third which deals
with the cost of running the Government, we have already reaped great
savings in the last 13 months. We have saved the American taxpayer $20
billion in fiscal year 1995 under what was initially appropriated. For
fiscal year 1996, we can say with certainty we are going to save them
at least $22 billion and possibly as much as $30 billion below that
same level, depending on our progress with our remaining appropriations
action.

We are continuing to make progress. I think today we are making great
progress. As I said, we have 6 bills outstanding. One of those bills is
included in its entirety, the Foreign Operations bill, the bill chaired
by the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. Callahan], who spoke a little while
ago. That bill is incorporated in this agreement, which means that this
bill, once it has gone through the processes, will be enacted into law
and, instead of having 6 bills outstanding, we will have 5.
I want to take this moment to say that that would not have been
possible without the valuable services of all of our staff. All of the
staff on the Committee on Appropriations have contributed mightily to
the progress we have made. It has been the members that have slowed
down the process, not the staff. One particular staff member is marking
this bill as his last. For 17 years on the Hill, he has worked within
the Committee on Appropriations, both on the MILCON and the Foreign
Operations bills, worked closely with me and with all the other
members. He sits beside the gentleman from Wisconsin. I am talking
about Terry Peel. I would ask all of the Members to give Terry Peel an
expression of appreciation for his invaluable service.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LIVINGSTON. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. OBEY. Let me simply say that I want to join the gentleman in
taking note of Terry's tremendous service to this place. I think
Members in both parties who worked with Terry Peel understand that he
has really epitomized what the word ``service'' is all about. He has
been of tremendous service to this House. He has been of tremendous
service to this country. He has been the ``brains'' of many of us for
years on complicated foreign assistance programs, and he must have an
incredible disposition to be able to deal with that bill as long as he
has and still smile as regularly as he does and still find the energy
to write the plays that he has managed to write the past few years.
I appreciate the time he has taken and I appreciate the time that his
wife Ann has allowed him to give us and the country in so doing.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I want to echo those
comments, wish Terry and his wife well in their future endeavors, and I
look forward to going to the performances of his plays as well.
Now, my friends, we are coming to the end of the general debate.
There have been a few points made about education. The fact of the
matter is that some of our friends on the Democrat side emulated what
was said about Will Rogers and his relationship to mankind. ``Will
Rogers never saw a man he did not like.'' The Democrats never saw an
education program they did not like. No matter how wasteful,
inefficient, redundant, duplicative, or unnecessary, the fact is, they
do not want to close any programs, they do not want to end them. They
want to create a new program for every idea, every initiative, every
whim, every speculation, and, by the way, all the others are great, do
not close them, do not merge them, do not try to get any savings or
efficiency for the American taxpayer.
I do not know if my colleagues are aware, but there are roughly 256
separate education programs. There are also about 163 job training
programs and 47 nutrition programs, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
The U.S. Congress over the last 60 years has done a great deal of
good with the American people's money for the American people. The
problem is the process has gotten out of kilter. We create so many
programs that we run out of good causes. But we do not remember that we
are using other people's money. We are taking their money and putting
it in a program, creating a bureaucracy, and taking that money and
spreading it all over for good causes and getting reelected.
The time has come when the taxpayer is saying enough is enough is
enough. After World War II, the average American family paid 5 percent
of its income to the Federal Government. Today the average American
family pays 25 percent of its income to the Federal Government. If they
have their way, it will be 80 percent one of these days, because they
do not want to balance the budget, they just want to keep taking the
money and spending it.
Now it is time to pare down the bureaucracy. Even the President
acknowledges that. In his State of the Union Speech just 2 days ago, he
acknowledged that it is time for a smaller Government. In fact, he has
suggested to this Congress that we close 36 education programs. They
might all have good titles, good names. You can find a lot of
constituents for those programs. But when you consider that those
constituents are also being served by hundreds of other programs, there
is some loss of common sense in the works.

It is time to restore common sense. Now they say that the Labor-
Health-Education bill has not worked its way through the process, and
it is our fault. We have not adequately funded it. They say we have cut
all the programs. The fact is the House of Representatives through the
appropriations process passed the Labor-Health bill in late July 1995.
They say it is not being filibustered by the Democrats in the Senate.
The fact is I happened to turn on the television to watch the other
body, and saw one of the Members stand up and

[[Page H897]]
object to the consideration of the Labor-Health bill, the presentation
of the bill on the floor of the Senate. That happened. Whether that is
a filibuster or not, the bill was not presented, it was not debated, it
was not argued, it did not occur, it did not pass.
As we all know about the legislative process, if it does not pass one
body, they cannot go to conference. If we cannot go to conference, we
cannot present the bill to the President. If they cannot present the
bill to the President, he cannot sign it or veto it. So the process is
stuck.
What are we doing here? We are simply passing a Balanced Budget
Downpayment Act for this month, between now and March 15, to keep most
of these programs going. That seems logical. Keep them going so that
the Government does not close down, and at the same time let us not
spend excessively.
We trim them to about 75 percent of funding. We acknowledge that some
people should be furloughed or rifed where there is not going to be
full funding over the year. And we simply tell the American taxpayer we
are making a dent; we are not solving all the problems, but we are
making a dent on your behalf.
The people that really need service will get service, but perhaps we
will begin to cut back on this unnecessary and wasteful bureaucracy
just a little bit between now and March 15, until the regular process
can work its way through the system and the Labor-Health bill can be
passed and the President can sign his name on it.
I hope that happens. But, in the meantime, I think it is very, very
important to pass this bill. Let us quit wasting the taxpayers' money,
but let us also quit wasting time debating year fiscal year 1996,
because, my friends, within days we are going to be debating fiscal
year 1997 and the process is going to start all over again.
So I urge my friends, vote for the bill; vote against the motion to
recommit. Let us keep the Government open, let us send this to the
Senate, let the Senate send it to the President, and we can go home and
have a couple of days off.
Mr. STOKES. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2880, a continuing
resolution for fiscal year 1996. I join my ranking member for the full
appropriations subcommittee, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] in
commending our colleagues on the other side of the aisle for working so
diligently to bring this much improve measure before us tonight.
While I am glad to see that progress appears to be occurring with
respect to a final budget agreement and the remaining appropriations
bills, I am certain that no one is more delighted with any progress
than the hard-working Government employees, their families, and the
millions of individuals and families whose lives have been held hostage
over the last few months since we have been unable to resolve these
pressing matters.
As ranking member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Veterans
Affairs, Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies, I
have been among the most ardent opponents of the many reductions to
critical programs under the subcommittee's jurisdiction, as well as the
numerous and harmful riders that were included in the measure. The
measure before us does not address all of the areas for which I have
concern. It does, however, allow the Federal Government to continue to
meet important obligations to our Nation's veterans, to safeguard our
environment, provide aid to the homeless, assist families and
individuals in purchasing homes, and further our scientific and
technological endeavors.
Mr. Speaker, this measure is by no means perfect and still requires
some major fine tuning. Furthermore, we must not forget that we have to
extend the debt ceiling limit to restore financial stability of our
Nation's financial markets. Nonetheless, we must do the right thing for
this Nation and pass this continuing resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hefley). Pursuant to the order of the
House of today, the previous question is ordered.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.

Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. BONIOR

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

Mr. Bonior moves to recommit the bill to the Committee on
Appropriations with instructions to report it back forthwith
with an amendment as follows:
At the end of Title I of the bill insert the following new
section:

``restoration for education programs

``Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act except
sections 106, 115, 119 and 120, projects and activities of
the Department of Education shall be continued at a rate of
operations at the current rate, and under the authority and
conditions provided in the applicable appropriations Act for
the fiscal year 1995. Provided, That section 111 of this
title shall not apply to this section notwithstanding any
other provisions of this Act.

The SPEAKER, pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior,]
is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his motion to recommit.
Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, this is the ninth stopgap measure that we
have had on this floor since that fiscal year began. Let us be clear
what this motion to recommit is. It is one of the biggest education
votes that you will have in this Congress. Do we make our kids'
education a priority, or do we cut it? That is what this vote is all
about.
The Republicans have presented us with a resolution that makes deep
cuts. It cuts Safe and Drug Free Schools by 25 percent. That is the
DARE program. That is the one we all go home and praise to the high
heavens. It cuts the School-to-Work Program by 18 percent. That is the
new program we adopted to take care of the 70 percent of our kids who
do not graduate from college, modeled after the successful program they
have in Germany. It cuts title I funding by more than $1 billion over
the year, if you prorated this out over the year per this request. It
kicks over 1 million kids off math and reading. It cuts teacher
training for special education by 25 percent.
If we go down this road, as my friend from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] and
the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Kildee] pointed out, this is going to
cost about $3.1 billion. That will be the biggest cut in education in
the history of this country. Its effect will be devastating. This is
shortsighted. It is a strategy already being felt in communities all
over this country.

Now is the time for teacher contracts to be signed, but communities
cannot do that because the funding is uncertain. Now is the time for
cities to submit their school budget, but they cannot do that because
they do not have any numbers to work with.
Now is the time for colleges to award financial aid, but they cannot
do that because they have not been told how much they are going to have
to offer, and, because of it, families and students all over America
are being hung out to dry.
These are the people who work hard, who play by the rules, who pay
their bills, and they want a better life for their kids. They want
their kids to have some opportunity. We should be standing up for them
today. We should not be standing in their way.
Mr. Speaker, the motion to recommit that we offer today will protect
our children's education. It will restore funds for School-to-Work, it
will restore funds for Safe and Drug Free Schools, the DARE Program. It
will restore funds for the Perkins loans, it will restore funds for
math and science training, it will restore funds for impact aid and for
title I and other things as well. Without this amendment, we will be
placing an extra burden on local communities, local schools, and, I
might dare say, on local property taxes.
So let me just conclude, Mr. Speaker, by suggesting that we should
not be cutting education. Republicans could not cut education through
the front door, and we should not let them cut it through the back
door. This is one of the most important education votes that we will
cast in this Congress. I urge my colleagues, vote ``yes'' on the motion
to recommit, and give our kids an opportunity they deserve.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BONIOR. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan, who has been a
stalwart on this issue for many years.

{time} 1900

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

[[Page H898]]

Mr. Speaker, education has always had friends on the Republican side
of the aisle, and they realize that elementary and secondary education
is forward-funded, that this resolution provides money for the school
year beginning this coming September.
If this resolution is extended for the rest of the year, there will
be a $3.1 billion cut in education, the largest cut ever. Schools right
now, or very soon, will be writing their budgets. They have to know how
much money will be available or teachers will be pink-slipped. Programs
will be cut.
I ask my friends on that side of the aisle, many of them sitting
right there who have been good friends of education, we have worked
together in the vineyard of education, I ask my colleagues to set aside
partisanship. We have the opportunity to restore those funds to give
the school districts some certainty as to their funding.
Please set aside the partisanship. Mr. Gingrich, Professor Gingrich,
will not punish you for supporting education. Please vote for this
motion to recommit.
Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California [Mr. Cunningham].
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I respect the gentleman from Michigan
[Mr. Kildee]. We are on the same committee. I would say, of the 256
educational programs we have, we cannot fund all the programs that
really work adequately. Where do we get this free money? We take it
from the people that we supposedly send it back to, but we only give it
back to them at 23 cents on the dollar after we feed the Federal
bureaucracy, and when we do that it is inefficient.
Mr. Speaker, 93 percent of education is funded at the State and local
level. We only funded 7 percent of it, but yet take a look. That 7
percent has over 50 percent of the rules and regulations that a State
has to follow and over 75 percent of the paperwork. It is not
efficient. So what we are doing is reducing it slowly.
I agree we can just chop it off. Because of the economy, we cannot
put it all back at the State. You cannot fund a school bond or election
for education.
But we have to reduce the waste and the spending. What did we cut?
Yes, ask the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Sabo] on the Committee on
the Budget. The President's Direct Lending Program capped at 10 percent
cost a billion dollars more just in administrative fees. So what did we
cut? We cut the precious bureaucracy and cut that out.
We took the savings and increased student loans by 50 percent,
increased Pell grants the highest they have been, and increased and
level-funded the IDEA Program that my colleagues are talking about in
special education. It is level-funded. It is not reduced.
And what else? We took the Goals 2000 that has 45 instances that say
``States will,'' and we take that money and we give it back to the
States where they are not required to have boards and commissions that
report to a Federal bureaucracy here in Washington, DC. We turn that
money and give it direct so we can get 77 cents on the dollar into the
classroom, not just 23 cents. We need to be more businesslike in our
education funding.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the
distinguished gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] chairman of the
Subcommittee on Labor, Health, and Human Services and Education.
(Mr. Porter asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, 5 cents out of every $1 spent on education
is spent by the Federal Government. Reductions in Federal education
spending in this House bill, H.R. 2127, amount to less than 1 percent
of the total money spent on primary and secondary education in the
United States.
The sky is not falling. There is no hostility to the Federal role in
education. What we intend to do is to spend the money better and get
better results for America's children.
Let me quote Alice Rivlin in her 1992 book, ``Reviving the American
Dream.'' She says, ``Presidential speeches and photo opportunities,
national testing and assessments, federally funded experimental
schools, even new grants spent in accordance with Federal guidelines
can only make marginal contributions to fixing the schools.''
What we are attempting to do is to get control over 256 separate
programs that even officials in the Department of Education will say
are out of control and require huge overhead to administer. These funds
do not go to kids, but to directors and staffs in Washington that do
nothing to improve education.
Let me talk for a moment about title I. Title I evaluations say they
do not appear to be helping close the learning gap. The money is
spread, Mr. Speaker, all over our country. The money goes to schools
that do not need it. What we need to do with title I is to target the
money to the schools with large numbers of disadvantaged children so
that we get better results for kids that are most at risk. The Safe and
Drug-Free Schools Program suffers from the same problem. Funding goes
everywhere instead of to the schools that most need it. It has never
had a national evaluation.
Goals 2000 is really an attempt to use Federal dollars to encourage
States to do what they are already doing; and that is, setting up high
standards that have to be met by students and teachers alike. We do not
need Federal bribery to get that job done.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, let me say that this motion, with the exception
of only two programs, Vocational Rehabilitation and Impact Aid, has no
impact whatsoever. Most education programs are forward-funded and the
funds allegedly provided in this motion will not be obligated during
the continuing resolution period.
Mr. Speaker, I would urge the Members to vote ``no'' on the motion to
recommit.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Bonior
motion to recommit.
I do so on behalf of education. We cannot be a party to causing the
State and local turmoil that will ensue--including the issuing of pink
slips to teachers across this Nation--if we cut $3.1 billion out of
education--the biggest cut in our history.
Schools must by law send layoff notices to teachers by March or April
of the year prior to the next academic year--in this case the 1996-97
school year.
The impact on college students will be no less harmful.
I urge my colleagues to vote for this recommittal motion and save
education for children of all ages.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to recommit.
It is the height of irresponsibility for Republicans to hold
education programs hostage to their plot to extract radical concessions
through budget negotiations.
Governing and politics are about give and take and good faith.
Republicans need a lesson in both.
Their failure to support a simple continuing resolution that funds
education programs at fiscal year 1995 levels is creating serious
problems for schools, teachers and children who have absolutely nothing
to do with the budget fight. They are the innocent victims of a drive-
by shooting. In this case, it is hard to tell who is driving this car.
Is it the Speaker or the 73 Republican freshmen or the Christian
coalition?
The devastating cut in title I funding will deny 1.1 million needy
children the crucial help they need in reading, writing, math, and
critical thinking. Drug abuse and violence prevention programs will be
cut for millions of students in nearly every school district in the
country. Innovative school to work strategies developed at the local
level will be halted. Teachers will be fired, classroom sizes will
increase.
With this continuing resolution, the Republicans are turning their
backs on public education. Cuts in education are further proof that the
Republican Party has not only lost its heart and soul, but has also
lost its mind.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hefley). All time has expired.
Without objection, the previous question is ordered.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit
offered by the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior].
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.

recorded vote

Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 193,
noes 222, not voting 18, as follows:

[[Page H899]]

[Roll No. 18]

AYES--193

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Andrews
Baesler
Baldacci
Barrett (WI)
Becerra
Beilenson
Bentsen
Berman
Bevill
Bishop
Bonior
Borski
Boucher
Browder
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant (TX)
Cardin
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Coleman
Collins (IL)
Collins (MI)
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Cramer
Danner
de la Garza
DeFazio
DeLauro
Dellums
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doyle
Durbin
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Fazio
Fields (LA)
Filner
Flake
Foglietta
Ford
Frank (MA)
Franks (CT)
Frost
Furse
Gejdenson
Gephardt
Geren
Gibbons
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green
Gutierrez
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hamilton
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hefner
Heineman
Hilliard
Hinchey
Holden
Hoyer
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jacobs
Jefferson
Johnson (SD)
Johnston
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kleczka
Klink
LaFalce
Lantos
Leach
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
Montgomery
Moran
Murtha
Nadler
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Orton
Owens
Pallone
Pastor
Payne (NJ)
Payne (VA)
Pelosi
Peterson (FL)
Peterson (MN)
Pickett
Pomeroy
Poshard
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Richardson
Rivers
Roemer
Rose
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanders
Sawyer
Schroeder
Schumer
Scott
Sisisky
Skaggs
Skelton
Slaughter
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Stokes
Studds
Stupak
Tanner
Taylor (MS)
Tejeda
Thompson
Thornton
Thurman
Torkildsen
Torres
Torricelli
Towns
Traficant
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Volkmer
Ward
Watt (NC)
Williams
Wilson
Wise
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates

NOES--222

Allard
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baker (CA)
Ballenger
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
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 (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frisa
Funderburk
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goodlatte
Goodling
Goss
Graham
Greenwood
Gunderson
Gutknecht
Hansen
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
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
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Lightfoot
Livingston
LoBiondo
Longley
Lucas
Manzullo
Martini
McCollum
McCrery
McDade
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McKeon
Metcalf
Meyers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Molinari
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 (WA)
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Stearns
Stockman
Stump
Talent
Tate
Tauzin
Thomas
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Upton
Vucanovich
Waldholtz
Walker
Walsh
Wamp
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wolf
Young (FL)
Zeliff
Zimmer

NOT VOTING--18

Baker (LA)
Barcia
Barton
Brewster
Chapman
Clyburn
Hancock
Hayes
Johnson, E. B.
Linder
Myers
Serrano
Smith (TX)
Taylor (NC)
Waters
Waxman
Wyden
Young (AK)

{time} 1925

The Clerk announced the following pair:
On this vote:

Mr. Waxman for, with Mr. Linder against.

Mrs. SMITH of Washington, Mr. SHADEGG, Mr. KING, Mrs. CUBIN, and Mr.
McDADE changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. DOOLEY, BERMAN, and RUSH changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hefley). The question is on the passage
of the bill.
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 371,
noes 42, not voting 20, as follows:

[Roll No. 19]

AYES--371

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

[[Page H900]]

Sisisky
Skaggs
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Spratt
Stearns
Stenholm
Stockman
Stokes
Studds
Stump
Stupak
Talent
Tanner
Tate
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Tejeda
Thomas
Thompson
Thornberry
Thornton
Thurman
Tiahrt
Torkildsen
Torres
Torricelli
Towns
Traficant
Upton
Vento
Visclosky
Volkmer
Vucanovich
Waldholtz
Walker
Walsh
Wamp
Ward
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Williams
Wilson
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
Young (FL)
Zeliff
Zimmer

NOES--42

Becerra
Bonior
Bryant (TX)
Clay
Combest
Condit
Conyers
Coyne
DeFazio
Dellums
Fattah
Fields (LA)
Filner
Flake
Foglietta
Gibbons
Green
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Hilliard
Hinchey
Jefferson
Kanjorski
Kennedy (MA)
Klink
Latham
Lofgren
Maloney
Martinez
McDermott
Meek
Mfume
Owens
Pastor
Payne (NJ)
Rahall
Rangel
Sanders
Schroeder
Stark
Velazquez
Watt (NC)

NOT VOTING--20

Baker (LA)
Barcia
Barton
Brewster
Chapman
Clyburn
Frank (MA)
Hancock
Hayes
Johnson, E. B.
Linder
Moakley
Myers
Serrano
Smith (TX)
Taylor (NC)
Waters
Waxman
Wyden
Young (AK)

{time} 1941

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

____________________