[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 118 (Thursday, September 28, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H8412-H8416]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 4733, ENERGY
AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, by direction of the
Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 598 and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 598
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider the conference report to accompany the
bill (H.R. 4733) making appropriations for energy and water
development for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2001,
and for other purposes. All points of order against the
conference report and against its consideration are waived.
The conference report shall be considered as read.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert). The gentleman from Washington
(Mr. Hastings) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, for the purposes of debate
only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley), the ranking minority member of the
Committee on Rules, pending which I yield myself such time as I may
consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is
for the purposes of debate only.
(Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, H. Res. 598 is a rule
providing for the consideration of the conference report to accompany
H.R. 4733, the Energy and Water Appropriation Act of 2001. The rule
waives all points of order against the conference report and against
its consideration and provides that the conference report shall be
considered as read.
The conference agreement provides $23.59 billion in new discretionary
spending authority for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Department
of the Interior's Bureau of Reclamation, the Department of Energy, and
several independent agencies.
The bill is $2.3 billion above fiscal year 2000, and $889 million
above the President's request.
Most notably, Madam Speaker, as a Member whose district includes the
most challenging nuclear cleanup project in the Nation, I am pleased
that the conference report increases the funding for the defense
environmental management cleanup activities by $6.12 billion, an
increase of $406 million over last year.
Specifically, this legislation includes $377 million for the
critically important Hanford Tank Waste Treatment Facility that is
located in my district.
Finally, I would like to point out to my colleagues that this
conference report also includes an appropriation of $5 million
dedicated solely to reducing the national debt.
Madam Speaker, I want to commend the chairman of the Subcommittee on
Energy and Water Appropriations, the gentleman from California (Mr.
Packard), and the ranking member, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr.
Visclosky), for their efforts to defend the House position on a long
list of important items in this legislation. They have worked long and
hard to bring this agreement to the House, and accordingly, I urge my
colleagues to support both the rule and the conference report.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
[[Page H8413]]
{time} 1045
Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings),
my colleague and my dear friend, for yielding me the customary half
hour.
Madam Speaker, I would also like to thank the gentleman from Indiana
(Mr. Visclosky), and the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard) for
their work on this bill. They really had to juggle a lot of requests
and a lot of issues. And as a result, this conference report contains
funding for some very, very good water projects and infrastructure
projects.
Unfortunately, Madam Speaker, something happened last night in
conference that will force me to oppose this rule and oppose it very
strongly. Despite the fact that many people in the Northeast are
currently facing what promises to be the worst heating crisis, winter
heating crisis in two decades, some of my colleagues have decided to
eliminate the funding in this conference report for Northeast home
heating oil reserve.
Madam Speaker, I do not know why my colleagues would want to take
steps to avoid helping their neighbors, but I do know how bad the
situation could be in Massachusetts. According to today's Boston Globe,
the Energy Information Administration announced yesterday that the
stocks of heating oil shrank by another 300,000 barrels over the last
week, and what that means, Madam Speaker, is that New England has less
than one-third of the supply of heating oil that it had last year.
Madam Speaker, the winter we had last year was terrible, and we did
not have anywhere near enough home heating oil.
Madam Speaker, two million households in Massachusetts depend on
heating oil to warm their homes in the winter. Meanwhile, prices are up
to about $1.40 a gallon and to give you a sense of perspective, it was
$1 last winter and 80 cents the winter before. Madam Speaker, let me
tell my colleagues it gets cold in Massachusetts and these very high
prices force families to make that horrible choice between heating
their homes or feeding their children.
But, Madam Speaker, we can do something about this. We can insist on
a New England heating oil reserve. We can oppose efforts to stop the
President from releasing 30 million barrels of oil from the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve. Now, to hear some of my Republican friends talk,
this is a violation of a sacred thing to release this oil, but this is
not the first time this oil has been released from the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve.
Madam Speaker, this would be the 11th time that oil has been released
and every time, Madam Speaker, the release had the blessings of my
Republican colleagues. But all of a sudden the 11th time it is
released, it is political, but the other 10 times it was not.
So contrary to the way it may seem, oil really is not a matter of
political parties, it is not a matter of competition between one region
or another. In Massachusetts, heating your home really is not a luxury.
For many in the Northeast, Madam Speaker, it really could be a matter
of life and death. So to put people's health and safety at risk for
partisan gain is absolutely inexcusable. So I urge my colleagues to
oppose this rule.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield as
much time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Packard), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Water
Development, who is dealing with this legislation and somebody who is
working on his last appropriations bill before he retires.
Mr. PACKARD. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the
time, and I would like to respond to the remarks of the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) concerning Northeast home heating oil
reserve and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
I want to correct, what I hope is a misunderstanding. We have never
had in this bill funding for the Northeast energy oil problem. That
funding is in the Subcommittee on Interior, not in this bill. So we not
only did not knock it out, it never was in this bill. There was an
amendment passed on the floor of the House to do something in this
area, but that jurisdiction really belongs in the Committee on Interior
and not in this committee.
This is to further clarify this whole issue. The House did pass a
separate freestanding bill, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, and
that would have dealt with the Northeast oil issue, but that bill is
being held up in the Senate by Senator Boxer. And for that reason, it
has not moved. It is on hold by the Senator.
The administration claims, however, that as long as the
appropriations exist, they do not need legislation to release oil from
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. In fact, the President announced last
Friday that he was releasing 30 million barrels from that reserve.
Clearly, he does not feel that legislation is necessary for this
purpose.
Madam Speaker, I do not agree with him, and frankly I do not think
that is a wise policy, but the fact is that is what he announced. And
so we did not need to include funding in this bill for that purpose,
and we did not include it in the bill. It does not belong in our bill.
It belongs in the Interior Appropriations subcommittee bill. So we have
not included it.
Madam Speaker, on the rule itself, however, let me just make a
comment. I totally support the rule that is before the House. I commend
the Committee on Rules for providing us with this rule. It should be
very simple for us to move forward with this conference report under
the rule, and I hope that the House will unanimously vote for the rule.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, we had an immigration bill that started out in one
bill and then it was pulled out, it was put in another bill, and then
when we passed it on the floor, it was pulled up and put in another
bill. Is this what is going to happen from the Northeast, it is going
to go from Interior to Energy and Interior to Energy? There was a vote,
360 people voted for this Northeast petroleum reserve. It should be in
the Energy bill. So to have the gentleman say it should not be in the
Energy bill, I do not know why it should be in Interior and not in
Energy.
I think legislation may be necessary to give the President the right,
because the right the President had to release that oil lapsed last
month, and I think there is a question of whether he needs the
authority or not. But regardless of what happens, the Northeast
petroleum reserve should have been in the Energy bill, unless the
gentleman can tell me it is absolutely going to be in the Interior
bill.
Mr. PACKARD. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MOAKLEY. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. PACKARD. Madam Speaker, all jurisdiction for fossil fuel lies
within the Subcommittee on Interior, not this subcommittee,
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, we have other energy
issues, but not fossil fuel. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is in the
Interior jurisdiction.
I served on that subcommittee when I first went on appropriations,
and that is where we dealt with it then and that is where it ought to
be dealt with at this time.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, reclaiming my time, but the gentleman, I
am sure, knows it is not going to be dealt with. And we know in the
past we put amendments in other bills that really did not have the
jurisdiction and it passed. But I think it is going to get awful cold
awful quick, and I would hate to be someone who voted against this to
answer the questions why did not we not act when we had time.
As I say, go back to the Cubin bill. It goes from one committee to
the other. Every time it comes up, the committee says no, it is not our
jurisdiction, it is somebody else's jurisdiction. I think we should
look at the problem itself and how complex it is and how necessary it
is that some people have to choose between heating and eating.
And I do not think we should say it should not be in this bill
because we have never handled it before. We have done a lot of things
that we have never done before.
[[Page H8414]]
And as far as the release of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, I am
not saying it is in this bill, I am just referring to an action of a
Member of his party that is trying to stop the release of the
petroleum. I just want to show that this has been done.
This will be the 11th time it has been done, and this is the first
time that anybody accused it of being political.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I have no more requests
for time.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
the great State of Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano), a colleague of mine
from Somerville.
Mr. CAPUANO. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts
(Mr. Moakley) for yielding me the time.
Madam Speaker, as I was watching this back in the office and as I was
reading the contents of the particular bill, I have to tell my
colleagues I am absolutely shocked. I do not think anyone at home,
certainly nobody in my district, cares who has what jurisdiction. They
could care less, they care about one thing, keeping their seniors and
their kids warm. And for us to sit here and argue about jurisdiction to
make promises that we may not be able to keep is ridiculous. It is
patently absurd and unfair.
I came over today to make sure that the people I represent do not
care if it is political or not. We are all politicians. We all do
things for political reasons. Do my colleagues think any senior citizen
who freezes in the middle of the winter cares about politics? They want
heat. And for those people who do not have to rely on oil heat like we
do in the Northeast, mark my words, without question, if we do nothing
and oil heat price rises, natural gas prices will rise as well.
There are already supply problems. If we do not do it, people like me
may start thinking about changing to natural gas. If we do, that puts
further demand on diminished natural gas supplies. Those prices will be
right behind us. And I will tell my colleagues, whether it is political
or not, my hope is that every single politician in any one of us in the
Frostbelt States makes this an issue, one way or the other; I am for
it, I am against it.
I do not think, I have been involved with this since the day I got
here, I do not think anyone who has argued for or against the Strategic
Oil Preserve has said this is the only way to do it. We said there are
a thousand things we can and should be doing and hopefully we will.
This is one. This is the one that we can do immediately. Most of the
others will take time.
For us to sit here and fiddle while the Northeast and the Midwest
freezes is an insult to the people who have elected us.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I would just like to read from the Congressional
Record of June 27, the Sherwood amendment printed in House Report 106-
701 includes the text of H.R. 2884 as passed the House, includes
provisions to reauthorize the Strategic Petroleum Reserve through 2003
and authorizes the Energy Department to buy oil from stripper wells and
establish a regional home heating oil reserve in the Northeast. Agreed
on by a record vote of 393-33. Nobody who voted then questioned what
bill it was going to be put in.
Madam Speaker, I think we should take the will of the House, and it
should have been in this report. And I think unless it is in this
report, the report is flawed.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I yield as much time as he
may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the
distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I appreciate my friend from Washington
(Mr. Hastings) for yielding me the time and thank him for his
management of this rule.
We filed this late last night, and I want to rise in strong support
of it and the underlying conference report. And I want to congratulate
the retiring distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Packard), the
former mayor of Carlsbad, who will go off and be doing all kinds of
wonderful things as he leaves behind him this great work product.
I also want to congratulate the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young),
the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Appropriations.
And I want to take just a few minutes to talk about a very important
provision which is in this bill, which I have been working on for a
number of years. It began in Southern California when the water quality
authority, a group that came together to address the water challenges
that we have there, found something called perchlorate in the
groundwater. And perchlorate is a chemical which unfortunately has
tremendous negative repercussions getting into the groundwater.
We worked hard to try and find out exactly what led to the
perchlorate getting into the groundwater, and they discovered that it
came from the legal disposal of spent rocket fuel during the military
buildup during the Cold War during the 1950s and 1960s.
Many people, when this perchlorate was discovered, began pointing
fingers and saying that somebody is responsible for this. One of the
things that we found, Madam Speaker, is that there are many companies
that were very important to the buildup during the Cold War that are no
longer in business, and so it was easy to begin pointing fingers. Some
of us said that we needed to solve the problem, and so that is why,
when we look at the fact this is a national security issue, yes, it was
first discovered in Southern California, but this has national
repercussions.
It has national repercussions because the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Sessions), my friend, has been faced with the same problem.
{time} 1045
There are people from other States of the Union who have found just
recently the discovery of perchlorate in the groundwater. So I was very
pleased that several months ago the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Shuster), the chairman of the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), the
subcommittee chairman, agreed to put together a hearing which was
designed to specifically address this question.
We were able to utilize something I am very proud of, new technology;
and we had a hearing of the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, the subcommittee that the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Boehlert) chairs, which was able to include community activists from
Southern California, people with the Water Quality Authority, and
several of my colleagues who in a bipartisan way joined in introducing
the authorizing legislation, H.R. 910.
They included the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Napolitano), the
gentleman from California (Mr. Martinez) and others, the gentleman from
California (Mr. George Miller), the gentleman from California (Mr.
Rogan), who have been very supportive of this effort.
Well, Madam Speaker, I am pleased that we have been able to include
in this legislation in this conference report important funding to
begin this to find a solution to this problem. It is a small amount of
money. But it is a beginning. Again, it is one of the very serious
environmental questions that we have.
So in passage of this conference report, we will in this Congress be
taking a very bold step towards addressing a major environmental
concern, not only for Southern California, but for the entire country.
I want to express my appreciation again to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Packard). I would especially like to thank the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the distinguished chairman of the
Committee on Appropriations, who has been phenomenal in providing me
with assistance in dealing with this.
Also, I want to express my appreciation to Chairman Domenici for his
work on this and, as I said, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman
Shuster) and the gentleman from New York (Chairman Boehlert) for the
effort that they have put together in helping us deal with an important
problem that, as I said, impacts, it appears, Southern California right
now but also the entire Nation.
[[Page H8415]]
So I urge strong support of this rule and support of the conference
report.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, my colleagues may recall that I applauded all that is
in this bill. I am not taking anything away from my chairman. I think
he did a masterful job in getting the money he got for that project,
and it is well needed.
I am talking about what is not in the bill, and what is not in the
bill is going to help protect the lives and safety of the people in the
Northeast. Two years ago, we had an elderly couple freeze to death
because they did not have money to buy fuel oil, and there was no
reserve set up. We are trying to build against that so we will not have
the same thing happen again.
I think it is very, very small for some people to play petty politics
with this very, very important issue. Just because it affects the
Northeast where maybe our Republican candidate is not doing too well
and he can just ``dis'' it off. But there are human beings up there
that are fighting for their lives, and probably some may lose their
lives if the winter is as bad as some people predict.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Frost), the head of the Democratic Caucus.
Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
Madam Speaker, we ought to be very clear about the game that the
Republicans are playing right now. On the one hand, they are critical
of the President for announcing that he is going to release oil from
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. In fact, they are even talking about
filing a lawsuit or perhaps passing legislation to prevent the
President from releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
Yet, in this bill, they deleted the authority for the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve. So on the one hand, they are saying, gee, the
President does not have the authority. On the other hand, they are
deleting the authority and not giving it to him. One cannot have it
both ways.
Now they try and say, oh, well, it should be in another bill. We know
that is a ludicrous argument late in the session. This is a bill that
is moving forward. This is the opportunity to provide the authority to
release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve so that we can deal
with home heating oil prices so that we can deal with the price of
gasoline.
The facts are very clear. They do not want the President to have that
authority so then they can say, well, he does not have it. So we are
going to challenge his action. This is perhaps one of the most cynical
actions that a legislative majority could possibly take.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. FROST. Yes, I am happy to yield to the gentleman from
Massachusetts.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, is the gentleman from Texas aware this
has been done 10 separate and distinct times under Republican
leadership, and not one word of political chicanery was ever mentioned?
Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, I am aware of the history. It just is
ironic that today one of the committees of this House under the
leadership of a Republican chairman is criticizing the President for
exercising this authority while the other Republicans are on the floor
trying to prevent the President from having the authority.
Now, I cannot think of anything that is more cynical, any more than a
legislative body could take to say, gee, he cannot do that, but we are
sure not going to give him the authority to do it; so maybe then we can
challenge his right to do it.
Madam Speaker, this is perhaps one of the worst pieces of energy
policy that this majority has done in the last 6 years. I conclude my
remarks. I think it is extraordinary what is happening today.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, we had some other speakers, but we do not
seem to have them here; and I guess the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Hastings) has no speakers, so I reluctantly yield back the balance of
my time.
Announcement By The Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert). The Chair will take this
opportunity to remind all Members not to wear communicative badges
while under recognition.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I just want to repeat once again that all this
discussion has been on home heating oil for the Northeast. I know that
is a major issue for people who live up in that part of the country,
but this is being addressed already in another bill where there is
funding in the conference report that is working its way through. That
is the proper venue for this.
I would like to make one other point because this is probably the
first time that the issue has really been debated on the floor
regarding the Strategic Oil Reserves. Part of the long-term solution, I
want to emphasize the word ``long-term solution,'' is obviously to try
to find more sources to get petroleum. That has not been talked about.
It certainly was not talked about at all here in debate.
I would like to cite one statistic. When we created the Department of
Energy some 25, 30 years ago, it was a crisis. One of the reasons why
we created the Department of Energy is, horror upon horrors, we were
importing about one-third of our oil. So now here we are 25 years or so
or more later and we are importing some 50 percent of our oil.
I would just contend, if it was a crisis some 25, 30 years ago to
have a cabinet-level agency to look at our energy policies when we were
only importing 30 percent, it certainly ought to be something that we
look at right now. Obviously, part of the long-term solution is to find
more sources for oil.
Madam 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. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam 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 231,
nays 186, not voting 16, as follows:
[Roll No. 500]
YEAS--231
Aderholt
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Carson
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth-Hage
Clyburn
Coble
Collins
Combest
Cook
Cooksey
Cox
Crane
Cubin
Cunningham
Davis (FL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dooley
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Everett
Ewing
Fletcher
Foley
Fowler
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hansen
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
King (NY)
Kingston
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kuykendall
LaHood
Lampson
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
Martinez
McCrery
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
Meek (FL)
Metcalf
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Morella
Myrick
Napolitano
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Nussle
Ose
Oxley
Packard
Pastor
Pease
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Regula
Riley
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roukema
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Salmon
Sandlin
Sanford
Saxton
Scarborough
[[Page H8416]]
Schaffer
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simpson
Skeen
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Spence
Stearns
Stump
Sununu
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Thune
Tiahrt
Toomey
Traficant
Upton
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson
Wise
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--186
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldacci
Baldwin
Barcia
Barrett (WI)
Becerra
Berman
Berry
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blumenauer
Bonior
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Clayton
Clement
Coburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Cramer
Crowley
Cummings
Danner
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Forbes
Ford
Frank (MA)
Gejdenson
Gephardt
Gonzalez
Gordon
Gutierrez
Hall (OH)
Hastings (FL)
Hill (IN)
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson, E.B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kelly
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Kucinich
Lantos
Larson
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller, George
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Phelps
Pickett
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quinn
Rangel
Reyes
Reynolds
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Scott
Serrano
Sherman
Sisisky
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thurman
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Weygand
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--16
Castle
Clay
Engel
Eshoo
Fossella
Jones (OH)
Klink
LaFalce
Lazio
McCollum
McIntosh
Norwood
Paul
Stabenow
Talent
Vento
{time} 1116
Messrs. McHUGH, HOLT, TAYLOR of Mississippi, QUINN, SWEENEY,
REYNOLDS, and Mrs. KELLY changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. LAMPSON changed his 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.
____________________