[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 129 (Wednesday, September 29, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H8973-H8977]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2559, AGRICULTURAL RISK PROTECTION 
                              ACT OF 1999

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 308 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 308

       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. 2559) to amend the Federal Crop Insurance Act 
     to strengthen the safety net for agricultural producers by 
     providing greater access to more affordable risk management 
     tools and improved protection from production and income 
     loss, to improve the efficiency and integrity of the Federal 
     crop insurance program, and for other purposes. The first 
     reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of 
     order against consideration of the bill 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 Agriculture. 
     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 Agriculture now 
     printed in the bill, modified by the amendments printed in 
     the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution. That amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     shall be considered by title rather than by section. Each 
     title shall be considered as read. All points of order 
     against that amendment in the nature of a substitute are 
     waived. No amendment to that amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute shall be in order except those printed in the 
     portion of the Congressional Record designated for that 
     purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII and except pro forma 
     amendments for the purpose of debate. Each amendment so 
     printed may be offered only by the Member who caused it to be 
     printed or his designee, shall be considered as read, and 
     shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question 
     in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. 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,

[[Page H8974]]

     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 amendment 
     in the nature of a substitute made in order as original text. 
     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. Nussle). The gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Sessions) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost); pending 
which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration 
of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
  Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us today is a modified open rule 
providing for the consideration of H.R. 2559, the Agriculture Risk 
Protection Act.
  The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the 
bill.
  The rule provides 1 hour of general debate to be equally divided 
between the chairman and ranking minority member on the Committee on 
Agriculture.
  The rule makes in order the Committee on Agriculture's amendment in 
the nature of a substitute as an original bill for the purpose of 
amendment, modified by the amendments printed in the report of the 
Committee on Rules accompanying the resolution.
  The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the 
amendment in the nature of a substitute, as modified.
  The rule provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
shall be open for amendment by title.
  The rule makes in order only those amendments printed in the 
Congressional Record and pro forma amendments for the purpose of debate 
only.
  The rule provides that the amendment may be offered only by the 
Member who caused it to be printed or his designee, which shall be 
considered as read and shall not be subject to a demand for division of 
the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.
  The rule allows the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to 
postpone votes during consideration of the bill, and to reduce voting 
time to 5 minutes on a postponed question if the vote follows a 15-
minute vote.
  Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, passage of this rule will allow the House to consider 
this very important piece of legislation, the Agriculture Risk 
Protection Act. The Agriculture Risk Protection Act is the right 
legislative response to the current plight of our Nation's farmers and 
ranchers.
  It is no secret that agriculture commodity prices are down. Natural 
disasters, including hurricanes, floods, and droughts have only added 
insult to this injury. We must give agriculture producers the tools to 
manage risk in a responsible way. This bill is a large step in that 
direction.
  This legislation provides better insurance coverage at a lower cost 
for our Nation's farmers. It provides affordable coverage at every 
level, with strong incentives to purchase higher levels of protection 
and new flexibility for producers to choose the level of coverage that 
best meets their needs.
  Additionally, this legislation, for the first time, creates a pilot 
program that offers insurance assistance to livestock farmers and 
ranchers who suffer the same problems of volatile weather and markets 
that hurt crop farmers.
  This legislation empowers those who understand the kind of insurance 
that farmers need, instead of government bureaucrats. Under this plan, 
new programs are developed by reimbursing universities, farm 
organizations, co-ops, and even individual farmers who research and 
develop a policy that is successful.
  As many of my colleagues know, this is also an important issue to me 
as a Texan. In Texas, we have experienced historic droughts during 2 of 
the past 4 years. During these droughts, I have worked actively with 
not only my farmers and ranchers, but also with State, county, and 
local officials to find ways to survive these dry conditions.
  Unfortunately, there is no easy way to manage crops and livestock 
once these severe drought conditions are experienced. After living 
through these droughts, I have made a conscious effort this year to get 
my district ready for the potential of the dry weather that we knew 
would happen. Through proactive planning sessions held in each county 
in my district, I made plans to try and make sure that my farmers and 
ranchers were prepared. However, it is common sense for us to know that 
being prepared is better off than reacting to the weather.
  This legislation makes sure every farmer and rancher has the tools 
necessary for this preparation. Clearly, proactive steps such as these 
are needed at the Federal level. Under current conditions, too many 
farmers are unable to afford crop insurance. When natural disasters 
strike, the Federal Government assists victims with taxpayer dollars. 
By increasing Federal contributions to tax insurance, such insurance 
becomes more affordable, and there is less need for taxpayer dollars 
for reactive solutions.
  The Agriculture Risk Protection Act is a common sense, fiscally 
conservative way to properly prepare for natural disasters that impact 
agriculture production. I urge my colleagues to support this rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule, which provides for 
consideration of crop insurance reform.
  Mr. Speaker, farmers across this country are facing a disaster. The 
bill, as far as it goes, makes improvements in crop insurance that will 
probably provide some relief. But, unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, this 
bill misses an opportunity to make substantial changes in the crop 
insurance program that could yield long-term relief and provide a real 
safety net to the agricultural sector.
  However, this bill can be improved, and the rule allows for the 
consideration of amendments that seek to accomplish that end. While 
Democratic members of the Committee on Rules might ordinarily object to 
a rule that requires preprinting of amendments, in this case, because 
of the tactical nature of agriculture programs, we will not do so.
  Mr. Speaker, my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Stenholm), will offer a significant amendment that seeks to provide 
assistance to those producers who are the most in need and which 
addresses the long-term problems of the cyclical nature of agriculture. 
That assistance would come in the form of a supplemental income payment 
program, which squarely addresses the issue of price disasters. His 
amendment deserves serious consideration and support of the House.
  Mr. Speaker, this rule will allow the consideration of amendments 
which can improve this legislation, and I urge its adoption.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the chairman of the Committee 
on Rules.
  (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my very good friend from Dallas for 
yielding me this time, and I congratulate him on his fine statement and 
his work on this.
  I mention that he is from Dallas. I feel compelled to bring at least 
a modicum of geographic balance to this debate. As I look at the 
manager of the rule, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), and the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost), the manager on the minority side, the 
other gentleman from Dallas; and then once we pass the rule, we look at 
the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture, the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Combest), and the manager on the minority side will be the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm).
  So I am pleased to bring some geographic balance to this debate and 
say this, obviously, is an issue which transcends simply our friends 
from Texas

[[Page H8975]]

and is, in fact, a very, very important issue.
  I think that the statement that was made by the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Sessions) is right on target when he says that it is better to be 
prepared rather than simply reacting to weather. And we clearly know 
that, as we have been dealing with disasters that have hit throughout 
the past several weeks and months here in this country and the 
tragedies that we have witnessed around the world.
  Obviously, this legislation, which enjoys strong bipartisan support, 
as does the rule, is designed to ensure that we have better risk 
management and those tools that are essential to an industry which 
obviously is dependent on the weather.

                              {time}  1045

  So I simply want to congratulate my friend and say that I am pleased 
to join in support of what is obviously a very, very important step to 
make sure that we maintain a continuity for ranchers and farmers in 
this country.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Lubbock, Texas (Mr. Combest), the chairman of the 
Committee on Agriculture.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Dreier) for bringing a regional balance to this, as well as for his 
great work on the Committee on Rules in providing this rule. I thank 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) and the other gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Stenholm).
  Mr. Speaker, I just would like to say I rise in support of this rule. 
I think it is a process by which all Members should have an opportunity 
if they have desires to discuss this subject. It should give plenty of 
time for that. There are some amendments. We will be dealing with 
those, as well.
  To the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) I would say, I appreciated 
his opening comments and statement. I just wanted to make the point, 
Mr. Speaker, that while the $6 billion additional money for crop 
insurance that was provided for in the budget which passed this House 
several months ago is in itself very significant in that this is, I 
think, the largest increase in crop insurance, that alone is not what I 
believe is probably the best part of this bill.
  One of the major problems that we have confronted with farm policy 
for many, many years is the lack of adequate risk management. To 
actually begin to move toward adequate risk management, it is important 
to make some major changes. This bill does that, and I think there are 
very positive changes.
  We saw a disaster package last year of $6 billion. There is one being 
considered today and may be considered this week that is going to be 
probably in excess of $8 billion. While this alone does not solve that 
problem, nor would I want to lead any of my colleagues to believe that 
it would totally solve it, I do believe that this is the first major 
step in a right direction to help provide adequate protection and much 
needed protection.
  To my colleagues who may not have an opportunity to deal in 
agricultural policy or who do not have a lot of farmers maybe in their 
districts, I would like to just make a brief explanation of why this is 
so important.
  Almost in every endeavor of life, Mr. Speaker, whether they are 
buying homeowner's insurance, whether they are a businessman or 
businesswoman that happens to have a small business or a large 
business, it is possible for people to protect themselves by buying 
insurance. They can buy it to protect their home. They can buy it to 
protect their inventory.
  If the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) and I are in business side 
by side and my inventory costs more than his inventory, I buy more 
insurance. It costs me more, but I can buy that. And if something 
happens to that inventory through some disaster that is covered by the 
insurance policy, then the insurance policy pays and I buy insurance on 
my next warehouseful of inventory.
  Unfortunately, one the real fallacies in crop insurance has been that 
farmers cannot cover their capability. As an example, if my colleague 
is a farmer, and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) is a farmer 
and can grow 50 acres of wheat on a normal year on a normal basis and 
he puts his input costs in to grow 50 bushels of wheat on his farm but 
because of past problems that have occurred, there are some antiquated 
historical data information that is used to determine how much 
insurance the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) could buy and he 
might only be able to buy insurance to cover 25 or 30 bushels of his 
crop but his input costs are to produce a 50-bushel crop of wheat, it 
is not advantageous, even under the maximum amount that could be 
purchased, for him to buy insurance. It is not cost effective. It does 
not adequately cover him. And there is no incentive.
  So what we are trying to do in this proposal is to give him an 
opportunity to have his actual production capability or movement toward 
his actual production capability to be able to insure for.
  This bill also is a major step in the right direction for revenue 
assurance, and that is very important to people that farm in areas that 
do not have historical natural disasters and generally always make a 
crop. Because the revenue aspect or the downward turn in revenue aspect 
are one of the reasons we are looking at disaster and emergency 
packages today, farm assistance, because of low market prices, some of 
the lowest we have seen in many, many years.
  So this does have a good program in it to provide insurance for 
revenue loss. It does increase the subsidy substantially that the 
farmer receives for buying insurance. We believe that this creates real 
incentives, albeit not as far as I would like to see it.
  I will tell my colleagues that, in the next couple of years, we 
intend to even move forward with a second phase of crop insurance 
reform. But it is important for there to be a risk management tool 
available to farmers that is, number one, economically feasible and, 
number two, it covers their crops in an adequate fashion and creates an 
incentive to buy rather than disincentive, which I think today is the 
case.
  Mr. Speaker, I think that this is a major move in the right direction 
for risk management that I think will lessen the impact of natural 
disasters or low commodity prices in the future, and I would commend it 
to my colleagues and ask for their support.
  Again, I am strongly in support of the rule, and I appreciate the 
Committee on Rules for its efforts.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, we reserve the balance of our time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Montana (Mr. Hill), who comes from a huge agriculture State.
  Mr. HILL of Montana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas 
for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the two gentlemen from Texas who 
are managing the rule for a good rule and the two gentlemen from Texas 
who will be managing the bill for a good bill.
  Mr. Speaker, as our colleagues are listening to the debate, they will 
be able to distinguish the difference between the Texans and the rest 
of us because the Texans will say ``insurance'' and the rest of us will 
say ``insurance'' when we talk about this. So that is one of the ways 
we can tell the difference.
  Crop insurance is the primary risk management tools that producers 
have. It helps them and has historically helped them manage the 
greatest risks they have and that is, of course, the loss of crop, a 
catastrophic loss of their crop. But as we have asked producers to 
produce for the marketplace, it has been apparent that we need to make 
some changes in the risk management tools that we have to help them do 
a better job of doing that. We need to do that in a fashion that does 
not distort the marketplace, and that is not easy to do. But this bill 
goes a long way in helping us address those concerns. I want to just 
touch on some of them.
  One of them, for example, is to make it more accessible for those who 
would produce alternative crops to get crop insurance. One of the 
things we are asking producers to do is to diversify their production, 
to reduce their risk to the catastrophic potential that weather might 
have on an individual crop or that prices might have on an individual 
crop. This bill makes alternative crops more accessible for insurance.

[[Page H8976]]

  One of the problems with the existing program is that the amount of 
support the Government gives to lower levels of insurance is greater 
than the amount of support we give to higher levels of insurance. And 
the consequence of that is that it actually discourages many producers 
from participating in the crop insurance program and then it reduces 
the effectiveness of it.
  This bill increases support for the highest levels of guaranty, 
actually across the board, which should encourage more producers to 
participate. Many producers will tell us that crop insurance is not 
affordable, and this bill will help that by adding more support across 
the board, as I mentioned.
  Without this bill, the crop insurance premiums for producers is going 
to go up about 30 percent, which would be a catastrophic thing to occur 
given the hardship that is out there in ag country right now. Without 
this bill, we will have a 30-percent increase. This bill avoids that 
increase.
  The current program hits producers when they are down. If they have a 
number of bad production years, the amount of insurance that they can 
buy goes down based upon their average production. This bill allows 
them to take on some of those bad years to be able to keep their 
insurance level high enough so that they can get enough insurance to 
cover production costs and to cover their loan.
  The program also now introduces the idea of premium discounts. If 
they have a number of good years where they do not have a claim and 
they have good production years, they can actually get a discount on 
their premium, which will help it be more affordable to producers.
  It also expands the principle of revenue insurance. One of the things 
we discovered is that production loss is not the only loss that 
producers need to be able to manage the risk of. There is also the 
potential of price loss. This bill allows producers to insure their 
revenue, which covers both price and production risks.
  Lastly, the bill allows livestock producers for the first time to 
participate in the crop insurance program and the risk management 
principles that are associated with it.
  I just want to again congratulate the ranking member and the chairman 
for bringing forward a very good rule and a very good bill, and I would 
urge all my colleagues to support both the rule and the bill.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).
  Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Sessions) for bringing a great rule to the floor.
  Mr. Speaker, as many people know, we have heard from California and 
Montana and Texas, now we go to the East Coast, North Carolina, where 
floods have inundated our farmers and our families.
  I come to the floor today to voice my strong support for a good rule, 
for a good bill, H.R. 2559, the Agricultural Risk Protection Act.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Combest) the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Ewing) and others for the work that they 
and the staff have done with Members, farm constituents, and 
agricultural associations to put together this thoughtful, far-sighted 
crop insurance bill which is covered by this rule.
  Over the past several months, I have traveled around my district, the 
8th of North Carolina, and spent dozens of hours listening to farmers 
and ranchers telling me about the state of the farm economy.
  In February, I, with the help of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Ewing) and the Committee on Agriculture, hosted a field hearing in 
Laurinburg, North Carolina, to learn farmers' concern about the current 
crop insurance program and what changes they felt needed to be 
implemented to achieve meaningful reform.
  The Committee on Agriculture took the comments of my farmers and the 
comments of other farmers around the country and passed a bill which 
addresses their concerns and strengthens crop insurance and provides 
better risk management tools for farmers and ranchers. Crop insurance 
is just one recent example of how the Committee on Agriculture takes a 
grass roots approach to learning about a problem and then, with a 
bipartisan effort, efficiently works to solve it. We are now looking to 
our colleagues here in the full House and the Senate to help us 
implement this reform and pass this rule.
  H.R. 2559 is a good bill created, for the most part, by our own 
farmers. This bill will provide long-term assistance badly needed. I 
urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule and the bill.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague, the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Dallas, Texas (Mr. Sessions) for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a modified, open rule. It is a good rule. It 
allows us to discuss federal agricultural policy as we deal with 
dramatic changes in agriculture.
  Last February, I served on the Committee on the Budget as well as the 
Committee on Agriculture, and last February we decided in the Committee 
on the Budget that we were going to include in the budget $6 billion 
from the year 2001 to 2004. The Budget Resolution funding would be to 
help farmers adjust to the challenges of survival that Americans now 
face. The 1996 Freedom to Farm legislation provides a phaseout of the 
old Government programs.
  The challenges now facing farmers, include subsidies to farmers in 
other countries that put our farmers at a disadvantage, reduced exports 
and Washington's lack of efforts to be more aggressive in expanding our 
trade. Certainly the greatest challenge this year are record-low prices 
that farmers receive for their commodities. So farmers today are 
receiving record low prices. For example, soybean price is the lowest 
in the last 30 years. Corn lower than the last 15 years.
  This bill helps farmers adjust.

                              {time}  1100

  What we are suggesting in this legislation is that insurance be more 
available to farmers that would add to their tools of reducing risk. 
This insurance covers two areas: One, insurance for some commodity 
price protection. Secondly, is what I call sunshine insurance, 
insurance to cover those farmers against loss in case of natural 
disasters.
  I think the challenge before us, as we revisit federal agricultural 
policy is how do we make sure that we keep a strong agricultural 
industry in the United States? If consumers want to continue with the 
high quality, low cost that they now pay for food in this country, if 
we want to continue to know the food is safe because we know how it was 
produced, then we are going to have to save and maintain and make sure 
we keep strong, stable agriculture in the United States.
  We'll examine some other ways that we can help farmers in the future 
years. Crop insurance deserves taxpayer support because we do not know 
what the risks are, because those people that are selling that 
insurance do not have the experience. It is appropriate, it is proper, 
it is necessary that government support some of those premiums as we 
get more experience as we encourage farmers to take out crop insurance 
in the new freedom to farm environment.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, like my other colleagues who have spoken, I have spent a 
great deal of time visiting with the farmers and ranchers in my 
district down through central Texas in recent months. Clearly there 
needs to be a long-term solution to the crop insurance situation. The 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) has an amendment which he may or 
may not offer today, it has been made in order by the Committee on 
Rules, but the gentleman from Texas as the ranking member on the 
Committee on Agriculture will be offering a long-term approach to this 
situation in the months ahead. While today's bill will offer some 
short-term relief to farmers, there will need to be a more 
comprehensive approach down the road which the gentleman from Texas 
will offer at the appropriate time.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the rule so that we may proceed to 
consideration of this legislation today.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page H8977]]

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  As my colleague the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) has suggested, I 
would like to thank the participants from the Committee on Agriculture, 
including the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and also the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) not only for their leadership but for their 
care and consideration of the men and women who are involved in 
agribusiness.
  Mr. Speaker, I support this rule. I am asking for each one of our 
Members to support this bipartisan rule and piece of legislation.
  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 SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Nussle). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. FROST. 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.
  This 15-minute vote will be followed by a 5-minute vote on the 
question of the Speaker's approval of the Journal.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 422, 
nays 1, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 458]

                               YEAS--422

     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 (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     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)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     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
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     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
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     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
     Souder
     Spence
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--1

       
     Vento
       

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Dixon
     Hill (IN)
     Istook
     Jefferson
     Nadler
     Scarborough
     Spratt
     Thomas
     Watts (OK)
     Wu

                              {time}  1124

  Mr. HILLIARD and Mr. RAMSTAD changed their vote from ``nay'' to 
``yea.''
  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated for:
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 458, had I been present, I 
would have voted ``yea.''

                          ____________________