[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 154 (Thursday, November 6, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H10124-H10129]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks on House Resolution 188.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.
Madam Speaker, I am proud to bring this resolution, House Resolution
188, to the floor today for consideration. This measure, which has
support on both sides of the aisle, is an expression of the House that
the administration is not doing all that it can to protect our
dedicated service men and women who are, at this very moment, far from
home, protecting our national interests.
This resolution was initially directed toward China's irresponsible
transfer of cruise missiles to Iran. We have improved this measure by
adding the resolution of the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Harman]
on the Russian transfer of missile technology to Iran.
We further improved the resolution by incorporating proposals by the
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] and the gentleman from California
[Mr. Dreier] on restricting the issuance of visas to known weapons
proliferators whose actions are inimicable to U.S. interests.
We must do all we can to stop the proliferation of advanced
conventional, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. The acquisition
by Iran of a large number of advanced cruise missiles from China and
ballistic missile technology and knowhow from Russia clearly is a
dangerous and destabilizing development.
In the arsenal of a rogue regime like Iran, these weapons pose a
significant threat to the security of the United States forces in the
area, the safety of all ships passing through the Straits of Hormuz,
and the stability of the entire Persian Gulf region and beyond.
Concerning the transfer of cruise missiles, the Iran-Iraq Arms
Nonproliferation Act of 1992 requires the President to impose sanctions
on any Nation that transfers ``destabilizing numbers and types'' of
advanced conventional weapons to Iran.
Inexplicably, the Clinton administration determined that the transfer
of these state-of-the-art nearly supersonic sea-skimming Chinese-made
C-802 cruise missiles in the hands of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard
forces are not ``destabilizing.''
Based on that determination, the White House has regrettably failed
to levy sanctions on either the company which transferred the missiles
or against China, as called for in the Iran-Iraq Nonproliferation Act.
I strongly disagree with the administration's failure to act, and
have introduced this resolution in response. House Resolution 188 finds
that the delivery of C-802 cruise missiles to Iran violates the Gore-
McCain Act and urges the administration to take firm action against
those responsible for transferring these dangerous weapons.
Iran has threatened to use its military power to close the Straits of
Hormuz, to disrupt international shipping and to forcefully expel
American forces from the Persian Gulf.
The acquisition of C-802 cruise missiles by Iran, weapons which can
be launched from sea, the air or land, must be considered a serious
threat to regional stability, and, most important, our forces deployed
to the region.
Today, some 15,000 American service men and women are stationed in
the Persian Gulf region, well within the range of these mobile C-802
cruise missiles. We all remember the tragic and deadly attack against
the U.S.S. Stark that occurred in the gulf in May of 1987. A single
cruise missile slammed into that frigate and killed 37 of our American
sailors.
Likewise, we must pressure the Government of Russia to halt similar
irresponsible transfers of ballistic missile technology to Iran in
violation of the Missile Technology Control Regime.
If we are not able to accomplish this, it is incumbent upon the
administration to impose sanctions and to reconsider the aid we provide
to the Russian Government.
We owe it to our troops to minimize the threat they face as they
carry out their selfless mission in support of our national security.
Prohibiting Iran from acquiring advanced conventional weapons and
penalizing those nations that provide those weapons must be a high
foreign policy objective of our Nation. To my mind, these transfers
should be unacceptable to the Congress, to the American people, and to
our U.S. military. I say it is time to do something about it.
Accordingly, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support House
Resolution 188 and we call upon the Clinton administration to take
appropriate action.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Harman], one of the chief sponsors of
a portion of this resolution.
Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding time to me
as the first speaker on our side and speak in enthusiastic support of
House Resolution 188, as amended.
I would also like to commend Chairman Gilman for highlighting the
serious national security threat posed by the acquisition of cruise
missiles by Iran. I agree with the gentleman that the acquisition of
missile technology by Iran threatens our troops in the area, poses the
highest security threat to Israel, our democratic ally in the region;
to Turkey, our NATO ally; and is in general profoundly destabilizing in
a highly volatile region.
An equally if not more destabilizing development than Chinese
proliferation to Iran is Iran's acquisition of long-range ballistic
missile technology from Russia. This pattern of Russian-Iranian
cooperation is well documented through press reports that cite Israeli
and U.S. intelligence sources. These reports say Russian entities have
provided assistance to Iran that includes
[[Page H10125]]
wind-tunnel testing of missile nose cones, guidance and propulsion
systems design, metal alloys used to build long-range missiles, and the
presence in Iran of high-level Russian advisers.
The U.S. Director of Central Intelligence, in an unclassified report
released in June, confirmed a Russian role in helping the Iranian
missile program. The DCI's report stated that, ``Russia had supplied a
variety of ballistic missile-related goods to foreign countries during
the reporting period,'' which was 1996, ``especially to Iran.''
Significantly, the Russian internal security service admitted last
month that it had thwarted an effort by Iran to acquire missile
technology from a Russian firm, this only a week after Russian
President Yeltsin denied the possibility of such transfers.
Madam Speaker, these Russian transfers to Iran are particularly
troubling. First, they will allow Iran to develop in a maximum of 3
years, and possibly within 1 year, a missile of a range capable of
striking as far away as Central Europe, as well as Israel and U.S.
troops in the region. That range is 800 to 1,200 miles.
One of the ironies, of course, is that is the distance between Iran
and Russia. So Russia may be feeding a system that may then in the end
threaten Russia.
Second, the Russian transfers provide Iran with technology and
technical advice that would allow Iran to indigenously produce long-
range ballistic missiles. And this is Iran's stated intention.
Let me underscore this point, Madam Speaker. We are not talking about
a one-time transfer of weapons. We are talking about the transfer of
knowhow that would allow Iran to build up an arsenal of its own, an
arsenal that could be equipped with chemical, biological, and nuclear
warheads, and very likely would be equipped with those warheads.
My amendment, now included in House Resolution 188, which I
introduced in the House and which Senator Kyl has introduced in the
other body, directs the President to impose sanctions on those entities
that are found to be responsible for these dangerous transfers of
technology in accordance with current law and current policy.
It is a simple and direct signal to the administration that it must
act now to seek a halt by the Russian Government of its policy, one of
complacency at best, proliferation at worst.
Let us pass House Resolution 188, as amended, and put the House on
record in strong support of taking immediate steps to halt this
dangerous situation.
Madam Speaker, diplomacy to date has failed to achieve the desired
results. Imposing sanctions is the next step required.
Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Blunt], a member of our committee.
Mr. BLUNT. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this important
measure. I appreciate the leadership of the chairman on this issue.
Fifteen thousand members of the U.S. Armed Forces are currently
stationed in the Persian Gulf to maintain peace in that vulnerable
region of the world. We owe these young men and young women the safety
that we can provide in a dangerous occupation and in a dangerous world.
We need to minimize the threat to their lives that these actions that
are being discussed here on the floor today create. We also need to
minimize the threat to our ally, Israel, and to our allies in Europe,
and to the stability of the Middle East.
The acquisition by Iran of advanced cruise missiles like the C-802
model is a serious threat to the stability of the entire gulf and to
the safety of our troops. Iran is clearly challenging the United States
for control of the gulf, and I doubt if it would hesitate to utilize
the 60 or more lethal cruise missiles pointed at our troops if the
opportunity presented itself.
The sale of these missiles and of missile technology by the Russians
to Iran and by China constitutes a clear violation of the Iran-Iraq
Arms Nonproliferation Act and of our missile technology accords.
The President must use his authority and the Congress has to give
direction, apparently, that that authority be used to impose sanctions
on China and on Russia. His continued failure to do so represents a
clear abdication of his duties as Americans are under serious threat,
our allies are under serious threat.
Surely the 1987 example of the attack on the U.S.S. Stark gave us all
the evidence we need; the loss of 37 American sailors should be enough.
I urge my colleagues to vote for this resolution and protect the lives
of young Americans.
Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas, Mr. Sam Johnson.
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me time, and thank the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Hamilton]
as well.
Madam Speaker, now that Chinese President Jiang's visit to the United
States is over, I am glad we can focus on the real issue at hand, and
that is the future of United States policy toward China. I hope the
President, after rolling up the red carpet and putting away the
champagne glasses, remembers that China has sold deadly military
hardware to a terrorist nation. This includes a direct transfer of both
chemical technology and cruise missiles to Iran. And what was this
administration's response? Silence. Even though this was in direct
violation of U.S. law, which was written by none other than Vice
President Al Gore.
Correct me if I am wrong, Madam Speaker, but wasn't it this President
who in 1993 said, ``The United States would not cater to nations that
violated peace and weapons agreements and restricted the freedoms of
their people?''
The last time I checked, China was still a Communist nation with a
leadership that restricted the most basic of human rights, and Iran was
still a dangerous rogue nation, which even today has proven ill will
toward the United States. But most hypocritical of all, the original
author of the Senate bill to stop arms sales to terrorist nations and
impose sanctions if violations occur was none other than Al Gore, our
own Vice President.
Yet last week, during the discussions with Jiang, our President was
touting a new agreement he had reached with President Jiang. Well, that
is nice, but what about upholding current law? If I was the Vice
President, I would be outraged. I guess the law just does not matter to
some.
I hope the President remembers, as Mr. Gilman has noted, that 15,000
United States troops are stationed right there in direct line of the
cruise missiles which China transferred to Iran. The transfer of these
weapons and technology from China is in direct violation of United
States law, and our refusal to call China to the mat for their actions
is an embarrassment to this country.
{time} 1415
This bill will rectify this situation and force the administration to
take the very action which the Vice President called for in 1993. This
Congress must live up to our responsibility to protect the safety and
security of America. I urge my colleagues' vote.
Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, first of all, the resolution finds that the delivery
of cruise missiles to Iran is of a destabilizing type and is,
therefore, in violation of the Iran-Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act of
1992. The resolution also urges the President to enforce the Iran-Iraq
Nonproliferation Act of 1992, basically calling for the application of
sanctions, with respect to the acquisition of Iran, by Iran, of C-802
model cruise missiles.
The Committee on Rules added 2 clauses, one recommending a visa
denial for anyone from China who has been materially involved in
weapons proliferation; and second, the text of the resolution of the
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Harman], House Concurrent Resolution
121, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the
proliferation of missile technology from Russia to Iran.
I am troubled by this resolution. I understand the popularity of it.
I certainly share with my colleagues in their concern about the
transfer of dangerous technology to Iran by either China or Russia. I
think we all agree on the objective that it is very, very much in the
interests of the United States to stop the transfer of that technology
to Iran.
Now, in the Iran-Iraq Nonproliferation Act, the Congress of the
United
[[Page H10126]]
States gave to the President the power, the authority to make a
determination whether China or any other country has violated the law.
We did not give that authority to ourselves; we gave it to the
President. The reason we gave it to the President was because it is a
very tough question, a question of great sensitivity and complexity,
and any finding that the delivery of cruise missiles to Iran is of a
destabilizing number and type, and therefore a violation of the Iran-
Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act, is a judgment that calls for the input
of the political leaders of the country, but also intelligence, policy,
regional experts.
I have complained about the process. I do it in this instance. To my
knowledge, we heard, with respect to this question of violation, from
one intelligence official for about 5 minutes. I am speaking now about
Members. I think the staff may have been briefed further. At the time
the intelligence official made the briefing, there were three Members
of Congress in the room.
Now, we have then a situation where some years ago we made the
judgment that this is a very, very tough call; it should be made by the
President because of the resources available to the executive branch,
and now we are saying we are going to make that call in this
resolution, and we are doing so with very thin consultation and
preparation.
The staff has had briefings on the topic of C-802 missile transfers
from China to Iran. It is my very clear impression that those missiles
from China do, indeed, make the task of the United States Navy in the
gulf more complicated. I do not think there is any doubt about that.
But it is also clear from these briefings that the missiles do not
shift the military balance in the gulf. The United States clearly
retains strong air and naval superiority.
Another point I want to make here is that the comment has been made
several times that diplomacy has failed. I can understand how that
conclusion may have been reached, but I really do not agree with it. I
do not think it is fair to say that diplomacy has succeeded, but I do
think it is fair to say that as a result of diplomacy, the Chinese now
appear to be heading in the right direction on this issue, although
they are not yet prepared to give a public pledge to stop all
transfers. I think the goal of U.S. diplomacy now has to be to confirm
and to clarify and to get the most authoritative statement we can from
China about the termination of missile shipments.
In a sense, our problem on the floor, the difference between the
majority and myself here, is one of a failure of consultation between
the executive branch and the legislative branch. The negotiations have
been going on. Those negotiations have been in secret. There has not
been, I think, adequate consultation with Members of Congress about the
progress that has been made.
Members of Congress have read a lot of press reports. They are
rightly concerned about this transfer, and so they decide that more
vigorous action has to be taken. What bothers me is that I think the
resolution is not going to be helpful to the diplomatic process. This
problem is going to be solved eventually through diplomacy I think, I
hope, and our goal should be to help the President and not make his job
more difficult on the very tough questions of nonproliferation, where
we all share the same goals.
With respect to the resolution of the gentlewoman from California
[Ms. Harman] concerning the transfer not of Chinese, but of Russian
missile technology to Iran, which was added to this resolution, may I
simply say to her that I think she deserves a lot of credit for
focusing the attention of the House on a very important question. If
her resolution stood by itself, I would have no trouble at all voting
for it as a freestanding resolution, because I think it is quite
commendable.
I understand that the argument I am making here is probably one that
will not be agreed with by most of my colleagues, but I do think it is
important that we point out that diplomacy here has made some progress,
and that progress may not be fully known to all Members of the House.
We think the Chinese are heading in the right direction now. We cannot
be absolutely sure of that, but I am sure none of us want to take steps
here that would make that diplomacy, and a successful result from it,
more difficult.
Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HAMILTON. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's nice comments
about my role and I thank him for them.
On the subject of diplomacy, though, as the gentleman does, I commend
the Vice President and the President for raising this issue, certainly
the issue of Russian proliferation, with senior Russians in the
delegation at every summit meeting and every possible event during the
year. However, published reports show that the proliferation between
Russia and Iran is not stopping, despite our urging and despite the
fact that President Clinton has raised this with President Yeltsin
personally twice.
So my question to the gentleman is, if it is true that Iran will get
indigenous capability in terms of developing missiles and the means to
deploy them within a year to 3 years, can we wait any longer for this
diplomatic course to work, or should we not, as responsible Members of
Congress, exert maximum pressure, as we are trying to do today, to
force the stopping of the proliferation?
Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, reclaiming my time, the difficulty in my
mind, and I fully appreciate the gentlewoman's deep concern about it,
is whether the actions we take today and the threat of the sanctions
will in fact help our diplomacy. I think it is the Vice President's
position, and I do not want to try to speak for him, but that this kind
of action at this particular juncture is counterproductive.
I understand that we do not have firm results in diplomacy now, so I
understand the unease that many Members have here. I think, from my
standpoint, we have several months, at least, to see that diplomacy
work. And if the steps we take today make the diplomacy more difficult,
I do not think any of us want to do it. Now, the gentlewoman and I may
have a difference in judgment about whether these steps are helpful or
not.
Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, if the gentleman would yield for another
10 seconds, I would comment that we have been trying to do this at
least since April, and the subject was raised at the Helsinki summit
and it was raised in Denver, and it was raised in Moscow more recently
by the Vice President, and it has been raised at other senior level
meetings between us and the Russians; in addition to which we have an
ambassador, Mr. Wisner, who is in Russia at this moment negotiating on
this, but the results are not there, and the clock is ticking, and I
think that we have to push harder.
Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, reclaiming my time, let me emphasize to
the gentlewoman that I am not opposing her part of the bill. My
objection really runs to the other part of it. The gentlewoman's
resolution is a sense of the House, as I recall, and I think it is
worthy, and I do not want to suggest that I am opposed to it. My
objection goes to the China part of it.
Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, my final comment, if the gentleman will
continue to yield, I think the point of the gentleman from New York
[Mr. Gilman], is that missile technology from any source in Iran is
destabilizing and that is why he is trying to shut down the Chinese
proliferation, and that is why I agree with him.
Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, we have no argument about wanting to
shut down the transfer of technology. Everybody agrees to that. I am
not urging the transfer of technology from China and Russia to Iran.
Please do not attribute that to me.
The question here is how best do we stop it? I am simply raising the
question that at this point intervention on the transfer of China to
Iran, when diplomacy appears to be, and I have to emphasize the
``appears,'' to be making progress, I am not sure it is the best thing
to do.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California [Mr.
Berman], a distinguished member of the committee.
Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the legislation. I
want to particularly focus on the language put into this bill by the
adoption of the rule dealing with the Russian sale of
[[Page H10127]]
missile technology to Iran. This is a critical issue. In fact, both
aspects of this bill involve a critical issue: The delivery of of
enhanced missile capability, and in the case of the Russian transfers,
very specifically technology, which violates commitments made by the
Russian promise to adhere to the missile technology control regime.
{time} 1430
I want to congratulate the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Harman]
for being probably the leader on this side of the Congress, the House
side of the Congress, in raising this issue now for many, many months.
The administration has now clearly become focused on this issue. They
have appointed a special emissary to negotiate on this. It is receiving
attention at the highest levels of our Government. The gentlewoman
deserves congratulations for bringing this resolution to this point and
to the attention of this body.
Mr. HAMILTON. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon], the distinguished
Chairman of the Committee on Rules, for a closing statement.
Mr. SOLOMON. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time
to me.
Madam Speaker, let me sing the gentleman's praises, because let me
tell the Members, the gentleman from New York, Mr. Ben Gilman, does an
outstanding job as the chairman of the Committee on International
Relations, my old committee. We just cannot tell the gentleman how
important it is for the foreign policy of this Nation.
I also see across the aisle the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Jane
Harman. Let me also sing her praises, because she has been a leader on
this issue, and we have to give her full credit for it. We are glad
that her amendment is part of the bill.
Madam Speaker, let me say something about the gentleman from Indiana,
Mr. Lee Hamilton, the ranking member and former chairman of the
committee that I used to serve on. The gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Lee
Hamilton, is one of the men that I most respect in this body. He has
always been a man who speaks from his heart, he speaks with sincerity,
and he tells it like it is.
We do not always agree. We certainly do not agree on this issue here.
He talks about how best to handle our relationships with China. He
talks about thinking that China is moving in the right direction, and I
would just say to my good friend, the gentleman from Indiana, thinking
that they are moving in the right direction is not good enough.
Nothing has changed. Everything is worse in China. They have a
deplorable human rights record, just read the gentleman's own State
Department report. Religious persecution is so, so terrible. They have
huge military buildups taking place over the last 4 or 5 years that
have almost doubled the entire military budget for China, the only
nation of any significance at all, any size, that has any increase in
their military budget at all.
Why are they doing those things? They are selling missiles to
unstable countries. They are allowing Third World despots like Iran,
our sworn enemy, to obtain nuclear technology, not to mention chemical
and biological factories that are actually being sold to Iran at this
very moment.
Let me just read the Members an AP story. I think we can probably
believe this. It is by Barry Schweid. I do not see the date here.
It says,
Even while the Clinton administration celebrates new
assurances that China will refrain from selling nuclear
missile technology to Iran, it is investigating recent
delivery of nonnuclear cruise missiles to Tehran, to Iran.
Madam Speaker, let me tell the Members that this bill offered by the
gentleman from New York, Mr. Ben Gilman, is an excellent piece of
legislation. It brings to the floor a ridiculous situation that the
Clinton administration has put itself in.
In 1992 Senator Gore, at that time, now our Vice President, offered
legislation that would impose sanctions on nations that sell advanced
conventional or weapons of mass destruction technology to Iran or Iraq.
That is the law of the land.
Guess what? Communist China has been selling the C-802 antiship
missiles to Iran. Everybody knows it. Everybody in this Chamber here
knows it. Everybody, including the Clinton administration, admits it.
But no sanctions of any kind have been levied against China, as
provided for in Vice President's Gore's own legislation.
Cruise missile shipments from China to Iran were publicly reported in
Defense News, the Washington Post, and the New York Times as early as
the summer of 1995 and continue to go on; 2 years of public knowledge
and still today there has been no acknowledgment from our
administration of the significance of the deadly capabilities that have
been passed on to Iran, again, I say, our avowed enemy. Iran says that
they are our avowed enemy.
It is high time, Madam Speaker, that our President stop looking the
other way, stop ignoring the Gore-McCain law, ignoring the danger
facing our 15,000 U.S. troops that are stationed within range of these
deadly cruise missiles provided to Iran by this China that we seem to
want to appease here on this floor, the danger that was witnessed
firsthand by the men and women of our Armed Forces during Desert Storm.
I was over there and the Members were over there, we saw them, when
the USS Stark was struck by a cruise missile resulting in the loss of
37 American sailors. Do we want to increase that danger? What will it
take to convince the administration of the significance of the Chinese
arms sponsorship of outlawed nations like Iran?
The Congress must take the opportunity presented to us here today in
this resolution to make a clear statement to the President, and in turn
to the Communist Chinese Government, that the United States people will
not stand for further proliferation, will not stand for dangerous and
extensive weapon capabilities that threaten United States Armed Forces
and endanger the welfare of United States allies in the Mideast.
Mr. Speaker, everybody says, oh, you must never appease, we always
have to cooperate and work with the Chinese. Let me tell the Members
something. We have a $50 million trade deficit with China. They lick
their chops to do business with the United States of America, with 260
million Americans, with the highest standard of living in the world.
Everybody wants to sell America. We use that as a bargaining chip to
stop this rogue regime, these outlaw activities.
That is why we need to pass this bill before us today. It will send
the right message. China is not going to say, the heck with the United
States. They are going to come licking their chops and doing business
with us, and they will cooperate, and we will save American lives in
doing it.
Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SOLOMON. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I just wanted to point out that I agree
with gentleman's analysis about the dangerous nature of these
transfers, about the destabilizing impact, about the need to do
everything we can to stop it. But I just want to say, in all fairness,
the administration has been intensely focused on trying to get these
transfers stopped. We have reason to believe as a result of their
efforts that things will change, so I just think the administration on
this one is not the enemy, they are the gentleman's and my ally.
Mr. SOLOMON. Madam Speaker, my good friend is a member of the Select
Committee on Intelligence. He is aware of all of the information that I
am aware of. Let me assure the gentleman, it is still going on, and we
need to put a stop to it. Let us do it by sending this signal, a very
light signal to the Chinese Government.
Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Emerson). Pursuant to House Resolution
302, the previous question is ordered on the resolution, as amended.
The question is on the resolution, as amended.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the
[[Page H10128]]
point of order that a quorum is not present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 414,
nays 8, not voting 11, as follows:
[Roll No. 592]
YEAS--414
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baesler
Baker
Baldacci
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berman
Berry
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Cardin
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth
Christensen
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Condit
Conyers
Cook
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crapo
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
Dellums
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Ensign
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Fawell
Fazio
Filner
Flake
Foley
Ford
Fossella
Fowler
Fox
Frank (MA)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Furse
Gallegly
Ganske
Gejdenson
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Hefner
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (WI)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kim
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kleczka
Klink
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manton
Manzullo
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDade
McDermott
McGovern
McHale
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meek
Menendez
Metcalf
Millender-McDonald
Miller (CA)
Miller (FL)
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Mollohan
Moran (KS)
Morella
Myrick
Nadler
Neal
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pappas
Parker
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Paxon
Payne
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pickett
Pitts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Poshard
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Redmond
Regula
Reyes
Riggs
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryun
Sabo
Salmon
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sanford
Sawyer
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaefer, Dan
Schaffer, Bob
Schumer
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Sisisky
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (OR)
Smith (TX)
Smith, Adam
Smith, Linda
Snowbarger
Snyder
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Stokes
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Talent
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thompson
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tierney
Torres
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watkins
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Weygand
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--8
Hamilton
Houghton
Johnson, E. B.
LaFalce
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Skaggs
Yates
NOT VOTING--11
Brown (CA)
Carson
Cubin
Foglietta
Forbes
Gonzalez
McKinney
Mica
Portman
Riley
Schiff
{time} 1459
Mr. YATES changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. SANFORD changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the resolution, as amended, was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
{time} 1500
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I move to reconsider the vote, Madam Speaker.
Motion to Table Offered by Mr. Latham
Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I move to lay on the table the motion to
reconsider.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Emerson). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Latham] to lay on the table the
motion to reconsider offered by the gentlewoman from New York [Ms.
Velazquez].
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 240,
noes 176, not voting 17, as follows:
[Roll No 593]
AYES--240
Aderholt
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Bentsen
Berry
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bliley
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Boyd
Brady
Bryant
Bunning
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth
Christensen
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Condit
Cook
Cooksey
Cox
Crane
Crapo
Cunningham
Davis (FL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeLay
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Ensign
Everett
Ewing
Fawell
Foley
Fossella
Fowler
Fox
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Goss
Graham
Granger
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (WI)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kasich
Kelly
Kim
King (NY)
Kingston
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Lampson
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lucas
Manzullo
Martinez
McCollum
McCrery
McDade
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKeon
Metcalf
Miller (FL)
Moran (KS)
Morella
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oxley
Packard
Pappas
Parker
Paul
Paxon
Payne
Pease
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Pombo
Porter
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Redmond
Regula
Riggs
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roukema
Royce
Ryun
Salmon
Sanford
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaefer, Dan
Schaffer, Bob
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Shimkus
Shuster
Sisisky
Skeen
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (OR)
Smith (TX)
Smith, Linda
Snowbarger
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Stearns
Stump
Sununu
Talent
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Tiahrt
Traficant
Turner
Upton
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
[[Page H10129]]
NOES--176
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baesler
Baldacci
Barcia
Barrett (WI)
Becerra
Berman
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Bonior
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Cardin
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Cramer
Cummings
Danner
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dellums
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doyle
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Fazio
Filner
Flake
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frost
Furse
Gejdenson
Gephardt
Gordon
Green
Gutierrez
Hall (OH)
Hamilton
Harman
Hefner
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holden
Hooley
Hoyer
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Klink
Kucinich
LaFalce
Lantos
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manton
Markey
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McDermott
McGovern
McHale
McNulty
Meehan
Meek
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller (CA)
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Mollohan
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Pickett
Pomeroy
Poshard
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rivers
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Schumer
Scott
Serrano
Sherman
Skaggs
Skelton
Smith, Adam
Snyder
Spratt
Stark
Stokes
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Thompson
Thurman
Tierney
Torres
Towns
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Waters
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Weygand
Wise
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
NOT VOTING--17
Bereuter
Brown (CA)
Burr
Carson
Cubin
Foglietta
Forbes
Gonzalez
McKinney
Mica
Nadler
Portman
Riley
Schiff
Slaughter
Stabenow
Stenholm
{time} 1518
Mr. ROEMER changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the motion to table was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Pursuant to House Resolution 302, the title of the resolution was
amended so as to read: ``Resolution urging the executive branch to take
action regarding the acquisition by Iran of C-802 cruise missiles, and
expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding
proliferation of missile technology from Russia to Iran.''
____________________