[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 41 (Tuesday, March 16, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H1298-H1301]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1999
Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 104 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 104
Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this
resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule
XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of
the bill (H.R. 819) to authorize appropriations for the
Federal Maritime Commission for fiscal years 2000 and 2001.
The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with.
General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not
exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure. After general debate the
bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute
rule. The bill shall be considered as read. During
consideration of the bill for amendment, the chairman of the
Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition on
the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment has
caused it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional
Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII.
Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. The
chairman of the Committee of the Whole may: (1) postpone
until a time during further consideration in the Committee of
the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any amendment; and
(2) reduce to five minutes the minimum time for electronic
voting on any postponed question that follows another
electronic vote without intervening business, provided that
the minimum time for electronic voting on the first in any
series of questions shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of
consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall
rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as
may have been adopted. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to
final passage without intervening motion except one motion to
recommit with or without instructions.
{time} 1345
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Stearns). The gentlewoman from North
Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley),
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose
of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday the Committee on Rules met and granted an
open rule for H.R. 81, the Federal Maritime Commission Authorization
Act. The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided
between the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
The rule provides that the bill shall be open for amendment at any
point and authorizes the Chair to accord priority in recognition to
Members who have preprinted their amendments in the Congressional
Record.
The rule allows the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to
postpone votes during consideration of the bill, and to reduce votes to
5 minutes on a postponed question if the vote follows a 15-minute vote.
Finally, the rule provides for one motion to recommit with or without
instructions.
Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 104 is an open rule for a good, noncontroversial
bill. The Federal Maritime Commission Authorization Act allocates $15.7
million for the Federal Maritime Commission in 2000 and $16.3 million
for the Commission in 2001, an increase of approximately $1 million.
Because the Commission ably protects United States shippers and
carriers, including Sea-Land Service of Charlotte, North Carolina, from
the unfair trade practices of foreign governments and flag carriers,
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported a bill that
makes no changes to the duties of the Commission. I urge my colleagues
to support this open rule and to support the underlying legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, my dear friend, the
gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick), for yielding me the
customary half-hour, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, like every other Member of this House, I am a big fan of
the Federal Maritime Commission. It protects United States shippers
from the restrictive rules of foreign governments and from the unfair
practices of foreign flagged carriers. It investigates complaints and
helps keep shippers in compliance with the Shipping Act of 1984. It
also monitors tariffs to make sure they are reasonable.
In short, Mr. Speaker, the Federal Maritime Commission keeps order on
[[Page H1299]]
the high seas, especially when it comes to commerce. The commissioners
do very good work, and their work should continue.
I support this open rule and the bill to fund the Federal Maritime
Commission in fiscal years 2000 and 2001. However, Mr. Speaker, let me
note that I do not think that this bill even needs a rule at all.
The Federal Maritime Commission has such widespread support that,
once upon a time, this bill was on the suspension calendar. I know of
no amendments to this bill, so I am wondering why we are bringing the
bill up with a rule in the first place.
Mr. Speaker, this is starting to become a pattern. Bills that
normally come up under suspension of the rules are instead being sent
to the Committee on Rules and coming to the floor for a vote. In fact,
9 of the last 15 bills that we have sent to the Committee on Rules have
passed by more than 400 votes.
On the other hand, Mr. Speaker, the bills that should have open rules
are being closed down. We just finished the Ed-Flex bill, which was
brought to the floor under a restrictive rule with a preprinting
requirement and a time cap. Twenty-three Democratic amendments were
submitted and preprinted; two Republican amendments were submitted and
preprinted. Both Republican amendments were considered and only three
of the 23 Democratic amendments were considered before the time cap was
up.
In other words, Mr. Speaker, 20 Democratic amendments which were
preprinted in the Record, according to the rule, were blocked from
consideration. In order to give Members more time to offer their
amendments, the Democratic ranking member of the committee, the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay) made a unanimous consent request for
2 additional hours, which the Republican chairman, the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), denied.
I wonder, Mr. Speaker, why we need a rule for this simple 2-page
noncontroversial bill while bigger and more controversial rules, like
Education and Kosovo, are brought up under restrictive rules.
Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Myrick). Pursuant to House Resolution
104 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the
bill, H.R. 819.
{time} 1352
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for consideration of the bill
(H.R. 819) to authorize appropriations for the Federal Maritime
Commission for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, with Mr. Stearns in the
chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having
been read the first time.
Under the rule, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and the
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) will each control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I am quite pleased to bring this bill to the floor
today to authorize expenditures of the Federal Maritime Commission. The
Federal Maritime Commission has important work ahead to implement the
important provisions of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998. That act
contains the first major amendments to deregulate international ocean
shipping since 1984.
H.R. 819 also contains funds for the Federal Maritime Commission to
enforce the provisions of the Foreign Shipping Practices Act and to
carry out the other responsibilities of the Commission. So I would urge
my colleagues to support this important bill.
Mr. Chairman, I would report to the House that thus far, in the early
days of this Congress, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure has already had nine bills pass the House and ten other
measures pass the committee and which we are prepared to bring to the
floor of the House. So we are off to a very fast start on the committee
and look forward to a very productive legislative session.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 819, the Federal
Maritime Commission Authorization Act of 1999. The Federal Maritime
Commission performs a vital role of protecting our international trade
from unfair practices by foreign governments and is actively engaged in
implementing the new Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998. Deregulation of
international maritime shipping begins May 1. The ocean carriers and
shippers are quickly moving to enter into service contracts in which
their competitors will no longer know the rates. A new era in
competition in international shipping is about to begin.
The Commission has also been actively involved in resolving practices
by the governments of China, Japan and Brazil that distort the free
market system of international shipping by imposing restrictions on
U.S. carriers in these trades.
H.R. 819 authorizes $15.6 million for the Federal Maritime Commission
for fiscal year 2000 and $16.3 million for fiscal year 2001. The fiscal
year 2000 funding level is $385,000 above the amount requested by the
President to fund the appointment of the fifth commissioner and his
staff. Mr. Chairman, this is a very reasonable budget request.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 819, the Federal
Maritime Commission Authorization Act of 1999.
Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 819, the
Federal Maritime Commission Authorization Act. The Federal Maritime
Commission (FMC) was created to advocate for an open and fair system of
international ocean borne transportation for U.S. imports and exports.
One of the most important responsibilities vested in the Commission
is its duty to protect U.S. ocean borne trade and U.S. carriers from
discriminatory or unfavorable treatment by foreign governments. The
Commission has a long history of using its authority to impose
sanctions and other retaliatory measures, to force foreign governments
to abandon protectionist policies and to open maritime markets to U.S.
companies. These ongoing actions have created business opportunities
for U.S. shipping companies and provide more favorable transportation
conditions for U.S. exports. Presently, the FMC is contending with the
monitoring and/or reviewing conditions and activities in the U.S./China
trade, commitments to reform Japanese port practices, and conditions in
Brazil which may be hindering free and open ocean trade.
The FMC performs a wide range of other important statutory functions
as well. This includes policing anti-competitive abuses of antitrust
immunity, various types of fraud against consumers, mis-description or
mis-declarations of cargo, illegal or unfiled agreements, unlicensed
freight forwarding, untariffed cargo carriage and illegal kickbacks,
and unbonded passenger vessel operations. Another essential
responsibility of the Commission is the oversight of carrier activity
and commercial conditions in the U.S. liner trades. The Commission also
conducts a variety of economic analyses of the pricing and service
behavior of carriers operating in the U.S. trades, as well as research
on emerging trends in the liner shipping industry. Most uniquely, the
Commission provides an expeditious and inexpensive forum for the
resolution of disputes between private parties involved in ocean
transportation.
The territory of Guam has utilized the adjudication arm of the FMC in
its quest to obtain honest and fair prices for shipping products to and
from the island. These so called ``rate cases'' have been instrumental
in exposing the historical inequity in shipping costs for Guam that
have long been the unseemly by-product of the Jones Act.
Guam's potential for serving as a ``clearinghouse for maritime
transported trade goods'' is limited by the application of the Jones
Act and other federal coastwise shipping laws, cargo-preference laws,
and cabotage laws. Generally, these laws require that goods shipped
between U.S. ports (e.g. Guam to San Francisco) must be carried on U.S.
built ships that
[[Page H1300]]
are of U.S. registry and manned by U.S. crews.
The political coalition that protects the U.S. shipping interests
through the Jones Act and associated laws is not only formidable, it is
probably the best-organized and broadest coalition of interests in
Washington. This coalition includes the U.S. shipbuilders who have an
interest in requiring that the domestic U.S. trade be reserved for
them; maritime labor unions who fight for jobs on these ships;
conservative defense ``hawks'' who argue that only a domestic U.S.
flagged fleet can be counted on in war time; and communities with
strong maritime interests.
Guam makes the best case for Jones Act reform--we are technically in
the domestic market of offshore trade, so a reform aimed at our
specific needs would not necessarily upset the total balance of
domestic political interests. Under current artificial conditions, Guam
does not have adequate economies of scale to attract and sustain large
port transshipment industries. For example, the rates for a container
shipment from the U.S. west coast to Guam is three times higher, on
average, than for a similar container going from the west coast to
Japan. It is almost impossible to compete with these numbers. An
unfortunate result was the 1996 relocation of the Navy's Diego Garcia
supply ship from Guam to Yokosuka based on the econmics of these
shipping rates.
Our problem has always been the political reluctance of the ``Jones
Act coalition'' to allow any erosion of current law. They argue that
allowing one exemption, however minor, starts us down a slippery slope
that jeopardizes all the other interests. The defense of the Jones Act
reaches across party lines, so that neither the Democrats nor the
Republicans in Congress or in the respective Democrat (Clinton) and
Republican (Bush) administrations have had any burning desire to mess
with it. Our most visible allies for Jones Act reform are the farmers
in the Midwest who feel that the Jones Act makes their grain exports
less competitive because of the artifically high transportation costs.
Unfortunately, the farmers' arguments do contribute to the feeling that
the slippery slope fear has some merit to it.
Transportation and trade have links, but in our case, the links are
tenuous. While the world is moving to a global economy with freer
trade, that trade is not going to pass through our port unless we have
an economically attractive package to offer to exporters in
transportation services. ``Transshipment'' through Guam is also
hindered by customs and tariff issues. Guam is not in the U.S. customs
zone, which means that except for goods manufactured on Guam, other
goods arriving from Guam are foreign. Certain goods manufactured on
Guam are subject to customs quotas. Multilateral trade agreements
(NAFTA, APEC) are moving us in a direction where trade barriers are
being eased. While we do not have complete free trade in any area, it
is likely that high technology products will lead the way on this
movement. But where there is free trade, the advantages of a U.S.
territory outside the customs zone also may evaporate--and if the only
advantage therefore is our transportation costs, then we are not
attractive to exporters under the current Jones Act constraints.
Certainly, it is difficult to argue against the National Security
element of the Jones Act. Admittedly, there seems to be some truth to
it and in that narrow regard, I support the arguments. However, in the
case of my home territory, Guam, we will seek a workable and proven
solution that will provide relief to the solitary economic anomaly of
being the only U.S. port in Asia. On behalf of the people of Guam, I
look forward to working with the Honorable Harold J. Creel, Jr.,
Chairman of the Federal Maritime Commission and the Honorable Clyde
Hart, Administrator of the U.S. Maritime Administration toward this
end. Si Yu'os Ma'ase.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests
for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read for amendment under
the 5-minute rule.
The text of H.R. 819 is as follows:
H.R. 819
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Maritime Commission
Authorization Act of 1999''.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FEDERAL MARITIME
COMMISSION.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Federal
Maritime Commission--
(1) for fiscal year 2000, $15,685,000; and
(2) for fiscal year 2001, $16,312,000.
The CHAIRMAN. During consideration of the bill for amendment, the
Chair may accord priority in recognition to a Member offering an
amendment that he has printed in the designated place in the
Congressional Record. Those amendments will be considered read.
The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a demand for
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5
minutes the time for voting on any proposed question that immediately
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
Are there any amendments to the bill?
If not, under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Pease) having assumed the chair, Mr. Stearns, Chairman of the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that that
Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 819) to
authorize appropriations for the Federal Maritime Commission for fiscal
years 2000 and 2001, pursuant to House Resolution 104, he reported the
bill back to the House.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, 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.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. 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.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 403,
nays 3, not voting 27, as follows:
[Roll No. 50]
YEAS--403
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Condit
Conyers
Cook
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Crane
Crowley
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Fowler
Frank (MA)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gejdenson
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill (IN)
Hill (MT)
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Hooley
Horn
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kingston
Kleczka
Klink
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
Kuykendall
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Largent
Larson
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
[[Page H1301]]
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Metcalf
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Minge
Mink
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Ose
Owens
Packard
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pickett
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reyes
Reynolds
Riley
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Salmon
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sanford
Sawyer
Saxton
Schakowsky
Scott
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simpson
Sisisky
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Spence
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Sweeney
Talent
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Traficant
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Wexler
Weygand
Whitfield
Wilson
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--3
Chenoweth
Paul
Sensenbrenner
NOT VOTING--27
Bartlett
Bilirakis
Boyd
Callahan
Cramer
Cubin
DeFazio
Dooley
Duncan
Gilchrest
Hall (OH)
Hastings (FL)
Hostettler
King (NY)
Lewis (KY)
Millender-McDonald
Moakley
Oxley
Pitts
Pryce (OH)
Scarborough
Schaffer
Turner
Vento
Watkins
Weldon (PA)
Wicker
{time} 1419
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. CALLAHAN. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 50, on H.R. 819,
I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted
``aye.''
____________________