[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 69 (Thursday, May 13, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H3141-H3147]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 1141, 1999 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL 
                           APPROPRIATIONS ACT

  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, under section 7(c), rule XXII, I offer a 
motion to instruct conferees on the bill (H.R. 1141) making emergency 
supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1999, and for other purposes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The CLERK read as follows:
       Mr. UPTON moves that the managers on the part of the House 
     at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the 2 Houses on 
     the Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 1141 be instructed to 
     insist that no provision--
       (1) not in H.R. 1141, when passed by the House,
       (2) not in H.R. 1664 when passed by the House or directly 
     related to H.R. 1664,
       (3) not in the Senate amendment to H.R. 1141, as passed by 
     the Senate,

     be agreed to by the managers on the part of the House.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) and 
the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) each will be recognized for 30 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton).
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Over the last couple of weeks this House has passed two supplemental 
appropriations bills. I voted for each of the two bills. I thought that 
they were very important and truly emergency spending resolutions that 
we needed to agree on and pass.
  Mr. Speaker, we passed both these resolutions here in the House, and 
clearly they were urgent, and clearly they were necessary. Many of us 
in the last week or two, when we supported particularly the second 
resolution, helping our readiness, helping our troops all over the 
world, decided that that was the wisest course to take. When we passed 
those two bills, we did not include the traditional pork barrel 
projects that are sometimes, more often than not, added onto these 
bills.
  But sadly, the other body took a different course. Yesterday when I 
introduced this resolution, we indicated that we should not exceed the 
scope of the bills passed in the House and Senate. This is a step in 
the right direction.
  Frankly, I would like to do a lot more. I would like to get all of 
the pork, all of these pork barrel projects that are not emergency, out 
of the bill. But lo and behold when I get home at night, as I did last 
night, and I turn on C-Span, it is really a big bazaar. It is Members 
of Congress in the House or the Senate, it does not matter which party, 
trading projects back and forth, back and forth.
  Mr. Speaker, I can remember the staffer in the Reagan administration 
looking at some of these appropriation conference bills. The House 
would pass a bill at this level, the Senate would be a little higher, 
and we would end up with a bill that was higher than both of them. The 
same thing is happening again.
  This has got to stop. This is taking money away from social security. 
This clearly has an impact on the surplus or the deficit, the long-term 
debt. It is wrong.
  This is an emergency. We need only to deal with the emergency items, 
whether they be the tornado, the awful tornado that struck in Oklahoma, 
whether they be Hurricane Mitch, whether it be our readiness. All of 
those things I can understand, and I think the taxpayers across the 
country can understand.
  But when they start seeing a bridge here, an armory here, some 
special environmental rider here or there, lots of things added to this 
bill, none of which were ever intended, particularly by the leaders of 
this House when we passed those bills, both in March and April, we have 
to draw the line.
  What this resolution does, Mr. Speaker, is say, they have got to go. 
This is our instructions to our conferees that have now been working 
for some 3 weeks, that it is time to put their feet to the fire and say 
no to these special interests, no to these special projects, bring a 
bill back for the House and Senate to agree to that does not include 
all of these pork barrel items.
  Mr. Speaker, we have a number of speakers that want to speak on this 
issue this afternoon, so I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the effort of the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Upton) in this area. This House is the people's House, and we are 
here to do the people's business. For any of the people of America who 
were watching C-Span last night and watching the conference report, I 
do not think they were watching the people's business. I think it was 
an unfortunate public example of what we know goes on privately many, 
many times.
  There is a statute which talks about emergencies. We are literally 
dealing with the most serious things this Congress can talk about and 
deal with, literally, a military operation going on in Kosovo, American 
men and women whose lives are in harm's way today, and then by I guess 
it is just the arrogance of power, just absolute arrogance is the only 
way I can describe some of my colleagues, particularly in the Senate, 
in the other body, that want to put in just absolutely awful, obscure, 
terrible, self-centered special interest riders onto legislation 
dealing with a true crisis.
  Think about how outrageous what is going on in this building today 
is. In the 7 years that I have been here, this is the worst example. We 
have seen special interests, we have seen pork barrel stuff, but what 
hypocrisy, what tragic, absolutely beyond-the-pale arrogance, when men 
and women of our armed forces are in harm's way, to play these games.
  This is not a game. There are some of my colleagues who might believe 
that it is a game, but it is not a game. Yet, that is exactly what is 
going on. Shame on those Members, and hopefully more people are 
watching on C-Span and more people are seeing what they are going to 
do, and guarantee that those people who are involved in this shameful 
activity never return to this Congress or to the United States Senate.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Delaware (Mr. Castle).
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, let me first associate myself with the 
comments of the gentleman from Michigan when he opened this 
legislation, and with the gentleman from Florida. I am as concerned as 
they are, and perhaps even more so. I think the process that we have 
adopted with respect to these so-called emergency spending bills is 
itself a disaster. Frankly, I think we need to do something about it in 
a hurry.
  First of all, we do not, in the Congress of the United States, unlike 
virtually every State in the country now, have any kind of an emergency 
spending process by which we set aside

[[Page H3142]]

money in case there are emergencies. It is ad hoc. You come in here, 
you declare something to be an emergency, if you can get a majority of 
your brethren to agree with you, then you can get a vote on it.
  The problem is, it goes through the Senate and then it goes into 
conference. What we have seen in recent days in the conference, with 
behavior from both sides of the aisle, particularly in the Senate, is 
to try to put everything in it you possibly can. It happens on every 
single emergency spending bill that goes through here. They become 
Christmas trees automatically. Everyone tries to put their own 
particular ornament on that Christmas tree. That process simply must 
stop.
  This is a wonderful idea that the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) 
has put forward. That is that we will take what passed in the House, we 
will take what passed in the Senate, and we will cut off everything 
else. We will just say no more, no mas, that is it, we are not going to 
do it. I think we should pass it as soon as we possibly can.
  Just remember, every time we add another dollar here, we are taking a 
dollar away from helping with the social security problem, because now 
we cannot retire the debt of the social security with those dollars 
that we are putting into some of these projects which come along.
  Mr. Speaker, I personally believe that the caps are a problem. I 
personally believe there is some spending we need to do in the area of 
education, particularly defense, and some things that are not being 
addressed, and we should not try to do it in emergency legislation.
  These are very good causes, but they should not be part of an 
emergency spending package, as we have seen here in the House so far. 
To add these things on is a terrible tragedy.

                              {time}  1415

  Some of the riders that are being considered are parochial by nature. 
They are not of an emergency nature. They do not benefit the country 
generally. There is just absolutely no excuse to include them in 
legislation such as this other than one is dealing usually with a 
powerful Senator who one needs in order to get it through. That is a 
terrible way to do business.
  So we should change the process. We should certainly pass these 
instructions that the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) has put 
forward. We should stand united that we are going to make absolutely 
sure that we are putting an end to this, to go about doing what we have 
the money to do now, balancing our budget, taking care of the problems 
of Social Security and Medicare, and perhaps even providing for a tax 
cut, and making sure that our soldiers and sailors and Air Force and 
all our other military people are provided for, as they should be.
  It can be done if we sit down and do it together. But do not do it 
through this emergency bill. Follow these motions to instruct.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Watt).
  Mr. WATT of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I want to rise very quickly 
in support of the Upton motion to instruct. Regardless of whether we 
are fighting for deficit reduction or to reduce the debt or to save 
Social Security or just trying to save dollars for other worthy 
purposes, this motion makes a lot of sense.
  We should not stack nonemergency items onto an emergency bill and try 
to boggard them through the process without giving them all of the 
consideration that the committee process requires. I want to 
congratulate the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) on his motion. I 
strongly urge my colleagues to support the motion.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Boehlert) to engage in a colloquy.
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Upton) for offering this motion which would strengthen 
the House position in conference. The House leadership and the House 
Committee on Appropriations I think have done an excellent job on 
holding the line on extraneous matters, and this motion should help. So 
the gentleman's motion will be helpful.
  I note, however, that, for drafting reasons, the gentleman's motion 
deals only with one set of problems we are facing in conference; 
namely, the addition of items that were never passed by either body.
  But we also face another set of problems in conference because the 
Senate-passed version of the supplemental also contains numerous 
extraneous detrimental riders, many of them dealing with sensitive 
environmental matters.
  I ask the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) what does he believe 
our posture should be toward those items?
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) for a 
response.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York for his 
comments, and I believe that the House in the conference must oppose 
all detrimental riders, including those that were passed by the other 
body.
  I would just like to add as well that we were really under the gun 
when we introduced this motion yesterday. Under the House Rules, it has 
to be introduced when we are in session. Because the legislative 
activity yesterday went a little bit faster than usual, and we were in 
fear that the conference would be finished even last night or today, we 
had to be very quick in drafting this.
  I view this as a first step. I think we ought to go a lot further and 
take a lot of the junk out that the Senate put in. I would completely 
agree with the gentleman from New York with regard to the environmental 
riders and would hope that they would be stripped out. I know for me, 
as a Member, if they are not, I will be voting ``no'' when this bill 
comes back.
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman 
from Michigan for clarifying this point, the supplemental which deals 
mainly with legitimate emergencies and gives an appropriate response. 
But I think that is going to be in jeopardy if it is used as a way to 
pass major policy decisions which normally would be subjected to 
greater scrutiny and fuller debate here this the people's House.
  I know that our leadership is well aware of that and has been working 
hard to keep the supplemental clean. They must succeed. I urge the 
support of the motion.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Florida 
yielding me this time.
  One of the low points for me in my tenure in Congress is what we have 
visited as the Congress adjourned last fall. We dealt with an omnibus 
spending bill. I think people on both sides of the aisle, people of all 
different philosophical orientations were frustrated that we were doing 
the people's business in this fashion with billions of dollars, nobody 
really knowing what was in it; and it was something that none of us 
would be proud of back home in the smallest city or county.
  I personally feel that we need to take each opportunity to recommit 
ours to a thoughtful, reasonable, effective bipartisan approach to 
dealing with the people's money. I strongly support the motion to 
instruct by the gentleman from Michigan. I am pleased to hear that he 
does not think it goes quite far enough. I appreciated the colloquy 
clarifying the intent on some of these very destructive environmental 
riders.
  My sincere hope is that this will be the beginning in this Congress 
of our having a bipartisan approach to make sure that we do handle the 
budget in a more thoughtful fashion.
  I commend the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) for his efforts. I 
like the spirit of bipartisanship that has been advanced. I hope that 
we can take every opportunity in the days ahead to follow up on this, 
because I think we can do a better job of discharging our 
responsibilities, getting more out of the tax dollar, and making people 
feel better about this institution.
  I think this is a very important part in this effort, and I look 
forward to it leading to new steps for our being able to work together 
to put more integrity in the budgetary process.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the statement of the gentleman 
from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Hampshire 
(Mr. Bass).

[[Page H3143]]

  Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Upton) for this very timely motion. I see this as a motion to 
support our conferees, to give them the kind of support that they need 
dealing with what is, in effect, a pork fest going on over in the 
Senate.
  It is a question of priorities. Are we for saving Social Security? 
Are we for tax relief for working Americans or eliminating the marriage 
tax penalty? Are we for tax dividend, or all the other issues that we 
have been dealing with? Are we for special education funding, these 
types of priorities? Or are we for a system that sets caps that are 
possibly unreasonably low, and then have individual Senators come in 
with their own pet projects in the name of an emergency in order to 
boost the budget? Is that the way we are going to set priorities in 
1999? Shame on the process for doing that.
  I would suggest to the Congress that if we cannot move forward on 
this emergency supplemental as it has been sent to the Senate, that we 
throw it out and we start all over again because there is no way that 
we are going to accede to an emergency supplemental that contains 99 
and counting pieces of special legislation for Senators.
  If this is the charade that we have to play in the name of looking 
like budget hawks, I do not want to have any part of it.
  So I commend the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) for his courage 
in bringing this motion to our attention. I hope it receives a 
unanimous vote.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am going to try to maybe point out specific things. I 
actually wonder about commercial fishing in Glacier Bay, if that really 
fits the criteria of emergency criteria under the statute that we have. 
To hold off funding our troops in Kosovo, bringing that as an issue, I 
do not know, I just find it shocking. I mean, that is the only words 
that I can think of. I use Yiddish on the floor, chutzpah. I mean it 
really is chutzpah.
  Everybody in America knows what chutzpah is. One does not have to 
speak Yiddish to understand. It is amazing that they would have that.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
DeFazio).
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for 
yielding me this time.
  I congratulate the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) on this motion 
to instruct. It is a good start to begin to strip out some of the 
extraordinary special interest riders that have been piggybacked on an 
ostensible emergency spending bill.
  Now I have got to depart from the majority of my colleagues here in 
that I voted against the entire package. The money for the military 
should come out of the Pentagon. The money for other purposes should 
come out of the appropriate budgets. We should not be spending the 
Social Security Trust Fund, which is what we are dipping into here, 
which both the Republican leaders and the President promised to 
safeguard for these purposes.
  But absent that, even worse than the fact that we went from $7 
billion to $11 billion, and all these other things were larded into the 
bill, even worse, we have an attack on the environment in this 
legislation. The 1872 mining law is not enough of a giveaway?
  Multinational mining companies acquire land in the western United 
States worth billions of dollars for $2.50 an acre with not a penny in 
royalties to the Federal taxpayers. That is running government like a 
business? But that is not bad enough. We cannot reform that law here. 
We know that. There is a majority that supports the continued 
giveaways.
  But this bill goes even further. It waives provisions that have 
ridiculous, inadequate, antiquated law so that an open pit mine, heap 
leach mining, can go forward in Washington State. Cut off the top of a 
mountain and for every 16,000 tons of ore, one dumps cyanide on it, 
which it tends to get into the water table, and one gets an ounce of 
gold. This is prospecting, modern times.
  But that requires a waiver, and the waiver is in this bill. What does 
that have to do with emergencies? What does is it have to do with 
Kosovo? Nothing. It has to do with the fact that Senators can do 
whatever they want behind closed doors and try and muscle the House and 
intimidate the President into signing the bill.
  I certainly know that President Clinton will stand strong against 
these environmental riders as he has stood so steadfast in the past 
against similar riders. I urge him to veto this bill if we are not 
successful in our efforts today.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Cunningham).
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I like the analogy of the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Deutsch). It does take chutzpah to have something that is 
truly an emergency and to pile riders and special interest just so that 
we have to vote for it to get it through is absolutely wrong. I support 
and I thank the gentleman.
  None of us mind paying our tax dollars when we have farmers in 
trouble, we have an earthquake, we have floods. We support that. But 
this is wrong. I think most of us that watched television last night 
were appalled. It made the term ``good government'' an oxymoron. It is 
bad government when this comes to pass.
  But what we are trying to do is fund our men and women and the needs. 
When the White House does have our people go into war, then we need to 
provide the equipment, the training, so that they can not only do their 
job, but win and come back safely. That is what the initial bill was 
for, not to pile on this stuff.
  But I would also like to say, why are we paying so high? General 
Clark told me we are fighting 86 percent of all the missions. Ninety 
percent of the ordnance dropped is from the United States at a million 
and 2 million and half a million apiece.
  There are 18 other Nations. Our supplemental should be a check from 
NATO to have them pay their fair share in the first place, not our 
taxpayers, and not cut money out of Social Security. The President, 
when he gets us into this thing, every penny of this comes out of the 
supplemental.
  Both sides said for different reasons that they want to support 
Social Security and Medicare and education. I want to double medical 
research, and I want a tax relief for working families.
  But by having us in Kosovo and extended, we paid $16 billion in 
Bosnia. We are still spending $25 million a year in Haiti building 
roads and schools. Enough is enough.
  I support the gentleman's motion, and I will vote against the bill if 
it ends up with this pork, and I am one of the biggest supporters of 
the military.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Inslee).
  Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in vigorous support for this motion. 
Perhaps I will give my colleagues a new Member's perspective. I have 
only been here for about 3 months now, and I have learned that, in all 
human perceptions and endeavors, sometimes one can get worn down. One 
can get worn down by some of the worst habits in American democracy.
  But I want to tell my colleagues I am not worn down. As a new Member, 
I stand here freshly outraged at the most grievous abuse of the 
democratic process I have seen since I got here 3 months ago.
  For the other Chamber, noble as it is, to try to land a sucker punch 
on the environment in the middle of the night, to hold hostage our 
fighting men and women, is an outrage. All of us ought to come forward, 
whether we have been here 3 months or 30 years and say that.
  It is an outrage because the American people have got to know, and 
they have heard about this bill. This bill is starting to have a 
certain odoriferous character about it, because the American people 
have learned that it has been larded up with various pork projects.

                              {time}  1430

  I want the American people to know it is not just lard, it is going 
backwards on the environment. Not just in one little district here or 
there, where a particular Senator had an interest. On the mining law, 
under the cover of darkness, under the cover of this war, folks who 
want to besmirch the environment have tried to rewrite the entire 1872 
Mining Act, not to go forward in time but back to the previous 
millennium in time and have more giveaways to the mining industry. This 
is broad based.

[[Page H3144]]

  I want to say one more thing. I am happy we are standing here on a 
bipartisan basis. Because I think no matter what we think of issues 
like the environment or the war or whatever, as House Members we have 
something at stake here, and that is our ability to stand up and be 
counted, which is going to be stripped away from us by the other 
Chamber if we yield on this.
  Congratulations to the makers of this amendment. Let us pass it.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New 
York (Mrs. Kelly).
  Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for 
yielding me this time.
  I rise in strong support of the motion to instruct conferees by the 
gentleman from Michigan.
  The idea behind this motion is simple, and it deserves our support. 
When a conference committee is meeting they should not insert 
provisions into the bill before them that were not in either the House 
or the Senate bills. We are a deliberative body that demands debate. To 
subvert this process by inserting provisions into a conference 
agreement not properly considered for the House or Senate is clearly 
wrong.
  These emergency supplementals are important and have my full support. 
We cannot allow disaster relief and the support for our troops in the 
Balkans to be delayed in any way. But if riders are going to be 
inserted into these emergency bills that were not considered by either 
side of Congress we are doing a great disservice to the American 
people.
  The big oink the American public hears is not coming from the House 
or Senate vote. I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join 
me in support of this stand we are taking to ensure that the 
legislative process is not subverted.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).
  Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for 
yielding me this time and for his leadership on this issue.
  I also rise in support of this resolution and commend my friend, the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) for bringing this at a very timely 
moment.
  I would have phrased the resolution a little bit differently however. 
I understand why my friend from Michigan had to file the resolution and 
the phraseology in the resolution the way he did. I would have phrased 
it a little bit differently and would have gone a little farther. I 
would have indicated that no issues unrelated to our troops' mission in 
Kosovo, the disaster relief for the victims of Hurricane Mitch or the 
disaster that is happening throughout rural America on our farms would 
be appropriate or made in order or accepted in this emergency 
supplemental bill.
  Those are the three areas that we should be dealing with and those 
are the three areas we should keep our eye on, rather than loading it 
up with extraneous, nonemergency, unrelated matters, as is happening 
right now in conference and jeopardizing its chances to pass.
  I am still relatively new in this place, just in my second term. I 
have experienced just a couple of emergency spending bills before. What 
I have seen, quite frankly, has been a joke. It is an ugly process. It 
is one that does not make any sense, and it is something that repeats 
itself time and time again.
  One would think that this institution, in matters of war and peace, 
life and death, dealing with natural disasters, we could play it 
straight, we could get it right and get it done efficiently, in a 
bipartisan fashion, with very little controversy and in an expeditious 
manner. One would think that that is the least that we can do for the 
American people, those who we are here to represent.
  But time and time again we fail that call, we fail that obligation, 
especially in emergency situations, and that is unfortunate.
  I will not be here if the supplemental happens to come up later 
tonight or sometime tomorrow. I have to go back home to western 
Wisconsin to help bury Chief Warrant Officer Kevin Reichert who, along 
with Officer David Gibbs, lost their lives during their training 
mission with an Apache helicopter last week in Albania. It is the 
hardest thing that I have had to do thus far in Congress.
  If this place wants to truly honor those officers who gave their 
lives in the call of duty, performing their mission under dangerous 
circumstances, then we should get this emergency supplemental right. We 
should be able to do this in a noncontroversial fashion by keeping our 
eye on the ball and by getting whatever supplies and resources that our 
troops need to carry out this mission in Kosovo as soon as possible. 
That is what we can do in honor of those two officers, in honor of 
their families and, perhaps most importantly, to do right by those 
troops who are in harm's way right now in Kosovo and their families, so 
they can carry out their mission effectively and as safely as possible.
  We are still trying to determine the cause of the Apache crash last 
week. There is some indication that it might have been mechanical 
failure. I do not know if I could or if my colleagues could live with 
ourselves if, because of a dispute in an emergency spending bill, that 
we are not able to get the supplies or the needed parts or the 
maintenance that is required to prevent future accidents like the one 
last week. That would be uncalled for. And shame on all of us if that, 
in fact, were to be the case.
  I beseech my colleagues: We still have time to do this right, to pare 
down the supplemental bill. Let us focus on the real issue here, and 
that is the troops in Kosovo, the disaster relief that is needed for 
both Hurricane Mitch and on the farms, and let us try to get this 
straight. Let us try to play it straight for the sake of war and peace, 
for the sake of life and death, and for the sake of Officer Reichert 
and Officer Gibbs, who answered their call to duty and paid the supreme 
sacrifice for their country.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Bilbray), and I want to say that we all appreciate the 
statement of the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Upton motion to 
instruct the conferees.
  The instruction is very, very moderate in this motion. In fact, it 
does not go as far as most of us would like to go.
  I think all of us agree that the other House has taken an emergency 
funding bill and added on so many items to it that it looks more like a 
Christmas tree than an emergency funding source.
  Mr. Speaker, I stand here asking us both on the Democratic side and 
the Republican side to use this resolution in an effort to send a clear 
message from the House of Representatives not just to the Senate but 
also to the entire United States that this body will no longer stand by 
and allow anybody to be able to take an emergency funding bill and use 
it for special interest legislation.
  Our chance here is now to have a bipartisan message, very clear to 
the conferees, both House and Senate, that we are no longer going to 
tolerate utilizing emergency spending bills as a trough in which to 
pour pork into.
  I ask us all to look at this resolution and say it may not be all we 
want, but it is our one chance to send a clear message to those 
conferees that if they bring back a bill to this floor that is loaded 
with pork, it will be dead on arrival.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Udall).
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I, too, want to extend my thanks 
to my colleague, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), and thank the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) for yielding me time to speak on 
the emergency supplemental.
  The gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray) misspoke briefly and 
mentioned referees rather than conferees, and I thought at the time 
maybe we need more referees over there than conferees to get us back on 
track.
  The conferees have been working to combine two emergency supplemental 
appropriations bills, one to fund our ongoing military activities in 
the Balkans and another that will provide humanitarian relief to the 
victims of Hurricane Mitch as well as vital assistance to hard-pressed 
farmers here at home. These are important purposes. But, once again, 
there has been an attempt to take them hostage by some who want to load 
up the bill with unrelated riders that would not pass alone.

[[Page H3145]]

  The list is long, but I wanted to mention a couple of these riders, 
just two examples of egregious things that should not be in the bill 
and should not be approved.
  One rider would overturn a court decision reducing by millions of 
dollars the refunds that natural gas companies now owe to consumers in 
23 States, including Colorado. Another would reverse a Department of 
the Interior decision that says the mining law of 1872 should limit the 
amount of materials that a mine can dump on adjacent public lands.
  In other words, both of these provisions would legislatively override 
current law to benefit certain well-connected parties at the expense of 
the public, the public that we represent here; and in the case of the 
mining law rider, apparently at the expense of the environment as well.
  To add a note of irony, in this case we would be overriding part of 
the 1872 mining law that is backed by some of the people who have 
repeatedly opposed attempts to reform that statute, which is antique at 
best.
  Mr. Speaker, we do not yet know just what the conference report will 
include, but this we do know: Humanitarian assistance is one thing, 
sweetheart deals are another. Holding aid money hostage in order to 
deliver this kind of deal is bad policy, and we should reject it.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest).
  Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for 
yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, at this point the American people are asking: ``Is it 
business as usual in Congress?''
  I am proud of serving this institution. I am proud of doing what is 
right for the country, what is right for my State, and what is right 
for my district. I am not necessarily proud of the American public 
viewing this process and saying it is business as usual, where 
political influence and seniority still supersedes rigorous mental 
effort and accountability.
  The American people want a thinking Congress, not a self-serving 
Congress. We are looked upon in Congress, in general, as the lower 
House. Well, on this particular issue, Mr. Speaker, we are really on 
the high side.
  The democratic process, which I explain to my constituents every time 
I go home, is an exchange of information, with a sense of tolerance for 
somebody else's opinion, and then we vote. Well, on this particular 
motion the House of Representatives, I urge, will send a strong, clear, 
unanimous vote to the conferees that this emergency supplemental is for 
military emergencies, people suffering from hurricane devastation, and 
the hard-pressed American farmers that have experienced a very, very 
difficult year.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for this motion, and I am proud of the 
gentleman from Michigan for bringing this to our attention.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, I 
think the gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray), used the expression 
of a Christmas tree. I think what we have here is not just a Christmas 
tree but a Christmas tree forest. This is beyond the Christmas tree.
  Again, I appreciate the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) bringing 
this as a motion to instruct, because I think what is going on in the 
conference at this point does not really withstand the light of day. 
And the more the light of day that we in this Chamber put on this, the 
less chance this will occur.
  This morning's New York Times editorial read, ``Trifling With 
Humanitarian Aid.'' I think that really is a headline of a story which 
we need to think about, ``Trifling With Humanitarian Aid.''
  We have had some, I think, very thoughtful and very emotional 
statements by some of my colleagues. I cannot think of anything more 
powerful than the statement by my colleague and my good friend, the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind). This is serious business. This is 
not a joke.
  Are we going to be able to get our friend, our campaign supporter, a 
little more money by changing the mining laws or by giving them some 
additional fishing rights in Glacier Bay or by doing some kickback in 
terms of loan guarantees for certain mining interests? Literally, I 
think we should all think about what is going on here. It is absurd.
  I wish there was someone here against the bill, to try to defend this 
in a public setting really. Because what we are talking about are the 
types of things that cannot be defended in a public setting. They 
cannot be defended in a public setting.
  And let no one forget or misinterpret what is going on here. This is 
a gamesmanship thing. People understand that we need to support the 
operation in Kosovo in terms of our men and women who are in harm's 
way; and, in fact, two of whom have literally lost their lives in this 
operation already to this date; and we have been blessed that we have 
not lost more in terms of the operations that have been going on.

                              {time}  1445

  So there is this incredible understanding that we need to do 
something, that the way in passing the supplemental not just on Kosovo 
but the three issues which truly are emergencies, now I think there is 
a clear consensus that fit the criteria of emergency. One this House 
passed literally over a month ago, the October Hurricane Mitch that 
devastated Central America that we have talked about, that we 
understand that if we do not deal with that emergency the repercussions 
are severe not just for the people that live in Central America but for 
ourselves in terms of our borders, in terms of what will happen, in 
terms of what has happened, the positive things in Central America, and 
the farmers who are also dealing with the crisis across this country.
  These other issues are not emergencies. And to use the leverage, 
because that is what it is, to use the leverage of a power position in 
the dark of night to put them into a bill and then come to the floor, 
because we can write the script today, we know what the script is, the 
script is that it is going to come to the floor with some of these, 
hopefully none of them, but the script that is being written by the 
conferees is that it is going to come to the floor with some of these 
items. And although none of us are going to say we like these items and 
in a sense we do not know where they came from, they came by magic, by 
thin air, or by individual Senators who have a specific interest that 
in their State it is okay. But from a national perspective, it is 
totally inappropriate, that now we have a choice, we are going to be 
faced with a choice. We can accept this pork, that trifling with 
humanitarian aid, or we can reject it and reject the operation and the 
need to deal with that.
  And I would tell my colleagues, I say to them that we need to tell 
them, and the President needs to be clear on this, that we cannot let 
our process of this Government be used as a game, that the President 
has the ability to draw the line right now and say he will not accept 
that, that in 1 hour, if he vetoes this, we will sustain that veto, we 
can come back in 1 hour and take the junk out and pass a clean bill 
that deals with true emergencies that the American people want to see 
happen.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend from 
Connecticut (Mr. Shays).
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time, and I also thank him for offering this motion. I also thank my 
colleague on the other side of the aisle, the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Deutsch) for his support of this motion.
  It is unusual but extraordinarily satisfying to be part of a 
bipartisan House effort that involves not just Democrats and 
Republicans, but liberal, moderate, and conservative Members, who I am 
glad to say are repulsed by what they are seeing take place in a 
conference that is spending money that we have not in any way 
authorized in either bill that has passed in the House or the Senate.
  This is a bipartisan resolution that should be a matter of law and 
House rules: that no authorization or appropriation can become part of 
a conference report that is not part of either the House or Senate bill 
that caused the conference report.
  It boggles my mind that we are inventing things that neither passed 
the

[[Page H3146]]

House nor the Senate and tying them into two bills that are absolutely 
essential, the Hurricane Mitch supplemental and the Kosovo 
supplemental.
  So, again, I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. I thank 
particularly the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) for coming forward 
with this resolution. And I hope that it not only passes unanimously, 
but that if we are sent a conference report that does not abide by what 
we are saying here, that we vote against it and defeat it.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my colleague, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Royce).
  Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for 
yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, we sent a clear bill through this chamber. Through this 
House, we sent to the other body a clean bill that was focused on 
making certain that our troops had the munitions that they would need 
in the field. We were told that our troops were short on issues like 
cruise missiles, that our fighter pilots needed precision bombs. We 
were told there are plenty of dumb bombs, there are plenty of cluster 
bombs in the arsenal but to give them the weapons that will cause least 
collateral damage in these operations, to give them the weapons that 
are safest for them to use, that we needed to pass out a supplemental 
bill, an emergency bill, which we did in this House, a clean bill to 
make certain that our troops had every piece of weaponry and every bit 
of training they needed for this operation.
  And now, after sending that message that our troops were our first 
priority, we find that the other body and in conference included 
provisions in this bill having nothing to do with true emergencies, 
having nothing to do with support of our troops in the field, that they 
had added pork in this bill.
  Well, I rise today to support the motion of the gentleman from 
Michigan. I rise to support the motion which instructs the conferees 
not to accept any provisions not already in the House or Senate passed 
supplemental bills and to put this House on record against any new 
projects or other type of non-emergency spending.
  I urge all my colleagues in this Chamber to support this motion 
today.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  As we are debating this at this moment, conferees are still meeting 
and maybe brainstorming more things that they can put into this bill 
before it finally gets to the floor. It is not the way things should 
be, and it is not the way they have to be, and we have the power to 
stop them. And on occasion, as a Chamber, we have stopped it. We have 
rejected these types of things before. And if it comes to us, as has 
been said by several of my colleagues, we ought to reject it today.
  I am just going to read through some things that, again through press 
accounts or other accounts, are still being talked about or being 
discussed.
  Extending a freeze on the pending regulation on environmental and 
reclamation standards at mines on Federal land. I would challenge any 
of my colleagues in this Chamber to come to this floor to defend that 
as an issue related to emergency spending. I would challenge anyone in 
a public setting to even attempt to say that that belongs on this bill. 
And it very well might be on this bill.
  A delay in the Clinton administration's plan to reclaim the value of 
royalties paid on oil and gas production on Federal lands. Again, on 
the Kosovo funding bill, on the emergency funding bill, allowing States 
to keep all of the $246 billion promised by tobacco companies in 
settlements of lawsuits. The transfer of a $100 million from Forest 
Service wildfire management operations to an Agriculture Department 
fund for restoration of national forestlands.
  I am sure someone wants that. I am sure they can articulate a policy 
reason for it. But does it really belong on this piece of legislation 
and is it really the right policy?
  I guess maybe because it is simple to understand and apparently, 
according to press accounts, it is actually in the bill, is the Glacier 
Bay commercial fishing issue. That one, I mean, it is simple. Maybe 
sometimes when we stop talking about billions of dollars or tens of 
billions of dollars or trillions of dollars we can understand this 
process maybe a little bit more.
  My understanding is that the conferees have actually agreed to 
restrict commercial or actually to allow commercial fishing in Glacier 
Bay, which had been stopped by previous negotiations and rulings by the 
Forest Service and they have actually provided $26 million, again small 
by our standard in a bill of $13 billion or $14 billion, but $26 
million literally that was not in either bill that just came in to 
provide, to buy up some of the people that might not be making as much 
money as they could have been because of the policy ruling regarding 
Glacier Bay. And men and women are in harm's way in Kosovo.
  As again at this point, my understanding is the conferees have agreed 
to accept Senator Byrd's amendment regarding steel subsidies in the 
hundreds of millions. So now we are not talking about 26 million 
anymore, we are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars.
  My understanding also is there is an issue, which I still do not 
understand, about livestock reindeer that is either in the bill or 
about to be put in the bill or it is being discussed as an additional 
rider to provide funding issues for livestock reindeer.
  And what also has been reported as part of the supplemental issue is 
the so-called general's aircrafts.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Upton amendment. But I think more 
than just supporting the Upton amendment, I think that all of us need 
to not just be on record as a vote today but as a message to our 
conferees and to the Senate conferees that there are many of us, and I 
would hope a majority of us, on this floor who will reject a bill, who 
will not allow this thing to be gamed, who will say that the issues 
that we are dealing with are significant enough. And I really urge the 
President, because he holds many of the cards in this whole thing and 
he has the ability to take the high road and he has the ability to say 
and to stare down those people and those individual Senators who are 
trying to do this outrageous activity and say to them they cannot and 
he will not let them.
  And I guarantee to the President that, on both sides of the aisle, 
and this is I think one of the really good days in the Congress in a 
sense, that this is totally a bipartisan issue, that I think a clear 
majority from both sides of the aisle do not want to see this 
legislation happen in this way.
  I will tell the President, I will tell him again directly, that that 
will not occur, that we will be able to sustain a veto like that.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the remainder of my time.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time.
  Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to commend my friend, the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) and all the speakers who have spoken this 
afternoon on both sides of the aisle. We know what the right vote is. 
That is a ``yes'' vote on this resolution. We have had enough.
  Frankly, the appropriators I think all of us wish had depleted their 
work a long time ago. The emergencies are well-known. Many of these 
pork barrel projects should have been stripped from the very beginning. 
And I would hope that today's vote not only will pass but will send a 
very strong signal to those conferees that enough is enough, no more of 
this pork ought to be added to bills that really must pass.
  My friend, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) talked about going 
to the funeral this weekend or maybe perhaps tonight or tomorrow with 
regard to the brave helicopter pilot who died from Wisconsin. As I 
think about his message, I think about my weekend this weekend when I 
am going to go visit some almost 200 reservists who are leaving from 
Kalamazoo Battle Creek and will be leaving this weekend, Air Force 
reservists, to go to the Balkans.
  And as I talk to other military folks from around the world, the Air 
Force colonel who just came back from a tour in Hungary 6 months, 
living in a tent that was so old that the fire retardant was not good 
anymore and they were wondering how it was going to last another winter 
with the heater that they might have in it.
  The mother that I talked to this last weekend in Michigan, whose son 
is a

[[Page H3147]]

Trident submarine trainee who does not have the books or can pay 
literally for the uniform they need to wear. I think about the woman 
that I talked to from Oklahoma City the other day who, after surviving 
the tornado, talked to me a little bit about her experience there and 
how it came so close to Tinker Air Force Base. And my comment was, boy, 
they must have looked like Chicago O'Hare with all those planes taking 
off so that we did not end up with a complete disaster there. And her 
response was, ``No, they do not have enough crews to fly those planes 
out. It could have been another Pearl Harbor, even worse than the 
situation there.''

                              {time}  1500

  We need to help our troops as they prepare for whatever lies ahead of 
them, that their life is as good as we can make it with housing and 
everything else. For this bill to come back cluttered from the Senate, 
filled with these items, whether they be environmental or other junk, 
is not right. It would be a travesty for us to recede to the Senate in 
a number of these issues. I would hope we could pass this resolution to 
send it back to both chambers clean, and that the emergency measures in 
both bills that all of us agree to here, Republicans and Democrats, 
would come back unfettered, that we would be proud to vote for this 
thing.
  I think the signal that we are sending to our leadership and really 
to the rest of the country is if it does come back with a lot of these 
projects, then in fact the vote that I cast a couple of weeks ago, a 
``yes'' vote for this, will in fact be reversed and I will vote ``no.''
  Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to vote for this motion.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). The Chair reminds all Members 
that it is not in order to cast personal aspersions on the Senate or 
its Members, individually or collectively, and that they must address 
the Chair and not the President.
  Without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to 
instruct.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct 
offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton).
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. UPTON. 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 381, 
nays 46, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 130]

                               YEAS--381

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Ewing
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     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 (FL)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larson
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     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
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Moore
     Morella
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paul
     Pease
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     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
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                                NAYS--46

     Aderholt
     Baker
     Berman
     Boyd
     Callahan
     Chenoweth
     Clyburn
     Cramer
     Dicks
     Everett
     Farr
     Gallegly
     Hastings (WA)
     Hilliard
     Hoyer
     Jones (OH)
     Kilpatrick
     Kucinich
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     McCrery
     Meek (FL)
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Packard
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pombo
     Rahall
     Riley
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Serrano
     Stupak
     Tiahrt
     Traficant
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Wise
     Young (AK)

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

       
     Young (FL)
       

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Boucher
     Brown (CA)
     Gephardt
     Quinn
     Ros-Lehtinen

                              {time}  1525

  Ms. KILPATRICK, Mrs. JONES of Ohio and Messrs. PAYNE, RYUN of Kansas 
and EVERETT changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Messrs. GEJDENSON, GREENWOOD and PICKETT changed their vote from 
``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the motion to instruct was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated for:
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and wish to 
be recorded as a ``yes'' vote on the motion to instruct conferees on 
the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for FY 1999 H.R. 1141, 
rollcall 130.

                          ____________________