[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 55 (Wednesday, April 21, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H2218-H2225]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1999
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 142 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 142
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. 1184) to authorize appropriations for carrying
out the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 for fiscal
years 2000 and 2001, and for other purposes. The first
reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. Points of order
against consideration of the bill for failure to comply with
clause 4(a) of rule XIII are waived. 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 Science. After general debate the
bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute
rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill
for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the
Committee on Science now printed in the bill. Each section of
the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute 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 the 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. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House
on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the
bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute. 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.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). The gentleman from California
(Mr. Dreier) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Dayton, Ohio
(Mr. Hall), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded will be for
the purposes of debate only.
(Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 142 is an open rule
providing for the consideration of H.R. 1184, the Earthquake Hazards
Reduction Authorization Act of 1999.
The purpose of the bill is to reauthorize the Federal government's
earthquake research and hazard mitigation programs. The rule provides
for the customary 1 hour general debate, equally divided and controlled
by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Science.
The rule waives clause 4(a) of rule XIII requiring a 3-day layover of
the committee report against consideration of the bill because the
report could not be filed in the House until 2 days ago.
The rule makes in order the amendment in the nature of a substitute
recommended by the Committee on Science as an original bill for the
purpose of amendment which will be open to amendment by section. The
rule further encourages priority recognition of Members who preprinted
their amendments in the Congressional Record, and allows the Chair to
postpone votes.
Mr. Speaker, in my State of California and in too many other regions
of the United States, earthquakes are a fact of life. They are
something we accept and work through. Thankfully, most are not
devastating occurrences. We clean up, rather than rebuild. However, we
cannot overlook the fact that the average annual cost from earthquakes
in the United States is about $4.4 billion. Of course, the toll imposed
by a major earthquake can be much greater.
In California, we have suffered two major quakes in the past decade.
In 1999, the Loma Prieta earthquake in the San Francisco area cost $6
billion, and then in 1994 in Los Angeles what was known as the
Northridge earthquake, which I felt and was horrible, cost $40 billion.
Of course, major earthquakes cost a lot more than dollars and cents.
In both cases, both of those earthquakes in California in the last
decade, the Loma Prieta and the Northridge quakes, people were killed
and lives were very, very disrupted. An earthquake can wreak havoc on a
community. During the 1987 earthquake in Whittier, an area that I used
to represent, I saw firsthand how unreinforced buildings can fail.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to have the attention of my California
colleagues who are in the back, and I know this is of great importance
to them.
During that 1987 earthquake in Whittier, I saw how unreinforced
buildings can fail. I saw how faults can act in a random manner and
cause complete devastation to one block while leaving untouched another
block that is right nearby.
{time} 1215
Mr. Speaker, the Boy Scout motto is ``Be Prepared.'' This legislation
is crafted in that spirit. H.R. 1184 authorizes the National Earthquake
Hazards Reduction Program, the Advanced National Seismic Research and
Monitoring System, and the Network for Earthquake Engineering
Simulation. These programs will modernize the existing seismic network,
which is both outdated and disjointed, and interconnect earthquake
engineering research facilities.
We all know that we cannot stop earthquakes from happening. However,
we can plan for them and improve our readiness. We can improve our
detection and warning systems and build roads and buildings to better
serve so that we can survive them. In short, we can be better prepared.
This bipartisan legislation clearly moves us in that direction.
I would like to commend the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Sensenbrenner), chairman of the Committee on Science, the members of
his committee for their efforts.
The payoff will be in lives saved, homes and businesses protected,
and communities preserved. We cannot afford to do anything less for the
people of California or the 39 other States that are inclined towards
earthquakes.
Therefore, I urge my colleagues to support both this open rule and
the underlying bill.
[[Page H2219]]
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr.
Dreier), the chairman of the Committee on Rules, for yielding me the
time.
This is an open rule. It will allow full and fair debate on H.R.
1184. As the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) has described, this
rule provides for 1 hour of general debate to be equally divided and
controlled by the chairman and the ranking minority member of the
Committee on Science.
The rule permits amendments under the 5-minute rule, which is the
normal amendment process in the House. All Members on both sides of the
aisle will have the opportunity to offer germane amendments.
According to the National Earthquake Information Center, about 12,000
to 14,000 earthquakes take place each year. That is 35 each day. Of
these, we can expect about 18 major earthquakes in a year.
Earthquakes can cause enormous loss of life, injury, and destruction.
They can occur almost anywhere at any time. They cannot be prevented.
However, damage, destruction, and loss of life can be significantly
reduced if we are prepared.
That is why this bill is important. This bill establishes a system to
organize earthquake monitoring systems in the United States. It makes
other improvements to help our Nation plan for earthquakes. It
authorizes funds for the existing Federal programs that study and
provide information about earthquakes.
The rule waives the requirement for a 3-day layover of the committee
report. This is necessary because the report was not filed until
Monday. The purpose of the requirement is to give adequate time to all
Members before a bill comes to the House floor. Because of the
bipartisan support and the uncontroversial nature of the bill, waiving
the requirement is appropriate in this case. However, I hope that
waiving this rule does not become routine.
This is an open rule. It was adopted unanimously by the Committee on
Rules. I urge adoption of the rule.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I do not have any requests for time, and I
yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that I mentioned the very
distinguished chairman of the Committee on Science, and I am very
pleased that this will be very ably handled on the minority side by my
very good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Brown), who has
been intimately involved in these issues and has probably suffered
through a number of earthquakes himself.
I look forward to seeing bipartisan movement on this very important
measure, and I would like to congratulate the gentleman from Michigan
(Mr. Smith) who has done a great deal of work on this.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I have no requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, as I said, I urge support for both the rule
and the bill itself.
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 (Mr. Ewing). Pursuant to House Resolution 142
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. 1184.
The Chair designates the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood) as
chairman of the Committee of the Whole, and requests the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Sessions) to assume the chair temporarily.
{time} 1220
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 1184) to authorize appropriations for carrying out the Earthquake
Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, and for
other purposes, with Mr. Sessions (Chairman pro tempore) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is
considered as having been read the first time.
Under the rule, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and
the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson) each will
control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Sensenbrenner).
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 5 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, I come before the House today to urge its support for
H.R. 1184, the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1999.
Mr. Chairman, it is a common complaint that we cannot control the
weather, neither can we control earthquakes, nor after years of effort
can we even forecast them with any confidence. But we can prepare for
them, and that is the main purpose of the National Earthquake Hazard
Reduction Program, known as NEHRP.
According to the U.S. Geological Survey, 39 States are subject to
serious earthquake risk, and 75 million people live in urban areas with
moderate to high earthquake risk. The Federal Emergency Management
Agency estimates the annual loss resulting from earthquakes is $4.4
billion. The Northridge earthquake of 1994 alone resulted in damages of
$40 billion.
Still, to date we have been fortunate that an earthquake with the
destructive force of the Tangshan, China event of 1976 or the Kobe,
Japan event of 1995 has not struck a large U.S. city. But if history is
any guide, the U.S. will be hit by violent shocks sometime in the not
too distant future. Indeed, major earthquakes have been recorded
throughout our Nation's history: in southern Missouri in 1811 and 1812,
southern California in 1857, Hawaii in 1868, South Carolina in 1886,
Alaska in 1899, and northern California in 1906.
The same geologic processes that led to these cataclysmic events are
still at work today. That we know. What we do not know is when and
where these forces will be unleashed.
Earthquakes may be inevitable, but catastrophic losses of life and
property need not be if we use science to help communities prepare. The
provisions in H.R. 1184 do just that.
Four agencies participate in NEHRP: the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, the U.S. Geological Survey, the National Science Foundation,
and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
For fiscal year 2000, H.R. 1184 authorizes $99.6 million for the base
activities in these agencies, including specific authorizations for the
U.S. Geological Survey for the Global Seismic Network, the Real-Time
Seismic Warning System pilot program, external research, and an
advisory committee. For fiscal year 2001, the bill authorizes $102.6
million for these base earthquake programs, an increase of 3 percent.
In addition, H.R. 1184 includes multiyear authorizations for two new
projects, each of which grew out of congressional direction in the last
NEHRP bill. The Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring
System will update the Nation's existing seismic monitoring network,
which is based on 30-year-old technology.
The bill authorizes $170.8 million over 5 years for the U.S.
Geological Survey for equipment, and a further $14.8 million over 2
years for the incremental costs of system operation.
The Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation will link more than
30 earthquake engineering research facilities and upgrade and expand
major earthquake testing facilities. H.R. 1184 provides the National
Science Foundation with a 5-year authorization totaling $81.8 million
for this program.
Finally, the bill authorizes a Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory
Committee at the U.S. Geological Survey, requires greater interagency
coordination in formulating the Program's budget, requests a report on
how the Program meets the needs of at-risk populations, and repeals
obsolete provisions of the statute.
With earthquakes, it is not a question of if, but when the next one
will
[[Page H2220]]
strike. Through its emphasis on monitoring, research, and mitigation,
H.R. 1184 will help the Nation prepare for the inevitable and save
lives and property.
I would like to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith), the
chairman of the Subcommittee on Basic Research, for drafting such a
fine bill; the gentleman from California (Mr. Brown), the minority
ranking member of the Committee on Science, for his continued support
of the program; and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice
Johnson) for her valued input in the consideration of this bill.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1184 represents the sensible, long-term investment
that will pay for itself many times over and save lives and reduce
property costs. I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. Chairman, I insert the following for the Record:
House of Representatives,
Committee on Science,
Washington, DC, April 20, 1999.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter of April 16,
regarding H.R. 1184, the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of
1999.
I understand that your waiver of Resources Committee
jurisdiction should not be construed to affect any future
referrals of bills dealing with the same subject matter. I
also will support the Resources Committee request to be
represented on any conference on H.R. 1184 or related bill.
H.R. 1184 is scheduled for Floor consideration on April 21
and I will include this letter as part of the floor
proceedings.
I, as well as my staff, look forward to working with you if
H.R. 1184 should go to conference and also, collaborating
with you on any legislation on which we may share
jurisdiction in the future.
Sincerely,
F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1184, the
reauthorization of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program,
NEHRP. It has been over 20 years since the Congress first authorized
the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act; and, during the intervening two
decades, the program has made tremendous strides in combating these
natural disasters.
We now have maps that inform engineers, architects, and builders of
seismic hazards, model building codes, and greater understanding of the
science of earthquake hazards and the response of buildings to seismic
movement.
In practical terms, federally funded research in geosciences, social
sciences, and engineering has saved countless lives, in addition to
saving personal property and critical infrastructures. I am certain
that with continued support we can make even greater strides in the
innovative areas that FEMA, the U.S. Geological Survey, the National
Seismic Foundation, and NIST are currently exploring.
Advances such as early warning of seismic events, more structurally
sound buildings, regional analysis of seismic risk, mobile research
centers, and widespread use of the Internet and our other
telecommunication capabilities are going to make marked reductions in
the impacts of not just earthquakes, but almost all natural and man-
made disasters.
But the story does not end there. While our increased understanding
of earthquake kinematics and the mitigation procedures proves that we
have made progress, there are still challenges we must face and
assessments that must be made periodically to make sure that we are
doing everything that we can to ensure the safety and security of the
American people.
There are still earthquake-prone communities that have not adopted
appropriate building codes. Monitoring in earthquake-prone areas is
still done with less than state-of-the-art equipment, and disparities
in earthquake losses due to age and socioeconomic status and physical
limitations still exist.
For these reasons and more, the earthquake programs must continue to
evolve to address these new challenges.
{time} 1230
I feel that the bill before us today will help us meet these new
needs.
In addition to authorizing increased funding for these base NEHRP
programs, the bill authorizes the Network for Earthquake Engineering
Simulation, an effort by the National Science Foundation to modernize
earthquake engineering research facilities; the Advanced Seismic
Research and Monitoring System, which will enable the Geological Survey
to upgrade and expand our seismic monitoring networks to reflect the
needs across the Nation, and a study on elements of NEHRP that address
the needs of at-risk populations.
Today's bill will not solve all of these challenges that remain, but
it will move us in the right direction.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, let me say that while natural disasters are
inevitable, the extent of the damage is not. We must attack the problem
from all sides with renewed efforts to implement seismically safe
building standards, to increase our pool of data on natural disasters,
to respond rapidly to disasters when they strike, and, in general, to
understand the risks associated with earthquakes in whatever form they
may manifest themselves.
Mr. Chairman, I commend the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Sensenbrenner); the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith), our
subcommittee chair, for their work; and certainly our leader, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Brown).
I also note that this bill is the product of a bipartisan effort, and
I urge passage of this bill, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me this time, and also thank him for his leadership on this
legislation; of course, along with the gentleman from California (Mr.
Brown) and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson).
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1184 is legislation to reauthorize what is called
the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program, NEHRP. It is a bill I
am pleased to sponsor on behalf of the Committee on Science.
The National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program, this NEHRP, has
long enjoyed strong bipartisan support in the Committee on Science. The
primary purpose of NEHRP is simple: To save lives and to reduce
property damage. But while the goal may be stated simply, getting a
grip on this problem of earthquakes poses a greater dilemma.
Since its inception in 1977, NEHRP has done a credible job of
contributing to our store of knowledge about the causes and effects of
earthquakes, and it has reduced our vulnerability to them through
engineering research and new building designs. The program's monitoring
component also holds the promise of providing real-time warning to
citizens and a wealth of data to researchers.
Indeed, improving earthquake warning by just a few seconds can mean
the difference between life and death. It can mean those few seconds
where we might send a signal to shut off the gas going through gas
mains and many other areas which can significantly reduce the damage of
earthquakes.
The National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program also has an
international and humanitarian aspect. Because of the almost tens of
thousands of earthquakes around the world, all of these countries look
to our research and information to help reduce their damage to property
and save lives. Many countries around the world continually monitor and
use the information that will develop through the authorization in this
bill.
The advanced national seismic research and monitoring system,
authorized in this bill, is important. Not only will it improve warning
times, but the data it collects will provide researchers with
information that will lead to safer buildings and designs and a greater
understanding of how earthquakes propagate.
The periodic nature of earthquakes can often lead to complacency.
Probably that is human nature. But that kind of complacency can carry
great risk. Let me just hold up this map a minute, Mr. Chairman, to
give my colleagues an idea. If we can see sort out the dark images of
little spots across this globe, tens of thousands of earthquakes happen
every year. In fact, in
[[Page H2221]]
the United States last year there were over 1,000 earthquakes. Some
modest, some very severe.
Certainly the earthquake that struck Kobe, Japan in early 1995 caused
nearly 6,000 deaths and over $100 billion in damages. And of course,
more recently, the tragedy in Armenia, Colombia, in which well over
1,000 people lost their lives I think are stern reminders of the
destructive power of earthquakes. The Loma Prieta earthquake caused $6
billion in damage, Northridge earthquake caused $40 billion in damages,
and provide, I think, a glimpse of what could happen here if we are not
adequately prepared.
As the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Sensenbrenner), noted in his statement, 39 States in this country are
exposed to a significant earthquake risk, and about 75 million people
live in urban areas with a moderate to high earthquake risk.
Thankfully, in my home State of Michigan, earthquakes are very rare,
but even Michigan is vulnerable to earthquakes.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would again certainly like to thank the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Brown), and the gentlewoman from Texas
(Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson), the ranking member of our Subcommittee on
Basic Research of the Committee on Science, for their assistance in
preparing this important bill and for their efforts in bringing it to
the floor, and I would urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to
support this bill.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes
to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).
(Ms. WOOLSEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks.)
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, first let me indicate my very strong
support for H.R. 1184, which will reauthorize the National Earthquake
Hazard Reduction Program, NEHRP.
Since its inception in 1977, and particularly in the last decade,
NEHRP has been successful in assessing how earthquakes affect us and
what we can do to prepare for the next one. Too bad they cannot prevent
earthquakes from happening in the first place.
NEHRP has been reaching out to State and local officials, improving
building codes, and assessing the level of seismic risk in different
areas across the country. This is a very important program, especially
in my Congressional District, which has the San Andreas Fault running
through it.
During the Committee on Science markup of this bill, I was pleased
that my amendment to H.R. 1184 was unanimously accepted and is in the
bill today. My amendment directs FEMA to report on the element that
addresses the needs of at-risk populations. Specifically, this includes
the elderly, the non-English speaking, persons with disabilities,
single parent households and the poor.
There are risk factors that cannot be determined by seismological or
engineering research and analysis. These risks deal with the social
culture and the economic factors that are presented nationwide when
there is a disaster. I am aware that the National Science Foundation,
which is a part of NEHRP, supports social sciences research, and I am
aware how this research relates to at-risk populations. This would be
addressed in our report.
Not only will this report provide valuable information on what has
been accomplished to date, it also will bring into focus what needs to
be done in the future to reach those populations that incur more damage
in disaster because of their age or their economic status or their
physical limitations.
Because disasters affect us all, this bill is one that Congress, as a
whole, should be very interested in and totally supportive of. I ask
that everyone support H.R. 1184.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes
to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson).
Mr. LARSON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from Texas for
yielding me this time, and I rise today to support this bill, the
Earthquake Hazard Reduction Act.
A few weeks ago we approved this bill unanimously in the Committee on
Science. This bill, as before mentioned by my colleagues, would
reauthorize nearly $40 million in funding over the next 2 years for
earthquake preparedness and programs.
I would also like to thank our esteemed chairman, the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) for his help, and the venerable ranking
member of our committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. George
Brown), and my colleagues, of course, who have sponsored and introduced
this legislation, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith), and the
gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) for graciously accepting two
amendments I offered during the markup.
My amendments were aimed at making sure information generated under
the program is localized and available on the Internet, and
specifically that the backbone of the Internet communication system be
considered part of the Nation's critical infrastructure. The original
law cites communication facilities as lifeline, but not communications
infrastructure.
Today, as we all know, there are fiber-optic links dedicated solely
to the transfer of information over the Internet. Data traffic is
currently increasing about 10 times the rate of phone traffic,
therefore creating this need.
We should also be concerned about routers and servers managing and
storing this traffic. Disaster recovery plans must account for
restoring high-speed links and for backing up critical databases. This
increasingly critical data infrastructure should be recognized as part
of the bill language and, as amended, is.
Again, I wish to thank my colleagues on the committee for supporting
the amendment and encourage all of my colleagues in the House to
support this bill.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes
to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu).
Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support today of H.R. 1184,
the reauthorization of the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction
Program. I particularly applaud the farsightedness of the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman of the Committee on
Science, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Brown), the ranking
member, in authorizing $168 million over the next 5 years for expansion
and modernization of the seismic monitoring infrastructure of the
United States.
Oregon is, unfortunately, at great risk for earthquakes, and I am
looking forward to the benefits that will flow from such a
modernization effort in Oregon and nationwide. My amendment, which has
been incorporated into the bill, will add an additional $2.8 million
over 2 years to the seismic network to procure two portable seismic
networks.
Seismologists routinely deploy temporary mobile networks to monitor
aftershocks or to better understand the impact of an earthquake in a
particular region. The two networks supported by my amendment would be
a natural supplement to the permanent monitoring networks.
The chairman has been conscientious in authorizing the elements of a
seismic monitoring system contained in a plan that will be forwarded to
us shortly by the administration. I believe these portable networks
will also be part of that plan.
These portable networks are very necessary to a comprehensive
capability for post-earthquake monitoring. I would hate to see any
delay in developing them, and I urge adoption of this amendment.
In closing, I would like to commend the chair and ranking member of
the Committee on Science and the chair and ranking member of the
Subcommittee on Basic Research for facilitating bipartisan cooperation
in this bill within the committee and here. With that, Mr. Chairman, I
urge passage of this bill.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time
as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Brown).
Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for
yielding me this time. I am enthusiastic about rising to support H.R.
1184 and, of course, it has been a favorite piece of legislation of
mine for many years.
I also note that one of our colleagues, the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr.
[[Page H2222]]
Larson), has used, I think for the first time on the floor, the
description of an elderly member as being venerable. Normally that is
an ecclesiastical term, and this is not an ecclesiastical body, but I
appreciate the intent.
The point that I wanted to make, I think most strongly, is that in
the first 22 years of the existence of this act we actually had a
stable and declining funding for this program, much to my regret.
{time} 1245
In real terms, the amount authorized for the program decreased by 26
percent over that period of time. Consider the fact that, as has
already been mentioned, that in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake alone,
estimates of the cost of damage and business interruptions were more
than $10 billion. I think it now becomes clear that the U.S. needs to
invest more than it has to date in earthquake hazards reduction.
I would like to congratulate the two committees, Science and
Resources, that enjoy joint jurisdiction over this legislation for
recognizing that this is an area and now is the time in which we should
invest more heavily for the benefit of all the people of this country.
As has been mentioned, I was involved with the passage of the
original bill in 1977, which focused almost exclusively on the research
necessary for earthquake prediction. We were motivated at the time by
rumors that the Chinese had developed novel ways of predicting
earthquakes, and we were intrigued by the fact that they could be ahead
of us in this regard.
It did not turn out to be true, but it did lead us to some focus on
the research necessary for prediction, which is still of great interest
but unlikely to bear the economic return that reducing hazards would
bear.
The current act which we are considering still contains provisions
for research but has been broadened to include seismic safety
standards, coordination with State and local governments, dissemination
of information, and public education and awareness. And all of these
features will add new value to this important piece of legislation.
Looking back at the evolution of the act of 1977, I believe that with
its renewed focus on mitigation and preparedness, Congress is now on
the right path to reducing the risk to life and property caused by
earthquakes.
Mr. Chairman, I thank all of those who have participated in bringing
the bill to the floor, and I urge the passage of this important bill.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I support the legislation. There is some
money in here for procurement. I will offer a buy-American amendment.
It has been standard language.
I remind the Congress that the last month quantified was February
1999 and we set another record trade deficit, close to $20 billion.
China and Japan alone accounted for $10 billion in February of 1999.
So it is just a simple, straightforward amendment and says any money
expended under this, if they possibly could find it in their heart to
buy American, we encourage that. But if they affix a fraudulent made-
in-America laden label, then they would have trouble with the further
contract.
It is not a major thing, we passed it before, and I would appreciate
the support for it.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have no objection
to this amendment; and I have no further requests for time, so I yield
back the balance of my time.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in
support of H.R. 1184, a bill to reauthorize the National Earthquake
Hazards Reduction Program--a multi-agency effort to reduce the terrible
effects of earthquakes on life and property.
Of particular interest to the Resources Committee, the bill would
authorize appropriations for FY 2000 and 2001 to the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) to carry out its responsibilities under the Act,
including a related USGS grant program and another program to develop a
prototype real-time seismic warning system. Finally the bill would
require the USGS Director to establish a Scientific Earthquake Studies
Advisory Committee.
The Clinton Administration has testified in strong support of
reauthorization of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program.
This program has made significant progress and contributions in the
reduction of earthquake risks during its 23-year history. While the
Resources Committee's jurisdiction in this matter is limited to
activities of the USGS, the effort to reduce earthquake risks is shared
among other federal agencies including the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of
Standards and Technology. As a native Californian, I am grateful to the
fine work done by all of these agencies.
Under this critical program, USGS produces earthquake hazard
assessments and national seismic hazard maps for earthquake loss
reduction; provides timely and accurate notifications of earthquakes
and information on their location, size, and damage potential, and
carries out studies and research on earthquake occurrence and effects.
For example, during 1999-2001, USGS will develop more detailed,
larger scale products that depict variations in the expected ground
shaking across the San Francisco Bay urban area. The data compiled will
enable local officials and planners to see probabilities of earthquake
occurrence, amplification or extension of shaking caused by geologic
deposits and structures, and susceptibility of these deposits to
liquefy and slide during an earthquake.
In another major partnership authorized by this program, the USGS,
National Science Foundation, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, and the Southern California Earthquake Center are
installing a state-of-the-art geodetic network to monitor fault
movements and Earth strain in Southern California. Utilizing a
satellite navigation system operated by the Department of Defense,
which permits points on the Earth's surface to be located to a
precision of a millimeter, the network will track the movement of 250
stations concentrated along a corridor through the Los Angeles basin,
but also extending south to the Mexican border and east to the Colorado
River. Basically, the data derived from this effort will not only
improve general understanding of large-scale tectonic processes
responsible for earthquakes but will also provide indications where
earthquakes might occur in the near future.
Earthquakes are one of the most devastating natural hazards known to
man and pose a severe threat to life and property in many regions of
our Nation and around the world--and in particular in my home state of
California. The United States has a fundamental responsibility and
self-interest in reducing the risks associated with earthquakes.
Mitigation and finding new applications should continue to be an
integral factor in efforts to lessen the terrible consequences of
earthquakes on our populace.
At the same time, we must continue to develop a strong scientific
understanding of where earthquakes will occur, why they occur, how big
they can be, and to learn more about the effects that they will
generate. Basic research and monitoring have contributed significantly
to our improved mitigation capacity. Good science has also led to
application and informed decision-making. The USGS Earthquake Hazards
Reduction Program addresses many of the more serious earthquake risks,
and I am pleased to support its reauthorization.
I recommend an ``aye'' vote on its passage.
Mr. COOK. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1184, the National
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program. In addition to authorizing
funding for basic earthquake programs, H.R. 1184 provides 5-year
authorizations for a new program--the Advanced National Seismic
Research and Monitoring System. H.R. 1184 authorizes USGS to spend
$170.8 million over the next 5 years to modernize the current
antiquated system.
The Utah Geological Survey estimates that my district, Salt Lake
County, Utah is due for a magnitude 7 earthquake. The UGS estimates
that a major quake of this magnitude could kill up to 7,600 people,
injure 44,000 more and cause nearly $20 billion in damages.
With this new monitoring system we could send out early warning of
impending earthquakes that utilities could use to shut off valves, and
schools to rush our children to safety. There also is additional money
for the University of Utah to continue their earthquake research on the
Wasatch Front. The Wasatch Front is the newest range in the Rocky
Mountains and it is getting bigger. It was created by earthquakes and
it will continue to grow with the help of earthquakes. Earthquakes
occur regularly in my district and we need to be prepared for them. 80%
of Utah's population resides on top of active earthquake faults. The
University of Utah is one of our nation's leading earthquake research
centers. This money will also be used to collect information needed to
deploy resources after an earthquake. We will be able to map the
severity and location of an earthquake to know how and where to send
emergency response teams. This bill is a good investment in protecting
our citizens
[[Page H2223]]
from a disaster that we know is coming. It would be a disaster for the
American people for Congress to run away from their responsibilities
and not prepare our country for earthquakes.
I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 1184.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time,
and I yield back the balance my time.
The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the
bill shall be considered by sections as an original bill for the
purpose of amendment, and pursuant to the rule, each section is
considered read.
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 request for
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5
minutes the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the
committee amendment in the nature of a substitute be printed in the
Record and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Wisconsin?
There was no objection.
The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is
as follows:
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 ``Earthquake Hazards Reduction
Authorization Act of 1999''.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Federal Emergency Management Agency.--Section 12(a) of
the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C.
7706(a)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(1) General.--'' and all that follows
through ``(7) There'' and inserting ``General.--There'';
(2) by striking ``1998, and'' and inserting ``1998,''; and
(3) by inserting ``, $19,800,000 for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2000, and $20,400,000 for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2001'' after ``September 30, 1999''.
(b) United States Geological Survey.--(1) Section 12(b) of
the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C.
7706(b)) is amended--
(A) by inserting ``There are authorized to be appropriated
to the Secretary of the Interior for purposes of carrying
out, through the Director of the United States Geological
Survey, the responsibilities that may be assigned to the
Director under this Act $46,100,000 for fiscal year 2000, of
which $3,500,000 shall be used for the Global Seismic Network
and $100,000 shall be used for the Scientific Earthquake
Studies Advisory Committee established under section 6 of the
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act of 1999; and
$47,500,000 for fiscal year 2001, of which $3,600,000 shall
be used for the Global Seismic Network and $100,000 shall be
used for the Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee
established under section 6 of the Earthquake Hazards
Reduction Authorization Act of 1999.'' after ``operated by
the Agency.'';
(B) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1);
(C) by striking the comma at the end of paragraph (2) and
inserting a semicolon; and
(D) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new
paragraphs:
``(3) $9,000,000 of the amount authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2000; and
``(4) $9,500,000 of the amount authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2001,''.
(2) Section 2(a)(7) of the Act entitled ``An Act to
authorize appropriations for carrying out the Earthquake
Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 for fiscal years 1998 and 1999,
and for other purposes'' is amended by inserting ``,
$1,600,000 for fiscal year 2000, and $1,650,000 for fiscal
year 2001'' after ``1998 and 1999''.
(c) National Science Foundation.--Section 12(c) of the
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706(c))
is amended--
(1) by striking ``1998, and'' and inserting ``1998,''; and
(2) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``, and
(5) $19,000,000 for engineering research and $10,900,000 for
geosciences research for the fiscal year ending September 30,
2000. There are authorized to be appropriated to the National
Science Foundation $19,600,000 for engineering research and
$11,200,000 for geosciences research for fiscal year 2001.''.
(d) National Institute of Standards and Technology.--
Section 12(d) of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977
(42 U.S.C. 7706(d)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``1998, and''; and inserting ``1998,''; and
(2) by inserting ``, $2,200,000 for fiscal year 2000, and
$2,265,000 for fiscal year 2001'' after ``September 30,
1999''.
SEC. 3. REPEALS.
Section 10 and subsections (e) and (f) of section 12 of the
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7705d and
7706 (e) and (f)) are repealed.
SEC. 4. ADVANCED NATIONAL SEISMIC RESEARCH AND MONITORING
SYSTEM.
The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C.
7701 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:
``SEC. 13. ADVANCED NATIONAL SEISMIC RESEARCH AND MONITORING
SYSTEM.
``(a) Establishment.--The Director of the United States
Geological Survey shall establish and operate an Advanced
National Seismic Research and Monitoring System. The purpose
of such system shall be to organize, modernize, standardize,
and stabilize the national, regional, and urban seismic
monitoring systems in the United States, including sensors,
recorders, and data analysis centers, into a coordinated
system that will measure and record the full range of
frequencies and amplitudes exhibited by seismic waves, in
order to enhance earthquake research and warning
capabilities.
``(b) Management Plan.--Not later than 120 days after the
date of the enactment of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction
Authorization Act of 1999, the Director of the United States
Geological Survey shall transmit to the Congress a 5-year
management plan for establishing and operating the Advanced
National Seismic Research and Monitoring System. The plan
shall include annual cost estimates for both modernization
and operation, milestones, standards, and performance goals,
as well as plans for securing the participation of all
existing networks in the Advanced National Seismic Research
and Monitoring System and for establishing new, or enhancing
existing, partnerships to leverage resources.
``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
``(1) Expansion and modernization.--In addition to amounts
appropriated under section 12(b), there are authorized to be
appropriated to the Secretary of the Interior, to be used by
the Director of the United States Geological Survey to
establish the Advanced National Seismic Research and
Monitoring System--
``(A) $33,500,000 for fiscal year 2000;
``(B) $33,700,000 for fiscal year 2001;
``(C) $35,100,000 for fiscal year 2002;
``(D) $35,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
``(E) $33,500,000 for fiscal year 2004.
``(2) Operation.--In addition to amounts appropriated under
section 12(b), there are authorized to be appropriated to the
Secretary of the Interior, to be used by the Director of the
United States Geological Survey to operate the Advanced
National Seismic Research and Monitoring System--
``(A) $4,500,000 for fiscal year 2000; and
``(B) $10,300,000 for fiscal year 2001.''.
SEC. 5. NETWORK FOR EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING SIMULATION.
The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C.
7701 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:
``SEC. 14. NETWORK FOR EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING SIMULATION.
``(a) Establishment.--The Director of the National Science
Foundation shall establish a Network for Earthquake
Engineering Simulation that will upgrade, link, and integrate
a system of geographically distributed experimental
facilities for earthquake engineering testing of full-sized
structures and their components and partial-scale physical
models. The system shall be integrated through networking
software so that integrated models and databases can be used
to create model-based simulation, and the components of the
system shall be interconnected with a computer network and
allow for remote access, information sharing, and
collaborative research.
``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--In addition to
amounts appropriated under section 12(c), there are
authorized to be appropriated, out of funds otherwise
authorized to be appropriated to the National Science
Foundation, $7,700,000 for fiscal year 2000 for the Network
for Earthquake Engineering Simulation. In addition to amounts
appropriated under section 12(c), there are authorized to be
appropriated to the National Science Foundation for the
Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation--
``(1) $28,200,000 for fiscal year 2001;
``(2) $24,400,000 for fiscal year 2002;
``(3) $4,500,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
``(4) $17,000,000 for fiscal year 2004.''.
SEC. 6. SCIENTIFIC EARTHQUAKE STUDIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
(a) Establishment.--The Director of the United States
Geological Survey shall establish a Scientific Earthquake
Studies Advisory Committee.
(b) Organization.--The Director shall establish procedures
for selection of individuals not employed by the Federal
Government who are qualified in the seismic sciences and
other appropriate fields and may, pursuant to such
procedures, select up to ten individuals, one of whom shall
be designated Chairman, to serve on the Advisory Committee.
Selection of individuals for the Advisory Committee shall be
based solely on established records of distinguished service,
and the Director shall ensure that a reasonable cross-section
of views and expertise is represented. In selecting
individuals to serve on the Advisory Committee, the Director
shall seek and give due consideration to recommendations from
the National Academy of Sciences, professional societies, and
other appropriate organizations.
(c) Meetings.--The Advisory Committee shall meet at such
times and places as may be designated by the Chairman in
consultation with the Director.
(d) Duties.--The Advisory Committee shall advise the
Director on matters relating to the
[[Page H2224]]
United States Geological Survey's participation in the
National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, including the
United States Geological Survey's roles, goals, and
objectives within that Program, its capabilities and research
needs, guidance on achieving major objectives, and
establishing and measuring performance goals. The Advisory
Committee shall issue an annual report to the Director for
submission to Congress on or before September 30 of each
year. The report shall describe the Advisory Committee's
activities and address policy issues or matters that affect
the United States Geological Survey's participation in the
National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program.
SEC. 7. BUDGET COORDINATION.
Section 5 of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977
(42 U.S.C. 7704) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(1)--
(A) by striking subparagraph (A) and redesignating
subparagraphs (B) through (F) as subparagraphs (A) through
(E), respectively; and
(B) by moving subparagraph (E), as so redesignated by
subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, so as to appear
immediately after subparagraph (D), as so redesignated; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(c) Budget Coordination.--
``(1) Guidance.--The Agency shall each year provide
guidance to the other Program agencies concerning the
preparation of requests for appropriations for activities
related to the Program, and shall prepare, in conjunction
with the other Program agencies, an annual Program budget to
be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget.
``(2) Reports.--Each Program agency shall include with its
annual request for appropriations submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget a report that--
``(A) identifies each element of the proposed Program
activities of the agency;
``(B) specifies how each of these activities contributes to
the Program; and
``(C) states the portion of its request for appropriations
allocated to each element of the Program.''.
SEC. 8. REPORT ON AT-RISK POPULATIONS.
Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of
this Act, and after a period for public comment, the Director
of the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall transmit to
the Congress a report describing the elements of the Program
that specifically address the needs of at-risk populations,
including the elderly, persons with disabilities, non-
English-speaking families, single-parent households, and the
poor. Such report shall also identify additional actions that
could be taken to address those needs, and make
recommendations for any additional legislative authority
required to take such actions.
SEC. 9. PUBLIC ACCESS TO EARTHQUAKE INFORMATION.
Section 5(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction
Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7704(b)(2)(A)(ii)) is amended by
inserting ``, and development of means of increasing public
access to available locality-specific information that may
assist the public in preparing for or responding to
earthquakes'' after ``and the general public''.
SEC. 10. LIFELINES.
Section 4(6) of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of
1977 (42 U.S.C. 7703(6)) is amended by inserting ``and
infrastructure'' after ``communication facilities''.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to the bill?
Amendment Offered by Mr. Traficant
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment, and I ask
unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed
in the Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Ohio?
There was no objection.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Traficant:
At the end of the bill add the following new sections:
SEC. . COMPLIANCE WITH BUY AMERICAN ACT.
No funds authorized pursuant to this Act may be expended by
an entity unless the entity agrees that in expending the
assistance the entity will comply with sections 2 through 4
of the Act of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c, popularly
known as the ``Buy American Act'').
SEC. . SENSE OF CONGRESS; REQUIREMENT REGARDING NOTICE.
(a) Purchase of American-Made Equipment and Products.--In
the case of any equipment or products that may be authorized
to be purchased with financial assistance provided under this
Act, it is the sense of the Congress that entities receiving
such assistance should, in expending the assistance, purchase
only American-made equipment and products.
(b) Notice to Recipients of Assistance.--In providing
financial assistance under this Act, the Secretary of
Transportation shall provide to each recipient of the
assistance a notice describing the statement made in
subsection (a) by the Congress.
SEC. . PROHIBITION OF CONTRACTS.
If it has been finally determined by a court or Federal
agency that any person intentionally affixed a label bearing
a ``Made in America'' inscription, or any inscription with
the same meaning, to any product sold in or shipped to the
United States that is not made in the United States, such
person shall be ineligible to receive any contract or
subcontract made with funds provided pursuant to this Act,
pursuant to the debarment, suspension, and ineligibility
procedures described in section 9.400 through 9.409 of title
48, Code of Federal Regulations.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, the amendment has been explained in the
general debate time. It is a straighforward, buy-American amendment. It
has passed on several other pieces of legislation. I encourage the
committee to accept it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Sensenbrenner).
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
We are pleased to accept this constructive amendment.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas
(Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson).
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have no objection
to the amendment.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I urge an ``aye'' vote, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other amendments?
If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute, as amended.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended,
was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Bonilla) having assumed the chair, Mr. LaHood, 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. 1184) to
authorize appropriations for carrying out the Earthquake Hazards
Reduction Act of 1977 for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, and for other
purposes, pursuant to House Resolution 142, he reported the bill back
to the House with an amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on the amendment to the committee
amendment in the nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of the
Whole? If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature
of a substitute.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute amendment was
agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. 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. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground
that a quorum is not present and make the 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 3, not voting 16, as follows:
[Roll No. 95]
YEAS--414
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
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
Cramer
Crane
Crowley
[[Page H2225]]
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (VA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
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
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill (IN)
Hill (MT)
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
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)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kleczka
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
Kuykendall
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Largent
Larson
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
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)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Miller, George
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Ose
Packard
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pickett
Pitts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
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
Sawyer
Scarborough
Schaffer
Schakowsky
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simpson
Sisisky
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
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
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watkins
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Weygand
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (AK)
NAYS--3
Duncan
Paul
Sanford
NOT VOTING--16
Chenoweth
Deal
Gekas
Hastings (FL)
Klink
Lantos
Metcalf
Miller, Gary
Nethercutt
Nussle
Owens
Oxley
Radanovich
Saxton
Souder
Young (FL)
{time} 1315
Mr. DUNCAN changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 95, I
attempted to return from lunch to vote; however, there was an accident
and I arrived one minute after the vote was taken. This was unavoidable
and beyond my control. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, today, April 21, 1999, I was unavoidably
detained during rollcall No. 95, and thus my vote on the passage of
H.R. 1184 was not recorded. Had I been present, I would have voted
``yea'' in support of the legislation.
____________________