[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 74 (Wednesday, June 14, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H4367-H4436]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). Pursuant to House Resolution
518 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration
of the bill, H.R. 4577.
{time} 1556
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 4577) making appropriations for the Departments of
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and related agencies
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2001, and for other purposes,
with Mr. Pease (Chairman pro tempore) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. When the Committee of the Whole rose on
Tuesday, June 13, 2000, the bill had been read through page 84, line
21.
Mr. PORTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word for the
purpose of entering into a colloquy with the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Quinn).
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Quinn) for
an explanation of his concerns.
Mr. QUINN. Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by thanking the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Porter) for the fine job and the hard work he has
done, not only for the job he has done this year in a very difficult
year, but over the years for our Labor-HHS bill.
{time} 1600
Mr. Chairman, as a former teacher, funding for elementary and
secondary education programs is a top priority for me as well as many
other Members here in the House. I have several concerns regarding
education funding levels in this bill. I am particularly concerned that
the title I education programs have been level funded at fiscal year
2000 levels. These title I programs are vital for school districts like
the Buffalo area and many more. Title I educational assistance programs
target low-income and disadvantaged areas providing accelerated
instruction, smaller classes, extra time to learn after school and
during the summer, and computer-based instruction. Buffalo receives
approximately $23 million a year in title I funding alone.
As my colleague can see, this is critical for many districts. I have
been working closely with our colleague, the gentleman from New York
(Mr. McHugh), to ensure full funding for this program.
Secondly, Mr. Chairman, I also want to talk with the gentleman for a
moment about other programs we have discussed. It has been argued that
a nearly $200 million cut in the dislocated workers assistance program,
run by the Department of Labor, can be justified by our Nation's strong
economy. While that may be true in some parts of the country,
unfortunately, in my district, in our area of the State and many other
Rust Belt communities throughout the country, workers who are
permanently separated from their jobs depend on this program to return
to productive unsubsidized employment.
Lastly, the one-stop career centers were not funded in the bill this
year. The elimination of these one-stop career centers would threaten
the division of Veterans Employment and Training Services efforts
toward establishing licensing and certification of military skills for
the civilian economy. This would affect the licensing and certification
language in the new Montgomery GI Bill legislation, which was passed in
the House in May. It would also have a negative effect on Veterans
Employment and Training legislation which the subcommittee will
introduce later this summer. Everyone has worked extremely hard to
ensure these programs exist for our Veterans.
These three concerns, Mr. Chairman, lead me to look forward to
working closely with the gentleman from Illinois in the weeks to come
so that these programs receive adequate funding in the final version of
the legislation, and I appreciate the opportunity for this discussion.
Mr. PORTER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman
for bringing this to my attention. Because of budget restraints, we
were not able to provide an increase in these programs in the House
bill.
However, I understand the gentleman's concerns and will assure him
that I will do my best to work with my colleagues in conference to
ensure that these programs receive adequate funding.
Mr. Chairman, I include the following material for the Record.
[[Page H4368]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.001
[[Page H4369]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.002
[[Page H4370]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.003
[[Page H4371]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.004
[[Page H4372]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.005
[[Page H4373]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.006
[[Page H4374]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.007
[[Page H4375]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.008
[[Page H4376]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.009
[[Page H4377]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.010
[[Page H4378]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.011
[[Page H4379]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.012
[[Page H4380]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.013
[[Page H4381]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.014
[[Page H4382]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.015
[[Page H4383]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.016
[[Page H4384]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.017
[[Page H4385]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.018
[[Page H4386]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.019
[[Page H4387]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.020
[[Page H4388]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.021
[[Page H4389]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.022
[[Page H4390]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.023
[[Page H4391]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.024
[[Page H4392]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.025
[[Page H4393]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.026
[[Page H4394]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.027
[[Page H4395]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.028
[[Page H4396]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.029
[[Page H4397]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.030
[[Page H4398]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.031
[[Page H4399]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.032
[[Page H4400]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.033
[[Page H4401]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.034
[[Page H4402]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.035
[[Page H4403]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.036
[[Page H4404]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.037
[[Page H4405]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.038
[[Page H4406]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.039
[[Page H4407]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.040
[[Page H4408]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.041
[[Page H4409]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.042
[[Page H4410]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.043
[[Page H4411]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.044
[[Page H4412]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.045
[[Page H4413]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.046
[[Page H4414]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.047
[[Page H4415]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.048
[[Page H4416]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.049
[[Page H4417]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.050
[[Page H4418]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.051
[[Page H4419]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.052
[[Page H4420]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.053
[[Page H4421]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.054
[[Page H4422]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.055
[[Page H4423]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.056
[[Page H4424]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.057
[[Page H4425]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.058
[[Page H4426]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.059
[[Page H4427]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.060
[[Page H4428]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.061
[[Page H4429]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.062
[[Page H4430]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.063
[[Page H4431]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.064
[[Page H4432]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14JN00.065
[[Page H4433]]
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I would ask the gentleman if it is the intention of the
majority to now proceed to a final vote on this bill.
Mr. PORTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. PORTER. Yes, it is.
Mr. OBEY. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman,
and all I would say with respect to the previous colloquy is that the
only assurance that any individual Member can provide that there will
be more funding for a program that he is interested in is to vote for a
bill which contains it. When we vote for a bill that does not contain
it, what we do is give leverage to the very people who are trying to
hold down funding for that bill.
I think before Members vote they should understand one thing about
this bill. All of yesterday we tried to offer amendments to restore
funds for education, for health care, for job training, for various
other items that were knocked out of the President's budget request and
we were denied the opportunity to offer those amendments, in large part
because we were told they exceeded the allowable budget ceiling for
this bill. And yet this bill now, as it stands here, with the failure
of the Young amendment, is $500 million in budget authority above the
allowable amount and it is $217 million above the allowable budget
ceiling for outlays; that despite the fact that it is still $3 billion
short of the President's budget for education, $1.7 billion below for
worker protection and training, and $1.2 billion below the President's
budget for health.
I find it interesting that one standard is applied to amendments that
this side sought to offer and another standard to the majority side
when it wants to pass a bill. This bill, as it stands, is not in
compliance with the budget resolution, and yesterday the majority time
and time and time again chastised us for offering amendments that were
not in compliance with the budget resolution. So much for consistency.
But I guess it is the best that we can expect.
Lastly, I want to announce to the House, Mr. Chairman, that there
will be a motion to recommit.
Mr. PORTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Though I did this at the beginning, Mr. Chairman, I want to take just
a minute to thank the Members of the subcommittee and the staff.
Members of the House should realize that the hearings on this bill
take longer perhaps than most other appropriation bills, running
months, running into hundreds of public witnesses, and hearing from
literally 100 Members of Congress. The Members that serve on it serve a
very long and hard year in bringing this bill to the floor.
I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Bonilla), the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook), the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr.
Dickey), the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker), the gentlewoman
from Kentucky (Mrs. Northup), and the gentleman from California (Mr.
Cunningham) on our side; and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey),
the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Pelosi), the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey),
the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), and the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Jackson) on the minority side.
It has been a great source of pleasure for me to work with such fine
people and to be able to, in the end, despite all the rhetoric, find
the common ground to fund these very, very important programs that
exist in the bill.
Let me also thank the professional staff, and they are true
professionals, who work even harder than we do. Tony McCann, the clerk
of my subcommittee and chief of staff; Carol Murphy, Susan Firth, Geoff
Kenyon, Francine Salvador, and Tom Kelly; and on the minority side Mark
Mioduski and Cheryl Smith.
Let me also thank my personal staff, my administrative assistant,
Katharine Fisher, and Spencer Perlman, who also put in long, long hours
in producing this bill.
Finally, let me thank the associate staff. Obviously, they work hard
as well. Brent Jaquet, Angela Godby, Bill Duncan, Paul Pisano, Kristen
Bannerman, Jim Perry, Kristy Craig, and Frank Purcell. All of them work
very hard in very tough circumstances to make this bill come to the
floor and, I hope, get passed.
Finally, let me say that it has been, for me, for all the years that
I have served on the Committee on Appropriations a real pleasure to
work with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), our chairman. If
anyone wanted to see a strong, effective, hard-working leader, who is
universally respected and loved by Members on both sides of the aisle,
they would want to see the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young). I do not
know when he or the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) ever get a
chance to get any sleep during appropriation season.
And during all of this, I would add, that the gentleman from Florida
is the best husband and father, and puts his family ahead of everything
else. How he finds the time to do it all is beyond me. But we all love
him and respect him greatly.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. PORTER. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. OBEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, Mr. Chairman.
I will not repeat everything I said about the gentleman from Illinois
yesterday, in the interest of brevity, but I do simply want to say that
on this side of the aisle we regret very much the fact that the
gentleman is retiring. We regret very much he will not be with us next
year.
As I said yesterday, the gentleman has been a superb public servant.
He has done honor to his district, to his State, to his party, to his
Nation, to this institution, and each and every one of us who have
served with him, and we wish him Godspeed.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Pease). The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
This Act may be cited as the ``Department of Labor, Health
and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2001''.
Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4577, the
fiscal year 2001 Labor-Health and Human Services-Appropriations bill. I
believe strongly this legislation shortchanges America's families by
inadequately funding critical federal education and health programs.
First, I would like to express concerns with the legislation's
funding levels for federal education programs. At a time when we should
be increasing funding for our schools to reduce class size and to
enhance teacher training, this bill would cut $3.5 billion from the
Administration's education budget. H.R. 4577 would repeal last year's
bipartisan plan to hire 100,000 additional teachers for smaller
classes. In North Dakota alone, this initiative has helped to hire 145
teachers and reduce class size for children like my daughter Kathryn.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 4577 would also provide no funding for school
modernization, meaning that hundreds of schools in North Dakota will
have to forgo repair and modernization projects. In addition, at a time
when we are facing a teacher shortage, this bill eliminates $1 billion
in crucial funding for teacher recruitment and training. By enacting
these cuts and failing to provide funding for crucial education
programs, this legislation will shortchange our students and endanger
America's future economic prosperity.
In the area of health programs, I have serious concerns regarding the
funding levels approved by the House Appropriations Committee for
Medicare contractors. In the Administration's fiscal year 2001 budget
request, the President requested $1.30 billion to support Medicare
claims processing contractors, supported in part by Medicare user fees.
While I do not support implementation of Medicare user fees, I am
concerned that the committee approved only $1.17 billion for Medicare
contractors. This amount is not only $136 million less than the
President's request, but also $79 million less than the fiscal year
2000 allocation.
As the committee notes in its report, ``Medicare contractors are
responsible for paying Medicare providers promptly and accurately.'' I
am concerned that this funding reduction contradicts the committee's
intent; it is likely to slow down claims processing activities and the
ability of contractors to provide services to both beneficiaries and
providers. We have all heard our constituents' concerns about the
Medicare claim process--claims that are accidentally denied, slow
payments, reaching voice mail more often than human beings. We should
not exacerbate these concerns by reducing funding levels for Medicare
contractors.
[[Page H4434]]
Mr. Chairman, I impress upon my colleagues the need to adequately
fund the Medicare contractor program. I am not asking for Congress to
approve Medicare user fees. In the future, however, when the House and
Senate conference on this appropriations bill, I urge my colleagues to
revisit this issue.
Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, as we consider the Department of Labor,
Health and Human Services and Education Appropriations Bill for Fiscal
Year 2001, a simple question comes to mind. Do we, or do we not care
about the needs of hard working American families? By looking at this
proposal it seems to me that the answer is a resounding ``no.'' The
appropriations legislation put before us short-changes nearly every
vulnerable group--children, dislocated and injured workers, and the
elderly, to highlight just a few.
The American public time and again has rated education as a top
priority--above tax cuts, above foreign affairs, above Pentagon
spending, even above gun control and protecting social security. While
I am not discrediting the need for Congress to address all of those
issues, it is important that we listen to what constituents are saying.
It seems ridiculous that at a time when our economy is booming, we
still have schools that are under funded and under staffed, mainly due
to the slight of hand indifferent policy path of the Republican
leadership. How can the United States possibly expect to remain
competitive in a global marketplace if we are unwilling to make the
investment to ensure that our students are receiving the best education
possible? As examples, H.R. 4577 short-changes students who need the
most support, by inadequately funding Head Start, Title I, after school
care, teacher quality and class size reduction initiatives.
Additionally, this proposal supports block granting for several
programs, a method of funding which dilutes the effectiveness of
federal dollars in our classrooms.
This appropriations bill is a disaster when it comes to taking care
of on the job workers safety and health. The rider blocking the
implementation of an ergonomics standard is particularly offensive, an
unnecessary delay tactic which could ultimately result in thousands
more workers being needlessly injured on the job. Additionally, this
legislation cuts dislocated worker programs--a slap in the face
following the recent vote of PNTR for China--and cuts funding of summer
jobs for at-risk youth, retreating from the modest temporary programs
that ease the plight of working families.
Congress must do more and increase funding for important human needs
and health programs. Instead, funding is reduced for Social Service
Block Grants (SSBG), one of the primary sources of social service
funding for states to provide vital services for children, youth,
seniors, families, and persons with disabilities. Also, public health
priorities such as Child Care Development Block Grants (CCDBG) and
mental health services have not been satisfactorily funded. Now, in a
productive economic time, Congress should not exacerbate social-
economic disparities, but rather maintain commitments to guarantee all
Americans an opportunity to contribute to and share in America's
prosperity.
This bill is emblematic of how budget distortions and faulty
priorities often have grave consequences for some of our most
vulnerable citizens. I encourage my colleagues to oppose this
legislation, which ignores the needs and priorities of American
families.
Mr. HILLEARY. Mr. Chairman, tonight, I come to the floor in
opposition to the implementation of a uniform medical identifier and
support of the Paul amendment, which would eliminate its
implementation.
I, along with Representative Paul, led a bipartisan group of members
urging the inclusion of this amendment. We had less than 24 hours and
limited resources at our disposal to gather support, yet within half a
day we had 33 members by our side.
These members all shared the same fear. That fear was that unless
Congress intervenes at this moment and stops the creation of a national
database containing the medical history of every American, government
and HMO bureaucrats across the country will be able to pry into the
personal information of every American.
However, it is not just privacy that is at stake here. We also
threaten to undermine the entire health care system. The
confidentiality associated with doctor-patient relationship will be
irreparably harmed. Embarrassing or emotional problems may never be
shared. As a result, the treating physician will be unable to deliver
the best treatment.
What we ask for today is nothing novel or extreme. For two straight
years we have included similar language in the Labor-HHS appropriations
bill. I am confident that this House will stand in favor of this
provision.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
LaHood) having assumed the chair, Mr. Pease, Chairman pro tempore of
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R.
4577) making appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and
Human Services, and Education, and related agencies for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2001, and for other purposes, pursuant to House
Resolution 518, he reported the bill back to the House with sundry
amendments adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment? If not, the Chair will
put them en gros.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Obey
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. OBEY. I think that is safe to say, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Obey moves to recommit the bill H.R. 4577 to the
Committee on Appropriations with instructions to report the
same back to the House forthwith with the following
amendment:
Page 84, strike section 518 (as added by the amendment
printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules to
accompany H. Res. 518).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Wisconsin is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his motion to
recommit.
(Mr. OBEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks and to include tabular and extraneous material.)
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, this motion is very simple. It deletes a
provision in the bill that was added by the rule through a self-
executing amendment that has the effect of cutting the fiscal 2000
appropriation in this bill for Child Care and Development Block Grant
by $506 million.
{time} 1615
The motion to recommit simply strikes that provision, thereby adding
$506 million back for child care, which is the same level that was
requested by the President and which was the level included in this
bill as reported out of committee.
This motion would provide child care for an additional 100,000
children. The provision in the bill which my motion strikes says that
if the Fiscal 2002 advance appropriation across all appropriation bills
exceeds $23.5 billion, then the child care program is singled out for
rescissions that bring the total back down to $23 billion.
Since the Labor HHS bill and VA bill already exceed that total by
$506 million, that means $506 million will automatically be lopped off
the $2 billion provided in this bill for child care.
I am sure my friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Porter), will
say this is next year's funding, and so you do not have to worry about
it. My response is this bill is either real or it is not. It is either
a let-us-pretend bill. If it is not a let-us-pretend bill, then it cuts
child care by $506 million.
I would hope that we would be voting for real bills, and I would hope
that we would not be slashing programs like this.
I would point out that only one out of every 10 children who are
eligible for child care under Federal standards today are actually
getting it because of a shortage of that service. If Members are
comfortable with that situation, then they should vote against my
motion. If they are not, then I would urge that they vote for it.
If this motion passes, the committee will simply have to bring back a
new bill immediately without this misguided provision.
Mr. Speaker, I include the following for the Record:
Sec. 518. If the total level of discretionary advance
appropriations for fiscal year 2002 and subsequent fiscal
years provided in general appropriation Acts for fiscal year
2001 exceeds $23,500,000,000, there shall be rescinded from
the amount made available in
[[Page H4435]]
this Act for fiscal year 2002 under the heading
``Administration for Children and Families--payments to
states for the child care and development block grant'' an
amount sufficient to reduce the total level of such
discretionary advance appropriations to $23,500,000,000:
Provided, That the rescission shall not exceed an amount that
would cause the amount provided under such heading to be less
than the amount provided for fiscal year 2001 in the
Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2000 (as
enacted into law by section 1000(a)(4) of Public Law 106-
113).
FY 2002 ADVANCES APPROPRIATIONS CONTAINED IN FY 2001 APPROPRIATIONS
BILLS
[Dollars in missions; Labor HHS Education, HR 4577]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Labor:
Adult Training............................................... $712
Dislocated Workers........................................... 1,060
Job Corps.................................................... 691
--------
Subtotal................................................. 2,463
HHS:
Child Care Block Grant....................................... 2,000
Low Income Energy Assistance................................. 1,100
Head Start................................................... 1,400
Abstinence Education......................................... 30
--------
Subtotal................................................. 4,530
Education:
Title I...................................................... 6,205
Title VI Block Grant......................................... 285
Teacher Assistance........................................... 900
Safe and Drug Free School.................................... 330
Reading Excellence Act....................................... 195
Special Education State Grants............................... 3,742
Vocational Education State Grants............................ 791
--------
Subtotal................................................. 12,448
Related Agencies: CPB.......................................... 365
--------
Subtotal, Labor HHS Education Bill....................... 19,806
VA HUD H.R. 4635, Section 8 housing assistance................. 4,200
========
Total advances............................................. 24,006
Budget Resolution limitation................................... 23,500
Rescission of Child Care Block Grant........................... -506
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Speaker, in the interest of time, I yield back the remainder of
my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). Is the gentleman from Illinois
(Mr. Porter) opposed to the motion?
Mr. PORTER. I am, Mr. Speaker, yes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that the minority would offer
this particular motion to recommit.
When the House reported the bill, it exceeded the $23.5 billion cap
in advanced appropriations, which is what the gentleman from Wisconsin
(Mr. Obey) was referring to.
We funded the Child Care Block Grant at $2 billion in fiscal year
2002; that is an advance appropriation, which is roughly $800 million
over the enacted FY 2001 amount.
In the rule, a provision was added to the bill that assures that we
will not exceed the overall budget cap of $23.5 billion set forth in
the budget resolution. This is the provision that the motion to
recommit of the gentleman would strike.
If we adopt the motion of the gentleman and remove the sequester
provision, it will simply mean that we will have to make it up
somewhere else in the other bill. These bills will have to be cut, in
order to stay within the budget resolution: we will have to make up the
$800 million.
So where will we make it up? We may have to cut section 8 housing
money in VA-HUD. We may have to cut law enforcement money in Commerce-
Justice-State. We may have to cut other money in other bills.
So while this may seem like a very appealing provision, there has to
be a way under the budget resolution to pay for it. Every one of the
amendments of the gentleman during the debate on this bill have ignored
the budget resolution. We cannot do so. We have to live under it. We
have to live within the allocations made. And if we squeeze the balloon
at one point, it comes out in another.
I urge Members to vote no. I urge Members to support the bill.
Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 15-minute vote followed by a
15-minute vote on passage.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 212,
noes 219, not voting 4, as follows:
[Roll No. 272]
AYES--212
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldacci
Baldwin
Barcia
Barrett (WI)
Becerra
Bentsen
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Bonior
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Cramer
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doyle
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Forbes
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frost
Gejdenson
Gephardt
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green (TX)
Gutierrez
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hastings (FL)
Hill (IN)
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Klink
Kucinich
LaFalce
Lampson
Lantos
Larson
Lazio
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller, George
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Phelps
Pickett
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Scott
Serrano
Sherman
Shows
Sisisky
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thurman
Tierney
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Weygand
Wise
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOES--219
Aderholt
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Bereuter
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bliley
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Brady (TX)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth-Hage
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Cooksey
Cox
Crane
Cubin
Cunningham
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Everett
Ewing
Fletcher
Foley
Fossella
Fowler
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hansen
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill (MT)
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Isakson
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kasich
Kelly
King (NY)
Kingston
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kuykendall
LaHood
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
Martinez
McCollum
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McKeon
Metcalf
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Myrick
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Ose
Oxley
Packard
Paul
Pease
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Reynolds
Riley
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roukema
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Salmon
Sanford
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaffer
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Skeen
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Spence
Stearns
Stump
Sununu
Sweeney
Talent
Tancredo
[[Page H4436]]
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Tiahrt
Toomey
Upton
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--4
Cook
Danner
Sensenbrenner
Vento
{time} 1638
Messrs. OSE, MANZULLO, PORTMAN and McCRERY changed their vote from
``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. GEORGE MILLER of California, MARKEY and MEEKS of New York
changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on the passage
of the bill.
Under clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 217,
nays 214, not voting 4, as follows:
[Roll No. 273]
YEAS--217
Aderholt
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Bereuter
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bliley
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Brady (TX)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth-Hage
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Cooksey
Cox
Crane
Cubin
Cunningham
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Everett
Ewing
Fletcher
Foley
Fossella
Fowler
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hansen
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill (MT)
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Horn
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Isakson
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kasich
Kelly
King (NY)
Kingston
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kuykendall
LaHood
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
Martinez
McCollum
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McKeon
Metcalf
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Myrick
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Ose
Oxley
Packard
Pease
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pickett
Pitts
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Reynolds
Riley
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roukema
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Salmon
Saxton
Scarborough
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Skeen
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Spence
Stearns
Stump
Sununu
Sweeney
Talent
Tancredo
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Tiahrt
Toomey
Traficant
Upton
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--214
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldacci
Baldwin
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (WI)
Becerra
Bentsen
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Bonior
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Cramer
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doyle
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Forbes
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frost
Gejdenson
Gephardt
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green (TX)
Gutierrez
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hastings (FL)
Hill (IN)
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Hooley
Hostettler
Hoyer
Inslee
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Klink
Kucinich
LaFalce
Lampson
Lantos
Larson
Lazio
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller, George
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Phelps
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sanford
Sawyer
Schaffer
Schakowsky
Scott
Serrano
Sherman
Shows
Sisisky
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thurman
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Weygand
Wise
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--4
Cook
Danner
Sensenbrenner
Vento
{time} 1703
Mr. McINNIS changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________