[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 23 (Wednesday, March 6, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H696-H700]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF MOTIONS TO SUSPEND THE RULES

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 354 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 354

       Resolved, That it shall be in order at any time on the 
     legislative day of Wednesday, March 6, 2002, for the Speaker 
     to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules 
     relating to the following measures:
       (1) The joint resolution (S.J. Res. 32) congratulating the 
     United States Military Academy at West Point on its 
     bicentennial anniversary, and commending its outstanding 
     contributions to the Nation.

[[Page H697]]

       (2) The bill (S. 1857) to encourage the negotiated 
     settlement of tribal claims.
       (3) The bill (H.R. 1870) to provide for the sale of certain 
     real property within the Newlands Project in Nevada, to the 
     city of Fallon, Nevada.
       (4) The bill (H.R. 1883) to authorize the Secretary of the 
     Interior to conduct a feasibility study on water optimization 
     in the Burnt River basin, Malheur River basin, Owyhee River 
     basin, and Powder River basin, Oregon.
       (5) The bill (H.R. 1963) to amend the National Trails 
     System Act to designate the route taken by American soldier 
     and frontiersman George Rogers Clark and his men during the 
     Revolutionary War to capture the British forts at Kaskaskia 
     and Cahokia, Illinois, and Vincennes, Indiana, for study for 
     potential addition to the National Trails System.
       (6) A bill to provide assistance to displaced workers by 
     extending unemployment benefits and by providing a credit for 
     health insurance costs, and for other purposes.
       (7) A resolution expressing support for the democratically 
     elected government of Colombia and its efforts to counter 
     threats from United States-designated foreign terrorist 
     organizations.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) is 
recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. 
Slaughter), 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, House Resolution 354 is a rule providing for the 
consideration of motions to suspend the rules at any time on the 
legislative day Wednesday, March 6, 2002. This is a fair rule that will 
allow for consideration of several pieces of legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, last night the Committee on Rules in fact had the debate 
and the vote about those things which we are going to choose to 
consider today and one of those that we talked about at the time we 
have now made a decision that we are not going to present at this time; 
and it should be noted that though, while the unemployment benefits 
bill is listed under the rule, it will not be called up for 
consideration today, meaning that it will not be a part of the package 
that we are seeking at this time.
  Mr. Speaker, since the tragic events of September 11, the House has 
worked with speed and deliberation to pass much-needed legislation that 
will provide an extension of critical-needed unemployment benefits to 
dislocated workers. It is regrettable that though this bill has passed 
several times with bipartisan votes that there will be no action on 
this today and also that there has been no action by the other body on 
this.
  As the 6-month anniversary of September 11 approaches us, there are 
people across the country who are still struggling to recover from the 
tragic events of that day, whether it be emotional, physically, 
financially or otherwise. It is my hope that the issue will stay at the 
forefront of our legislative business until we pass and enact a bill 
that will help each of those people.
  Mr. Speaker, I have outlined those things which we will be 
considering, or hope to consider, today under suspension of the rules; 
and I urge all of my colleagues to support this rule which will allow 
us to consider these pieces of legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Texas (Mr. 
Sessions) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, this rule will allow us to consider a number of 
suspension bills today, bills that many of us had hoped would be of 
critical importance to our constituents. In fact, last night rumors 
circulated that the leadership of the body was preparing to do what we 
hoped it would have done long ago and extend unemployment benefits to 
the thousands of workers who were laid off in the wake of the September 
11 attacks.
  For weeks we have begged the leadership of the body time and time 
again to pass a clean unemployment extension bill. Recently released 
Labor Department data for January 2002 shows that from September 11 
through January of this year more than 1.3 million workers exhausted 
their regular unemployment benefits. As of January, about 7.9 million 
Americans, or about 5.6 percent of the workforce, were unemployed. Over 
12,000 people a day are exhausting their unemployment insurance. And 
earlier this year the Senate adopted a simple extension of unemployment 
benefits by unanimous consent.
  The House leadership, rather than acting expeditiously, refused to 
pass the same extension without tying it to a package of dying stimulus 
plans.

                              {time}  1130

  The plan, no one was surprised to learn, consisted almost entirely of 
tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. And the measure, no one was 
surprised to learn, went nowhere in the Senate.
  We now have an opportunity to do today, or we did have, what should 
have been done weeks ago, pass a clean unemployment bill. Were we to 
pass such a measure this morning, the bill could be on the President's 
desk immediately. But, instead, the leadership of the body is preparing 
to push a measure that would augment a simple extension of jobs 
benefits with controversial tax provisions that will kill it in the 
Senate.
  Why can we not simply extend unemployment benefits by an additional 
13 weeks? Tax credits do little to aid the unemployed, many of whom are 
not paying taxes in the first place while out of work. A clean bill 
could go straight to the President, and the leadership in the body 
could signal to the unemployed that this House cares about the plight 
of their families. Today's confusion, however, will ensure just the 
opposite, more delay and not a penny of relief for impacted families.
  Mr. Speaker, this is not leadership; this is petulance. Having failed 
three times to pass accelerated tax breaks for upper brackets and 
reducing the alternative tax on corporations or actually doing away 
with them, the leadership is taking a fourth swing at the other body. 
What is stunning about this maneuver is the sheer cynicism it embraces. 
The leadership is making it perfectly clear that it is willing to 
inflict further pain on desperate families in order to have another 
crack at a divisive, partisan agenda.
  Moreover, Members of this body are being afforded little notice of 
what these bills contain. The House of Representatives is not a shadow 
government. Our rules mandate that we deliberate in the open. What 
aversion do we have here to regular order? Instead of informed 
deliberations, my colleagues are left with scant information. In fact, 
the bill we have been talking about has not yet been seen, and my 
colleagues and I have no information and no debate time on which to 
base decisions impacting millions of Americans.
  Mr. Speaker, this extraordinary rule we are considering today is 
normally reserved for those times when Congress is hard at work, not 
when we are working 2\1/2\ days a week, and it needs flexibility to 
meet its commitments. But not today. The long stretches of idleness in 
this body can surely be replaced with meaningful deliberation on 
important measures.
  We just got the report of people being abused in nursing homes. We 
should be concerned about all the corporations in America that are 
registering themselves over in Bermuda to avoid paying America's taxes. 
While we name post offices and contemplate shooting mourning doves, the 
measures that impact prescription drugs and saving Social Security 
languish.
  I have a bill that would ban genetic discrimination in health 
insurance that has over 258 bipartisan cosponsors; and it would affect 
every man, woman, and child in the United States. But for over 6 years 
we have not been able to have that on the floor. I implore, then, if 
they are going to abuse the power of suspensions, to put it to good use 
and make a real difference in the lives of American people.
  Mr. Speaker, we intend to try to defeat the previous question on the 
rule in order to amend the rule simply to allow what should be done, a 
straight 13-week unemployment benefits extension bill. I urge all my 
colleagues on both sides of this House to support this effort because 
the American public demands and deserves it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

[[Page H698]]

  We are hearing a lot about this unemployment problem, and it is a 
problem, and the health care problems, and there are health care 
problems. This body has addressed this issue numerous times. This issue 
was prepared to be on the floor today, except there was some 
disagreement as to whether it would be on suspension or whether we 
would have long enough even to speak about it. The bottom line is, I do 
not believe we should be playing politics with the health and 
livelihood of American workers, whose families' jobs and their own 
jobs, their own problems, are right on the line.
  But for those who would call for a clean bill, I would quote Speaker 
Hastert, who yesterday said this is about as clean as you could get it. 
And I would add that it is also a straightforward approach to 
addressing the real needs of laid-off workers as we can get. That was 
what this bill was supposed to do. It was clean. It was about 
unemployment and health care tax credits. Oh, but then we find out that 
they simply do not like the way we have done it, and that is why the 
other side is opposed to what we are doing.
  Mr. Speaker, we disagree on lots of issues, and they are honest 
disagreements that we have in Washington, about taxes, about the size 
of government, about how much we are going to tax the American people, 
about who will be paying in and who will be receiving what. But the 
bottom line is that this Republican Congress has attempted 
expeditiously and carefully to address the needs and the issues of 
people who are having tough times. But we also believe, as Republicans, 
that it is important for us to put out a plan that addresses the needs 
of the Nation. That is why we asked for tax cuts.
  We believe that people not only want a job but they want the ability 
to have a secure job. Savings and investment and the opportunity for 
people to have more take-home pay to protect the jobs that we have is 
what the Republican plan is, also. It is not just about the health care 
needs, where we offer tax credits. It is not just about unemployment. 
It is about a broad, overarching idea that we believe that this 
government can, must and will react and respond properly to people. And 
that is what the Republican plan has been since September 11.
  I am sorry we are not addressing that issue today. We will continue 
to wait for the other body as they deliberate and deliberate and 
deliberate on this issue, but we will keep going with the things we 
know are good for people.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
to respond to my friend.
  I appreciate that people who are unemployed, who have families to 
feed, who have mortgages to pay, who have no prospects immediately of a 
job are not terribly interested whether or not we do away with an 
Alternative Minimum Tax and give money back to IBM and money back to 
Enron and money back to major corporations in the United States. They 
simply want some kind of action here.
  In all times of trouble, when we have this kind of unemployment rate, 
it has been the policy of the government of the United States to extend 
unemployment. For some reason, we simply cannot seem to get that done 
here. I am appalled at that and urge that that be rectified.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Pallone).
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to my colleague on the 
other side, he just said that we are playing politics. I would say the 
problem here is that the Republicans are in charge of the floor. They 
are in charge of the House. They are in the leadership because they are 
in the majority. They are playing politics because they are not 
allowing a clean bill on unemployment insurance extension to come up.
  I cannot believe I am hearing this from my Republican colleagues, 
somehow suggesting that if we take action on this bill that they put in 
order under this rule that we will have some relief for the unemployed. 
It is not true. We know if this bill goes over to the other body and it 
includes anything other than extension of unemployment compensation it 
will never pass and it will die.
  The other body has already taken up I do not know how many stimulus 
packages, tried all kinds of options, with or without different kinds 
of health care benefits, with or without Alternative Minimum Tax, and 
finally the leadership said, look, there is nothing we can pass here 
other than a clean unemployment compensation extension, passed, I 
believe, 100 to nothing.
  So the lesson is learned. The only thing that will work, the only 
thing that will provide relief for Americans who are running out of 
their unemployment insurance is if we just pass a clean bill that has 
nothing else attached to it.
  We have done the same thing over here. The Republican leadership has 
brought up three stimulus packages, pretty much the same. I suspect if 
this bill is voted down today they will bring up another stimulus 
package tomorrow or next week. They are playing politics because they 
will not allow a clean bill to pass. It passed the other body 100 to 
nothing. It will pass here probably unanimously. Let us just do it.
  Now, let me talk about the tax credits for health care that are in 
this bill. My Republican colleagues know that this is a very 
controversial issue because the Democrats do not believe it will work. 
When we talk about tax credits for health care, most of the people who 
are uninsured, very few are going to be able to go out in the 
individual market and buy insurance, which is $4,000 or $5,000 a year, 
with the piddly tax credits the Republicans are proposing.
  So the Democrats have been saying this is not going to work, this tax 
credit. We have talked about extending COBRA, we have talked about the 
need to extend Medicaid to cover more people at a little higher level 
of income. My own State of New Jersey, a perfect example, is suffering 
because they do not have the money, and so many States are not able to 
provide the Medicaid benefits they have now and cover the people they 
now have and are considering cutting back on Medicaid.
  So we have a major difference here. Democrats believe COBRA extension 
and Medicaid extension will bring more people and provide insurance. We 
do not believe the Republican proposal with tax credits will work. So 
forget about this for the time being. We do not have agreement. Let us 
go with the thing we do have agreement on, which is unemployment 
expansion, a clean bill. We should bring it up and get it over with.
  The Republican side is playing politics and not giving a fair shake 
to those people in my district and around the country that need these 
extra weeks of unemployment compensation.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  We can keep talking about this. It has passed this House four times. 
This body has dealt with this issue. Now what we hear is my colleagues 
on the other side suggesting we have to bow down to what the other body 
wants to do, that we must do what the other body wants to do. Well, 
that is not the way it works. This body has its own leadership, has the 
two sides of the aisle. We work on the things that we work on, just 
like the items that we passed and have sent to the other body.
  Mr. Speaker, we have been open and clear about what we are trying to 
do. We are offering an opportunity to put together unemployment 
benefits, health care, and, at the same time, make sure that it would 
be done in a way which we believe would work. Now, what we understand 
from the other side is, we disagree that it is not going to work that 
way, so we are going to oppose what you are doing.
  Well, Mr. Speaker, we have heard this lots of time. We heard this 
about the balanced budget. A balanced budget will never work. We can 
never have a balanced budget.
  Secondly, we heard when we went to welfare reform, oh, my gosh, 
welfare reform will never, ever work. We heard this about the capital 
gains tax cut, that it is going to cost our government $9 billion. In 
fact, it did work and brought in $90 billion to the government and 
created an economic stimulus that our country has lived off for several 
years now.
  Republican ideas are simply bad to the other side every time, and 
that is where they play politics, and I am sorry that it is that way. 
But what we are doing is proposing something that

[[Page H699]]

will allow families who today have to use pre-tax dollars to pay for 
their health care, and we are trying to make it easier to where they 
can then deduct this amount.
  Tax credits do work. They work for the families that use them over 
and over and over. Tens of thousands of African Americans, tens of 
thousands of Hispanics, and, oh, yes, tens of thousands of Caucasians 
will get this same tax credit. It works for people. It works for people 
who have health care today by helping them pay for what they want and 
they need.
  I am proud of what we are doing. I am sorry that my colleagues on the 
other side simply disagree and so they are not willing to venture in to 
helping anybody because they do not like what we have done. That is the 
politics, Mr. Speaker, and it is a real shame that it is happening 
again today on the floor of the House of Representatives right before 
our very eyes.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Levin).
  (Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Texas has made it clear 
what this is all about. He says we are waiting for the other body. The 
other body has twice unanimously passed an unemployment compensation 
extension bill. Twice. What is my colleague waiting for? He says we 
should not bow down to the Senate. To whom? Trent Lott? Every other 
Republican in the Senate who voted for this extension?

                              {time}  1145

  Bowing down, this is a fight with Republicans in the Senate. It is 
not only a fight with us. The gentleman is all alone.
  Secondly, the gentleman says this issue is not just about 
unemployment. That is the problem. The gentleman is ignoring the needs 
of the unemployed because the gentleman has another agenda. I want the 
gentleman to go and talk to the 356,000 people who exhausted their 
benefits in January and tell them this is not just about unemployment. 
It is the largest number of people exhausting their regular benefits 
without receiving additional aid in a single month, in any single month 
on record. So I suggest that the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) go 
to the 50 States of this Union and tell them that this is not just 
about unemployment. Shame.
  The other side of the aisle insists on adding to this unemployment 
bill controversial issues, and the gentleman knows they are. The health 
provision is the same one that has created the controversy in the 
Senate. This is what Mr. Lott said on February 7.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Fossella). Members are reminded to 
refrain from improper references to Senators.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, this is what has been said. ``My 
recommendation is that they send just a clean bill.'' That is the 
gentleman's leader over in the Senate. I shall not name his name.
  This is what this is all about. The other side wants a package, and 
then they change it. They want a package that essentially says to the 
unemployed of this country that their unemployment is not enough for 
Congress to act.
  Mr. Speaker, my suggestion to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Hastert) and Members on the Republican side, including many of the 
leaders who said they wanted a clean bill, is to think again. These 
millions of people are not getting unemployment on their watch. They 
are disregarding them. They have another agenda. Take up unemployment 
compensation today, pass it, send it to the President. I am sure he 
will sign it, and then we will go on to other issues.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will reiterate that Members must 
avoid improper references to Senators, whether specifically by name or 
otherwise.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we do have a broader agenda. It is about jobs in this 
country. It is about the ability that we have to make sure through 
stimulus or through tax cuts or through those things that will allow 
people to have more money in their own pocket. That is also what this 
is about.
  Yes, it is bigger than unemployment. It also includes health care. It 
includes the things that are the essence of what will maintain the 
vitality of this country.
  Mr. Speaker, I learned a long time ago when I came to Congress, some 
6 years ago, that virtually every single bill, every single debate that 
takes place on this floor is about more government, more spending, more 
taxes, or about the reverse.
  I am falling off on the side of the people who want jobs in this 
country, who want to make sure we have a sound economy and make sure 
that what this government does, it does, and is done efficiently. I am 
proud of what we are doing and what we have passed.
  Mr. Speaker, I would remind this entire body that if we can lay aside 
our differences, lay aside the things that we think will not work and 
get to work on the things that we are going to propose that will work, 
that means real money to real people in the time of their need, that in 
fact we will achieve the things that we are after. Government should 
not pick the winners and losers. We should help the people that need 
help.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, it is to try to help the people that need help. I know 
the unemployed do want jobs. I am sure that all unemployed workers 
thought that, during their working years when they paid their taxes, 
they believed that should a catastrophe hit and they lose their jobs 
that this government would help them out. That has been in the best 
tradition, to tide them over until a new job can be found; and when 
that job is found, I hope it will be as good as the job they lost.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question. If the 
previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule 
that will allow the House to vote on a straight 13-week extension of 
the unemployment benefits.
  Mr. Speaker, it has been nearly 6 months since the tragic events of 
September 11. In addition to the horrendous loss of life that occurred 
as a result of that day, the economic destruction has been enormous. 
Our economy, which was already in an economic downturn before the 
event, has worsened considerably. Millions of American jobs have been 
lost since then.
  The unemployment benefits for many of these jobless workers have 
already expired. Many, many more will lose benefits in the coming 
weeks. We must act immediately. The other body has already passed a 
clean extension of these critically-needed benefits. Every day that we 
fail to act means economic hardships for thousands of Americans and 
their families. Let us stop wasting time and vote to extend the 
unemployment benefits. I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question.

    Previous Question for H. Res. 354--Motions to Suspend the Rules

       In the resolution after ``(6)'' strike ``the bill (H.R. 
     1963)'' and all that follows through ``health insurance 
     costs, and for other purposes'' and insert in lieu thereof 
     the following:
       ``Senate amendments to the bill (H.R. 3090) to provide tax 
     incentives for economic recovery.''

  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we have heard it here today. Republicans have this 
hidden agenda. The other side of the aisle is right. Our hidden agenda 
is jobs and growing the economy, getting people back in their jobs, 
having an extension of unemployment benefits, having health care tax 
credits. And yet we have heard now what the other side of the aisle 
says about that. That is that they do not like the way that we have 
done it, and because they do not like the way we have done this, they 
oppose it.
  Mr. Speaker, we are going to continue this Republican conference, and 
Congress is going to continue passing things that are great for people, 
good for workers, continues economic opportunities. We are going to 
keep talking about how America's greatest days lie in our future. 
Opportunities for people who are going to school and want jobs,

[[Page H700]]

people who today may not have a job. We are going to rebound this 
economy. It is going to head back.
  I believe that the President, working with this Congress, will have a 
lot of success. That is what this is about. That is our hidden agenda. 
Our hidden agenda is simple. It is about jobs. It is about economic 
growth and the opportunity for people to get a job, keep a job and know 
that they can have more take-home pay.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. 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.
  Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair will reduce to 5 minutes 
the minimum time for any electronic voting on adoption of the 
resolution.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 218, 
nays 191, not voting 25, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 49]

                               YEAS--218

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bereuter
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Callahan
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Isakson
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kerns
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schrock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Stump
     Sullivan
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NAYS--191

     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barrett
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ford
     Frank
     Frost
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green (TX)
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hill
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     John
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Luther
     Lynch
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Phelps
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Ross
     Rothman
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Shows
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wu
     Wynn

                             NOT VOTING--25

     Abercrombie
     Bentsen
     Blagojevich
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Condit
     Cubin
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Filner
     Hyde
     Kilpatrick
     Lantos
     Lee
     Lofgren
     Millender-McDonald
     Napolitano
     Roybal-Allard
     Sanchez
     Solis
     Traficant
     Waters
     Watson (CA)
     Wexler
     Woolsey

                              {time}  1222

  Messrs. LARSON of Connecticut, DINGELL, BARRETT of WISCONSIN, ALLEN, 
FORD, HINOJOSA and ISRAEL changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. REGULA changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 49, I was conducting 
official business in my San Diego, California, district. Had I been 
present, I would have voted ``nay.''
  Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 49 on ordering the 
previous question I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I 
would have voted ``nay.''
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, earlier today, I was unable to cast my 
vote on two rollcall votes. Had I been present, I would have voted as 
follows: Rollcall 48, Approval of the Journal: ``aye''; rollcall 49, 
Previous Question: ``nay.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Fossella). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________