[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 120 (Thursday, September 4, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H7900-H7922]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT,
2004
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 351 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. 2989.
{time} 1915
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. 2989) making appropriations for the Departments of
Transportation and Treasury, and independent agencies for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 2004, and for other purposes, with Mr. Dreier
in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
{time} 1915
The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, a
request for a recorded vote on the amendment by the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) had been postponed.
Pursuant to the order of the House of today, no amendment to the bill
may be offered except:
Pro forma amendments by the chairman or ranking minority member of
the Committee on Appropriations or their designees for the purpose of
debate;
The amendments printed in the Congressional Record and numbered 1, 6,
11, 14 and 24;
The amendment printed in the Congressional Record and numbered 2,
which shall be debatable for 15 minutes;
The amendment printed in the Congressional Record and numbered 15,
which shall be debatable for 20 minutes;
An amendment by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) regarding
OMB Circular A-76, which shall be debatable for 30 minutes;
One proper amendment by the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders)
regarding a district court memorandum and order addressing IBM's
pension plan, which shall be debatable for 1 hour;
An amendment by the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) regarding the
Help America Vote Act;
An amendment by the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen)
regarding OMB Circular A-76, which shall be debatable for 30 minutes;
One proper amendment by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake)
regarding Cuba travel, which shall be debatable for 1 hour;
An amendment by the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) regarding
San Jose light rail;
An amendment by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper), the
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) or the gentlewoman from
Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) regarding tax law enforcement, which shall be
debatable for 1 hour;
An amendment by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Davis) regarding
educational exchanges with Cuba;
An amendment by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) regarding the
National Railroad Passenger Corporation;
An amendment by the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) regarding
locality pay;
And an amendment by the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran) regarding
essential air service program.
Each amendment may be offered only by the Member designated, or a
designee, or the Member who caused it to be printed, or a designee;
shall be considered as read; shall not be subject to amendment; and
shall not be subject to a demand for a division of the question. Except
as specified, each amendment shall be debatable for 10 minutes, equally
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent. An amendment
shall be considered to fit the description stated in this request if it
addresses in whole or in part the object described.
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder
of the bill through page 157, line 2 be considered as read, printed in
the Record and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Oklahoma?
There was no objection.
The text of the bill from page 53, line 3, through page 157, line 2
is as follows:
Sec. 164. Section 5323(j) of title 49, United States Code,
is amended--
(1) by adding at the end of paragraph (1) the following:
``The term `manufactured goods' as used in this paragraph
means each individual item specified in each line item of a
procurement. If the individual items to be procured are
listed in the bill of materials and specifications rather
than a line item, the term `manufactured goods' shall apply
to each such item. The definition of `manufactured goods'
shall not be applicable to the procurement of rolling stock
as set forth in paragraph (2)(C).'';
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (7) as
paragraphs (4) through (8), respectively;
(3) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) When issuing a waiver based upon a public interest
determination under paragraph (2)(A), the Secretary shall
produce a detailed written justification as to why the waiver
is in the public interest. The Secretary shall publish this
justification in the Federal Register and provide the public
a reasonable period for notice and comment.''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(9) Application of waivers.--The Secretary may grant a
waiver under paragraph (2) for a microprocessor, but not for
microcomputer equipment. For purposes of this paragraph
`microprocessor' means a computer processor on a microchip.
``(10) Administrative review.--A party adversely affected
by an agency action under this subsection shall have the
right to seek review under section 702 of the Administrative
Procedure Act, title 5, United States Code.''.
Sec. 165. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds
made available for the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority,
Colorado, under Public Laws 106-69 and 106-346 shall be made
available for the Roaring Fork Valley Bus Rapid Transit
project.
SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation is hereby
authorized to make such expenditures, within the limits of
funds and borrowing authority available to the Corporation,
and in accord with law, and to make such contracts and
commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations as
provided by section 104 of the Government Corporation Control
Act, as amended, as may be necessary in carrying out the
programs set forth in the Corporation's budget for the
current fiscal year.
Operations and Maintenance
(harbor maintenance trust fund)
For necessary expenses for operations and maintenance of
those portions of the Saint
[[Page H7901]]
Lawrence Seaway operated and maintained by the Saint Lawrence
Seaway Development Corporation, $14,700,000, to be derived
from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, pursuant to Public
Law 99-662.
MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
Maritime Security Program
For necessary expenses to maintain and preserve a U.S.-flag
merchant fleet to serve the national security needs of the
United States, $98,700,000, to remain available until
expended.
Operations and Training
For necessary expenses of operations and training
activities authorized by law, $105,897,000, of which
$22,000,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2004,
for salaries and benefits of employees of the United States
Merchant Marine Academy; of which $13,000,000 shall remain
available until expended for capital improvements at the
United States Merchant Marine Academy; of which $9,063,000
shall remain available until expended for the State Maritime
Schools Schoolship Maintenance and Repair; of which $500,000
shall remain available until expended for the evaluation and
provision of the fourteen commercially strategic ports; and
of which $1,000,000 shall remain available until September
30, 2005, for Maritime Security Professional Training in
support of Section 109 of the Maritime Transportation
Security Act of 2002.
Ship Disposal
For necessary expenses related to the disposal of obsolete
vessels in the National Defense Reserve Fleet of the Maritime
Administration, $14,000,000, to remain available until
expended.
General Provisions--Maritime Administration
Sec. 170. Notwithstanding any other provision of this or
any other Act, the Maritime Administration is authorized to
furnish utilities and services and make necessary repairs in
connection with any lease, contract, or occupancy involving
Government property under control of the Maritime
Administration, and payments received therefore shall be
credited to the appropriation charged with the cost thereof:
Provided, That rental payments under any such lease,
contract, or occupancy for items other than such utilities,
services, or repairs shall be deposited into the Treasury as
miscellaneous receipts. No obligations shall be incurred
during the current fiscal year from the construction fund
established by the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, or otherwise,
in excess of the appropriations and limitations contained in
this Act or in any prior Appropriations Act.
Sec. 171. Chapter 10 of title I of the Emergency Wartime
Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Law 108-11) is
amended by striking ``For the cost of guaranteed loans, as
authorized, $25,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2005:'' and inserting ``For the cost of guaranteed loans
and associated administrative expenses, as authorized,
$25,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2005, of
which up to $4,498,000 may be used for associated
administrative expenses:''.
RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION
Research and Special Programs
For expenses necessary to discharge the functions of the
Research and Special Programs Administration, $47,018,000, of
which $645,000 shall be derived from the Pipeline Safety
Fund, and of which $2,437,000 shall remain available until
September 30, 2006: Provided, That up to $1,200,000 in fees
collected under 49 U.S.C. 5108(g) shall be deposited in the
general fund of the Treasury as offsetting receipts: Provided
further, That there may be credited to this appropriation, to
be available until expended, funds received from States,
counties, municipalities, other public authorities, and
private sources for expenses incurred for training, for
reports publication and dissemination, and for travel
expenses incurred in performance of hazardous materials
exemptions and approvals functions.
Pipeline Safety
(pipeline safety fund)
(oil spill liability trust fund)
For expenses necessary to conduct the functions of the
pipeline safety program, for grants-in-aid to carry out a
pipeline safety program, as authorized by 49 U.S.C. 60107,
and to discharge the pipeline program responsibilities of the
Oil Pollution Act of 1990, $64,054,000, of which $9,000,000
shall be derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund and
shall remain available until September 30, 2006; of which
$55,054,000 shall be derived from the Pipeline Safety Fund,
of which $21,786,000 shall remain available until September
30, 2006.
Emergency Preparedness Grants
(emergency preparedness fund)
For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5127(c),
$200,000, to be derived from the Emergency Preparedness Fund,
to remain available until September 30, 2006: Provided, That
not more than $14,300,000 shall be made available for
obligation in fiscal year 2004 from amounts made available by
49 U.S.C. 5116(i), 5127(c), and 5127(d): Provided further,
That none of the funds made available by 49 U.S.C. 5116(i),
5127(c), and 5127(d) shall be made available for obligation
by individuals other than the Secretary of Transportation, or
his designee.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General
to carry out the provisions of the Inspector General Act of
1978, as amended, $55,000,000: Provided, That the Inspector
General shall have all necessary authority, in carrying out
the duties specified in the Inspector General Act, as amended
(5 U.S.C. App. 3) to investigate allegations of fraud,
including false statements to the government (18 U.S.C.
1001), by any person or entity that is subject to regulation
by the Department: Provided further, That the funds made
available under this heading shall be used to investigate,
pursuant to section 41712 of title 49, United States Code:
(1) unfair or deceptive practices and unfair methods of
competition by domestic and foreign air carriers and ticket
agents; and (2) the compliance of domestic and foreign air
carriers with respect to item (1) of this proviso.
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of the Surface Transportation Board,
including services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $19,521,000:
Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of law,
not to exceed $1,050,000 from fees established by the
Chairman of the Surface Transportation Board shall be
credited to this appropriation as offsetting collections and
used for necessary and authorized expenses under this
heading: Provided further, That the sum herein appropriated
from the general fund shall be reduced on a dollar-for-dollar
basis as such offsetting collections are received during
fiscal year 2004, to result in a final appropriation from the
general fund estimated at no more than $18,471,000.
TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
DEPARTMENTAL OFFICES
Salaries and Expenses
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Departmental Offices
including operation and maintenance of the Treasury Building
and Annex; hire of passenger motor vehicles; maintenance,
repairs, and improvements of, and purchase of commercial
insurance policies for, real properties leased or owned
overseas, when necessary for the performance of official
business; not to exceed $3,000,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2005 for information technology modernization
requirements; not to exceed $150,000 for official reception
and representation expenses; not to exceed $258,000 for
unforeseen emergencies of a confidential nature, to be
allocated and expended under the direction of the Secretary
of the Treasury and to be accounted for solely on his
certificate, $175,809,000: Provided, That no less than
$21,855,000 is for the Office of Foreign Assets Control:
Provided further, That of these amounts $2,900,000 is
available for grants to State and local law enforcement
groups to help fight money laundering: Provided further, That
of these amounts, $3,393,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2005, shall be for the Treasury-wide Financial
Statement Audit Program, of which such amounts as may be
necessary may be transferred to accounts of the Department's
offices and bureaus to conduct audits: Provided further, That
this transfer authority shall be in addition to any other
provided in this Act.
Department-Wide Systems and Capital Investments Programs
(including transfer of funds)
For development and acquisition of automatic data
processing equipment, software, and services for the
Department of the Treasury, $36,653,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2006: Provided, That these funds shall be
transferred to accounts and in amounts as necessary to
satisfy the requirements of the Department's offices,
bureaus, and other organizations: Provided further, That this
transfer authority shall be in addition to any other transfer
authority provided in this Act.
Office of Inspector General
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General
in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act
of 1978, as amended, not to exceed $2,000,000 for official
travel expenses, including hire of passenger motor vehicles;
not to exceed $2,500 for official reception and
representation expenses; and not to exceed $100,000 for
unforeseen emergencies of a confidential nature, to be
allocated and expended under the direction of the Inspector
General of the Treasury, $12,792,000.
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Treasury Inspector General
for Tax Administration in carrying out the Inspector General
Act of 1978, as amended, including purchase (not to exceed
150 for replacement only for police-type use) and hire of
passenger motor vehicles (31 U.S.C. 1343(b)); services
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, at such rates as may be
determined by the Inspector General for Tax Administration;
not to exceed $6,000,000 for official travel expenses; and
not to exceed $500,000 for unforeseen emergencies of a
confidential nature, to be allocated and expended under the
direction of the Inspector General for Tax Administration,
$128,034,000.
[[Page H7902]]
Air Transportation Stabilization Program
For necessary expenses to administer the Air Transportation
Stabilization Board established by section 102 of the Air
Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act (Public
Law 107-42), $2,538,000, to remain available until expended.
Treasury Building and Annex Repair and Restoration
For the repair, alteration, and improvement of the Treasury
Building and Annex, $25,000,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2006.
FINANCIAL CRIMES ENFORCEMENT NETWORK
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of the Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network, including hire of passenger motor vehicles; travel
expenses of non-Federal law enforcement personnel to attend
meetings concerned with financial intelligence activities,
law enforcement, and financial regulation; not to exceed
$14,000 for official reception and representation expenses;
and for assistance to Federal law enforcement agencies, with
or without reimbursement, $57,571,000, of which not to exceed
$4,500,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2006;
and of which $8,152,000 shall remain available until
September 30, 2005: Provided, That funds appropriated in this
account may be used to procure personal services contracts.
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of the Financial Management Service,
$228,558,000, of which not to exceed $9,220,000 shall remain
available until September 30, 2006, for information systems
modernization initiatives; and of which not to exceed $2,500
shall be available for official reception and representation
expenses.
ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO TAX AND TRADE BUREAU
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of carrying out section 1111 of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002, including hire of passenger
motor vehicles, $80,000,000; of which not to exceed $6,000
for official reception and representation expenses; not to
exceed $50,000 for cooperative research and development
programs for Laboratory Services; and provision of laboratory
assistance to State and local agencies with or without
reimbursement.
UNITED STATES MINT
United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund
Pursuant to section 5136 of title 31, United States Code,
the United States Mint is provided funding through the United
States Mint Public Enterprise Fund for costs associated with
the production of circulating coins, numismatic coins, and
protective services, including both operating expenses and
capital investments. The aggregate amount of new liabilities
and obligations incurred during fiscal year 2004 under such
section 5136 for circulating coinage and protective service
capital investments of the United States Mint shall not
exceed $40,652,000. From amounts in the United States Mint
Public Enterprise Fund, the Secretary of the Treasury shall
pay to the Comptroller General an amount not to exceed
$375,000 to reimburse the Comptroller General for the cost of
a study to be contracted for by the Comptroller General on
the potential and cost-effectiveness of expanded use of pre-
made ``blanks'' by the U.S. Mint in the production of
circulating coins. The amounts reimbursed to the Comptroller
General pursuant to this paragraph shall be deposited to the
appropriation of the General Accounting Office then available
and remain available until expended.
BUREAU OF THE PUBLIC DEBT
Administering the Public Debt
For necessary expenses connected with any public-debt
issues of the United States, $178,052,000, of which not to
exceed $2,500 shall be available for official reception and
representation expenses, and of which not to exceed
$2,000,000 shall remain available until expended for systems
modernization: Provided, That the sum appropriated herein
from the General Fund for fiscal year 2004 shall be reduced
by not more than $4,400,000 as definitive security issue fees
and Treasury Direct Investor Account Maintenance fees are
collected, so as to result in a final fiscal year 2004
appropriation from the General Fund estimated at
$173,652,000. In addition, $40,000 to be derived from the Oil
Spill Liability Trust Fund to reimburse the Bureau for
administrative and personnel expenses for financial
management of the Fund, as authorized by section 1012 of
Public Law 101-380.
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
Processing, Assistance, and Management
For necessary expenses of the Internal Revenue Service for
pre-filing taxpayer assistance and education, filing and
account services, shared services support, general management
and administration; and services as authorized by 5 U.S.C.
3109, at such rates as may be determined by the Commissioner,
$4,037,834,000, of which $4,250,000 shall be for the Tax
Counseling for the Elderly Program, of which $8,000,000 shall
be available for low-income taxpayer clinic grants, and of
which not to exceed $25,000 shall be for official reception
and representation expenses.
Tax Law Enforcement
For necessary expenses of the Internal Revenue Service for
determining and establishing tax liabilities; providing
litigation support; conducting criminal investigation and
enforcement activities; securing unfiled tax returns;
collecting unpaid accounts; conducting a document matching
program; resolving taxpayer problems through prompt
identification, referral and settlement; compiling statistics
of income and conducting compliance research; funding
essential earned income tax credit compliance and error
reduction initiatives; purchase (for police-type use, not to
exceed 850) and hire of passenger motor vehicles (31 U.S.C.
1343(b)); and services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, at
such rates as may be determined by the Commissioner,
$4,221,408,000, of which not to exceed $1,000,000 shall
remain available until September 30, 2006, for research, and
of which not to exceed $10,000,000 may be used to reimburse
the Social Security Administration for the costs of
implementing section 1090 of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997
(Public Law 105-33).
Information Systems
For necessary expenses of the Internal Revenue Service for
information systems and telecommunications support, including
developmental information systems and operational information
systems; the hire of passenger motor vehicles (31 U.S.C.
1343(b)); and services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, at
such rates as may be determined by the Commissioner,
$1,628,739,000, of which $165,000,000 shall remain available
until September 30, 2005.
Business Systems Modernization
For necessary expenses of the Internal Revenue Service,
$429,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2006,
for the capital asset acquisition of information technology
systems, including management and related contractual costs
of said acquisitions, including contractual costs associated
with operations authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109: Provided, That
none of these funds may be obligated until the Internal
Revenue Service submits to the Committees on Appropriations,
and such Committees approve, a plan for expenditure that: (1)
meets the capital planning and investment control review
requirements established by the Office of Management and
Budget, including Circular A-11 part 3; (2) complies with the
Internal Revenue Service's enterprise architecture, including
the modernization blueprint; (3) conforms with the Internal
Revenue Service's enterprise life cycle methodology; (4) is
approved by the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of
the Treasury, and the Office of Management and Budget; (5)
has been reviewed by the General Accounting Office; and (6)
complies with the acquisition rules, requirements,
guidelines, and systems acquisition management practices of
the Federal Government.
Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration
For expenses necessary to implement the health insurance
tax credit included in the Trade Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-
210), $35,000,000, to remain available until September 30,
2005.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Sec. 201. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made
available in this Act to the Internal Revenue Service may be
transferred to any other Internal Revenue Service
appropriation upon the advance approval of the Committees on
Appropriations.
Sec. 202. The Internal Revenue Service shall maintain a
training program to ensure that Internal Revenue Service
employees are trained in taxpayers' rights, in dealing
courteously with the taxpayers, and in cross-cultural
relations.
Sec. 203. The Internal Revenue Service shall institute and
enforce policies and procedures that will safeguard the
confidentiality of taxpayer information.
Sec. 204. Funds made available by this or any other Act to
the Internal Revenue Service shall be available for improved
facilities and increased manpower to provide sufficient and
effective 1-800 help line service for taxpayers. The
Commissioner shall continue to make the improvement of the
Internal Revenue Service 1-800 help line service a priority
and allocate resources necessary to increase phone lines and
staff to improve the Internal Revenue Service 1-800 help line
service.
Sec. 205. Appropriations to the Department of the Treasury
in this Act shall be available for uniforms or allowances
therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901), including
maintenance, repairs, and cleaning; purchase of insurance for
official motor vehicles operated in foreign countries;
purchase of motor vehicles without regard to the general
purchase price limitations for vehicles purchased and used
overseas for the current fiscal year; entering into contracts
with the Department of State for the furnishing of health and
medical services to employees and their dependents serving in
foreign countries; and services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
Sec. 206. Not to exceed 2 percent of any appropriations in
this Act made available to the Departmental Offices--Salaries
and Expenses, Office of Inspector General, Financial
Management Service, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau,
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and Bureau of the
Public Debt, may be transferred between
[[Page H7903]]
such appropriations upon the advance approval of the
Committees on Appropriations. No transfer may increase or
decrease any such appropriation by more than 2 percent.
Sec. 207. Not to exceed 2 percent of any appropriation made
available in this Act to the Internal Revenue Service may be
transferred to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax
Administration's appropriation upon the advance approval of
the Committees on Appropriations. No transfer may increase or
decrease any such appropriation by more than 2 percent.
Sec. 208. None of the funds appropriated in this Act or
otherwise available to the Department of the Treasury or the
Bureau of Engraving and Printing may be used to redesign the
$1 Federal Reserve note.
Sec. 209. The Secretary of the Treasury may transfer funds
from ``Salaries and Expenses'', Financial Management Service,
to the Debt Services Account as necessary to cover the costs
of debt collection: Provided, That such amounts shall be
reimbursed to such Salaries and Expenses account from debt
collections received in the Debt Services Account.
Sec. 210. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this or any other Act may be used by the United
States Mint to construct or operate any museum without the
explicit approval of the House Committee on Financial
Services and the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and
Urban Affairs.
Sec. 211. For fiscal year 2004 and each fiscal year
thereafter, there are appropriated to the Secretary of the
Treasury such sums as may be necessary to reimburse financial
institutions in their capacity as depositaries and financial
agents of the United States for all services required or
directed by the Secretary of the Treasury, or the Secretary's
designee, to be performed by such financial institutions on
behalf of the Department of the Treasury or other Federal
agencies, including services rendered prior to fiscal year
2004.
prohibition on contracts with corporate expatriates
Sec. 212. (a) In General.--The Secretary may not enter into
any contract with a foreign incorporated entity which is
treated as an inverted domestic corporation under subsection
(b), or any subsidiary of such entity.
(b) Inverted Domestic Corporation.--For purposes of this
section, a foreign incorporated entity shall be treated as an
inverted domestic corporation if, pursuant to a plan (or a
series of related transactions)--
(1) the entity has completed the direct or indirect
acquisition of substantially all of the properties held
directly or indirectly by a domestic corporation or
substantially all of the properties constituting a trade or
business of a domestic partnership,
(2) after the acquisition at least 80 percent of the stock
(by vote or value) of the entity is held--
(A) in the case of an acquisition with respect to a
domestic corporation, by former shareholders of the domestic
corporation by reason of holding stock in the domestic
corporation, or
(B) in the case of an acquisition with respect to a
domestic partnership, by former partners of the domestic
partnership by reason of holding a capital or profits
interest in the domestic partnership, and
(3) the expanded affiliated group which after the
acquisition includes the entity does not have substantial
business activities in the foreign country in which or under
the law of which the entity is created or organized when
compared to the total business activities of such expanded
affiliated group.
(c) Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of this
section--
(1) Rules for application of subsection (b).--In applying
subsection (b) for purposes of subsection (a), the following
rules shall apply:
(A) Certain stock disregarded.--There shall not be taken
into account in determining ownership for purposes of
subsection (b)(2)--
(i) stock held by members of the expanded affiliated group
which includes the foreign incorporated entity, or
(ii) stock of such entity which is sold in a public
offering related to the acquisition described in subsection
(b)(1).
(B) Plan deemed in certain cases.--If a foreign
incorporated entity acquires directly or indirectly
substantially all of the properties of a domestic corporation
or partnership during the 4-year period beginning on the date
which is 2 years before the ownership requirements of
subsection (b)(2) are met, such actions shall be treated as
pursuant to a plan.
(C) Certain transfers disregarded.--The transfer of
properties or liabilities (including by contribution or
distribution) shall be disregarded if such transfers are part
of a plan a principal purpose of which is to avoid the
purposes of this section.
(D) Special rule for related partnerships.--For purposes of
applying subsection (b) to the acquisition of a domestic
partnership, except as provided in regulations, all
partnerships which are under common control (within the
meaning of section 482 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986)
shall be treated as 1 partnership.
(E) Treatment of certain rights.--The Secretary shall
prescribe such regulations as may be necessary--
(i) to treat warrants, options, contracts to acquire stock,
convertible debt instruments, and other similar interests as
stock, and
(ii) to treat stock as not stock.
(2) Expanded affiliated group.--The term ``expanded
affiliated group'' means an affiliated group as defined in
section 1504(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (without
regard to section 1504(b) of such Code), except that section
1504(a) of such Code shall be applied by substituting ``more
than 50 percent'' for ``at least 80 percent'' each place it
appears.
(3) Foreign incorporated entity.--The term ``foreign
incorporated entity'' means any entity which is, or but for
subsection (b) would be, treated as a foreign corporation for
purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
(4) Other definitions.--The terms ``person'', ``domestic'',
and ``foreign'' have the meanings given such terms by
paragraphs (1), (4), and (5) of section 7701(a) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, respectively.
(d) Waiver.--The President may waive subsection (a) with
respect to any specific contract if the President certifies
to Congress that the waiver is required in the interest of
national security.
(e) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect one day
after the date of this bill's enactment.
TITLE III--POSTAL SERVICE
Payment to the Postal Service Fund
For payment to the Postal Service Fund for revenue forgone
on free and reduced rate mail, pursuant to subsections (c)
and (d) of section 2401 of title 39, United States Code,
$65,521,000, of which $36,521,000 shall not be available for
obligation until October 1, 2004: Provided, That mail for
overseas voting and mail for the blind shall continue to be
free: Provided further, That 6-day delivery and rural
delivery of mail shall continue at not less than the 1983
level: Provided further, That none of the funds made
available to the Postal Service by this Act shall be used to
implement any rule, regulation, or policy of charging any
officer or employee of any State or local child support
enforcement agency, or any individual participating in a
State or local program of child support enforcement, a fee
for information requested or provided concerning an address
of a postal customer: Provided further, That none of the
funds provided in this Act shall be used to consolidate or
close small rural and other small post offices in fiscal year
2004.
TITLE IV--EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO
THE PRESIDENT
Compensation of the President
For compensation of the President, including an expense
allowance at the rate of $50,000 per annum as authorized by 3
U.S.C. 102, $450,000: Provided, That none of the funds made
available for official expenses shall be expended for any
other purpose and any unused amount shall revert to the
Treasury pursuant to section 1552 of title 31, United States
Code: Provided further, That none of the funds made available
for official expenses shall be considered as taxable to the
President.
White House Office
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses for the White House as authorized by
law, including not to exceed $3,850,000 for services as
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and 3 U.S.C. 105; subsistence
expenses as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 105, which shall be
expended and accounted for as provided in that section; hire
of passenger motor vehicles, newspapers, periodicals,
teletype news service, and travel (not to exceed $100,000 to
be expended and accounted for as provided by 3 U.S.C. 103);
and not to exceed $19,000 for official entertainment
expenses, to be available for allocation within the Executive
Office of the President, $66,057,000: Provided, That
$8,650,000 of the funds appropriated shall be available for
reimbursements to the White House Communications Agency.
Executive Residence at the White House
operating expenses
For the care, maintenance, repair and alteration,
refurnishing, improvement, heating, and lighting, including
electric power and fixtures, of the Executive Residence at
the White House and official entertainment expenses of the
President, $12,501,000, to be expended and accounted for as
provided by 3 U.S.C. 105, 109, 110, and 112-114.
reimbursable expenses
For the reimbursable expenses of the Executive Residence at
the White House, such sums as may be necessary: Provided,
That all reimbursable operating expenses of the Executive
Residence shall be made in accordance with the provisions of
this paragraph: Provided further, That, notwithstanding any
other provision of law, such amount for reimbursable
operating expenses shall be the exclusive authority of the
Executive Residence to incur obligations and to receive
offsetting collections, for such expenses: Provided further,
That the Executive Residence shall require each person
sponsoring a reimbursable political event to pay in advance
an amount equal to the estimated cost of the event, and all
such advance payments shall be credited to this account and
remain available until expended: Provided further, That the
Executive Residence shall require the national committee of
the political party of the President to maintain on deposit
$25,000, to be separately accounted for and available for
expenses relating to reimbursable political events sponsored
by such committee during such fiscal year: Provided further,
That the Executive Residence shall ensure
[[Page H7904]]
that a written notice of any amount owed for a reimbursable
operating expense under this paragraph is submitted to the
person owing such amount within 60 days after such expense is
incurred, and that such amount is collected within 30 days
after the submission of such notice: Provided further, That
the Executive Residence shall charge interest and assess
penalties and other charges on any such amount that is not
reimbursed within such 30 days, in accordance with the
interest and penalty provisions applicable to an outstanding
debt on a United States Government claim under section 3717
of title 31, United States Code: Provided further, That each
such amount that is reimbursed, and any accompanying interest
and charges, shall be deposited in the Treasury as
miscellaneous receipts: Provided further, That the Executive
Residence shall prepare and submit to the Committees on
Appropriations, by not later than 90 days after the end of
the fiscal year covered by this Act, a report setting forth
the reimbursable operating expenses of the Executive
Residence during the preceding fiscal year, including the
total amount of such expenses, the amount of such total that
consists of reimbursable official and ceremonial events, the
amount of such total that consists of reimbursable political
events, and the portion of each such amount that has been
reimbursed as of the date of the report: Provided further,
That the Executive Residence shall maintain a system for the
tracking of expenses related to reimbursable events within
the Executive Residence that includes a standard for the
classification of any such expense as political or
nonpolitical: Provided further, That no provision of this
paragraph may be construed to exempt the Executive Residence
from any other applicable requirement of subchapter I or II
of chapter 37 of title 31, United States Code.
White House Repair and Restoration
For the repair, alteration, and improvement of the
Executive Residence at the White House, $4,225,000, to remain
available until expended, for required maintenance, safety
and health issues, and continued preventative maintenance.
Council of Economic Advisers
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Council of Economic Advisors
in carrying out its functions under the Employment Act of
1946 (15 U.S.C. 1021), $4,000,000.
Office of Policy Development
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Office of Policy Development,
including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and 3
U.S.C. 107, $4,109,000.
National Security Council
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the National Security Council,
including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109,
$9,000,000.
Office of Administration
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Office of Administration,
including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and 3
U.S.C. 107, and hire of passenger motor vehicles,
$82,826,000, of which $17,470,000 shall remain available
until expended for the Capital Investment Plan for continued
modernization of the information technology infrastructure
within the Executive Office of the President.
Office of Management and Budget
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Office of Management and
Budget, including hire of passenger motor vehicles and
services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and to carry out the
provisions of chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code,
$62,772,000, of which not to exceed $1,500 shall be available
for official representation expenses: Provided, That, as
provided in 31 U.S.C. 1301(a), appropriations shall be
applied only to the objects for which appropriations were
made except as otherwise provided by law: Provided further,
That none of the funds appropriated in this Act for the
Office of Management and Budget may be used for the purpose
of reviewing any agricultural marketing orders or any
activities or regulations under the provisions of the
Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 (7 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.): Provided further, That none of the funds made
available for the Office of Management and Budget by this Act
may be expended for the altering of the transcript of actual
testimony of witnesses, except for testimony of officials of
the Office of Management and Budget, before the Committees on
Appropriations or the Committees on Veterans' Affairs or
their subcommittees: Provided further, That the preceding
shall not apply to printed hearings released by the
Committees on Appropriations or the Committees on Veterans'
Affairs: Provided further, That none of the funds
appropriated in this Act may be available to pay the salary
or expenses of any employee of the Office of Management and
Budget who, after February 15, 2003, calculates, prepares, or
approves any tabular or other material that proposes the sub-
allocation of budget authority or outlays by the Committees
on Appropriations among their subcommittees.
Office of National Drug Control Policy
salaries and expenses
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Office of National Drug
Control Policy; for research activities pursuant to the
Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of
1998 (21 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) as amended; not to exceed
$10,000 for official reception and representation expenses;
and for participation in joint projects or in the provision
of services on matters of mutual interest with nonprofit,
research, or public organizations or agencies, with or
without reimbursement, $28,790,000; of which $2,850,000 shall
remain available until expended, consisting of $1,350,000 for
policy research and evaluation, and $1,500,000 for the
National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws: Provided, That
the Office is authorized to accept, hold, administer, and
utilize gifts, both real and personal, public and private,
without fiscal year limitation, for the purpose of aiding or
facilitating the work of the Office.
Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary expenses for the Counterdrug Technology
Assessment Center for research activities pursuant to the
Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of
1998 (21 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) as amended, $40,000,000, which
shall remain available until expended, consisting of
$18,000,000 for counternarcotics research and development
projects, and $22,000,000 for the continued operation of the
technology transfer program: Provided, That the $18,000,000
for counternarcotics research and development projects shall
be available for transfer to other Federal departments or
agencies.
Federal Drug Control Programs
high intensity drug trafficking areas program
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Office of National Drug
Control Policy's High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas
Program, $226,350,000, for drug control activities consistent
with the approved strategy for each of the designated High
Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas, of which no less than 51
percent shall be transferred to State and local entities for
drug control activities, which shall be obligated within 120
days of the date of the enactment of this Act: Provided, That
up to 49 percent, to remain available until September 30,
2005, may be transferred to Federal agencies and departments
at a rate to be determined by the Director, of which not less
than $2,100,000 shall be used for auditing services and
associated activities, and at least $500,000 of the
$2,100,000 shall be used to develop and implement a data
collection system to measure the performance of the High
Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program: Provided further,
That High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Programs
designated as of September 30, 2003, shall be funded at no
less than the fiscal year 2003 initial allocation levels
unless the Director submits to the Committees on
Appropriations, and the Committees approve, justification for
changes in those levels based on clearly articulated
priorities for the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas
Programs, as well as published Office of National Drug
Control Policy performance measures of effectiveness:
Provided further, That no funds of an amount in excess of the
fiscal year 2004 budget request shall be obligated prior to
the approval of the Committee on Appropriations.
Other Federal Drug Control Programs
(including transfer of funds)
For activities to support a national anti-drug campaign for
youth, and for other purposes, authorized by (21 U.S.C. 1701
et seq.) as amended, $230,000,000, to remain available until
expended, of which the following amounts are available as
follows: $150,000,000 to support a national media campaign;
$70,000,000 for a program of assistance and matching grants
to local coalitions and other activities, as authorized in
chapter 2 of the National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988,
as amended; $4,500,000 for the Counterdrug Intelligence
Executive Secretariat; $2,000,000 for evaluations and
research related to National Drug Control Program performance
measures; $1,000,000 for the National Drug Court Institute;
$1,500,000 for the United States Anti-Doping Agency for anti-
doping activities; and $1,000,000 for the United States
membership dues to the World Anti-Doping Agency: Provided,
That such funds may be transferred to other Federal
departments and agencies to carry out such activities:
Provided further, That of the amounts appropriated for a
national media campaign, no less than 77 percent shall be
used for the purchase of advertising time and space for the
national media campaign.
Unanticipated Needs
For expenses necessary to enable the President to meet
unanticipated needs, in furtherance of the national interest,
security, or defense which may arise at home or abroad during
the current fiscal year, as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 108,
$1,000,000.
Special Assistance to the President and the Official Residence of the
Vice President
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses to enable the Vice President to
provide assistance to the President in connection with
specially assigned functions; services as authorized by 5
U.S.C. 3109 and 3 U.S.C. 106, including subsistence expenses
as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 106, which shall be expended and
accounted for as provided in that section; and hire of
passenger motor vehicles, $4,461,000.
[[Page H7905]]
operating expenses
(including transfer of funds)
For the care, operation, refurnishing, improvement, and to
the extent not otherwise provided for, heating and lighting,
including electric power and fixtures, of the official
residence of the Vice President; the hire of passenger motor
vehicles; and not to exceed $90,000 for official
entertainment expenses of the Vice President, to be accounted
for solely on his certificate, $331,000: Provided, That
advances or repayments or transfers from this appropriation
may be made to any department or agency for expenses of
carrying out such activities.
TITLE V--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD
Salaries and Expenses
For expenses necessary for the Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, as authorized by
section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended
$5,401,000: Provided, That, notwithstanding any other
provision of law, there may be credited to this appropriation
funds received for publications and training expenses, to be
available for the purpose of this account.
NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of the National Transportation
Safety Board, including hire of passenger motor vehicles and
aircraft; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at
rates for individuals not to exceed the per diem rate
equivalent to the rate for a GS-15; uniforms, or allowances
therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-5902)
$76,679,000, of which not to exceed $2,000 may be used for
official reception and representation expenses.
Emergency Fund
For necessary expenses of the National Transportation
Safety Board for accident investigations, $600,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That these funds shall be
available only to the extent necessary to restore the balance
of the emergency fund to $2,000,000 (29 U.S.C. 1118 (b)).
COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of the Committee for Purchase From
People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled established by
Public Law 92-28, $4,725,000.
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the
Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended,
$50,440,000, of which no less than $6,389,900 shall be
available for internal automated data processing systems, and
of which not to exceed $5,000 shall be available for
reception and representation expenses.
ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses to carry out the Help America Vote
Act of 2002, $5,000,000.
Election Reform Programs
For necessary expenses to carry out a program of
requirements payments to States as authorized by Section 257
of the Help America Vote Act of 2002, $495,000,000: Provided,
That no more that \1/10\ of 1 percent of funds available for
requirements payments under Section 257 of the Help America
Vote Act of 2002 shall be allocated to any territory.
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the
Federal Labor Relations Authority, pursuant to Reorganization
Plan Numbered 2 of 1978, and the Civil Service Reform Act of
1978, including services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, and
including hire of experts and consultants, hire of passenger
motor vehicles, and rental of conference rooms in the
District of Columbia and elsewhere, $29,611,000: Provided,
That public members of the Federal Service Impasses Panel may
be paid travel expenses and per diem in lieu of subsistence
as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5703) for persons employed
intermittently in the Government service, and compensation as
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109: Provided further, That
notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, funds received from fees
charged to non-Federal participants at labor-management
relations conferences shall be credited to and merged with
this account, to be available without further appropriation
for the costs of carrying out these conferences.
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of the Federal Maritime Commission
as authorized by section 201(d) of the Merchant Marine Act,
1936, as amended (46 U.S.C. App. 1111), including services as
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; hire of passenger motor vehicles
as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343(b); and uniforms or
allowances therefore, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902,
$18,471,000: Provided, That not to exceed $2,000 shall be
available for official reception and representation expenses.
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Real Property Activities
(federal buildings fund)
(limitations on availability of revenue)
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount to be deposited in, and to be used
for the purposes of, the Fund established pursuant to section
210(f) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services
Act of 1949, as amended (40 U.S.C. 592), $247,350,000. The
revenues and collections deposited into the Fund shall be
available for necessary expenses of real property management
and related activities not otherwise provided for, including
operation, maintenance, and protection of federally owned and
leased buildings; rental of buildings in the District of
Columbia; restoration of leased premises; moving governmental
agencies (including space adjustments and telecommunications
relocation expenses) in connection with the assignment,
allocation and transfer of space; contractual services
incident to cleaning or servicing buildings, and moving;
repair and alteration of federally owned buildings including
grounds, approaches and appurtenances; care and safeguarding
of sites; maintenance, preservation, demolition, and
equipment; acquisition of buildings and sites by purchase,
condemnation, or as otherwise authorized by law; acquisition
of options to purchase buildings and sites; conversion and
extension of federally owned buildings; preliminary planning
and design of projects by contract or otherwise; construction
of new buildings (including equipment for such buildings);
and payment of principal, interest, and any other obligations
for public buildings acquired by installment purchase and
purchase contract; in the aggregate amount of $6,557,518,000,
of which: (1) $406,168,000 shall remain available until
expended for construction (including funds for sites and
expenses and associated design and construction services) of
additional projects at the following locations:
New Construction:
California:
San Diego, Border Station, $34,211,000
Georgia:
Atlanta, Tuttle Building Annex, $10,600,000
Maine:
Jackman, Border Station, $7,712,000
Maryland:
Suitland, United States Census Bureau, $146,451,000
Michigan:
Detroit, Ambassador Bridge Border Station, $25,387,000
New York:
Champlain, Border Station, $31,031,000
Texas:
Del Rio, Border Station, $23,966,000
Eagle Pass, Border Station, $31,980,000
Houston, Federal Bureau of Investigation, $58,080,000
McAllen, Border Station, $17,938,000
Washington:
Blaine, Border Station, $9,812,000
Nonprospectus Construction, $9,000,000:
Provided, That each of the foregoing limits of costs on new
construction projects may be exceeded to the extent that
savings are effected in other such projects, but not to
exceed 10 percent of the amounts included in an approved
prospectus, if required, unless advance approval is obtained
from the Committees on Appropriations of a greater amount:
Provided further, That all funds for direct construction
projects shall expire on September 30, 2005, and remain in
the Federal Buildings Fund except for funds for projects as
to which funds for design or other funds have been obligated
in whole or in part prior to such date; (2) $1,010,454,000
shall remain available until expended for repairs and
alterations, which includes associated design and
construction services:
Colorado:
Denver, Byron G. Rogers Federal Building--Courthouse,
$39,436,000
District of Columbia:
320 First Street, $7,485,000
Eisenhower Executive Office Building, $65,757,000
Federal Office Building 8, $134,872,000
Main Interior Building, $15,603,000
Fire & Life Safety, $68,188,000
Georgia:
Atlanta, Richard B. Russell Federal Building, $32,173,000
Illinois:
Chicago, Dirksen Courthouse & Kluczynski Federal Building,
$24,056,000
Springfield, Paul H. Findley Federal Building--Courthouse,
$6,183,000
Massachusetts:
Boston, John W. McCormack Post Office and Courthouse,
$73,037,000
New York:
Brooklyn, Emanuel Celler Courthouse, $65,511,000
North Dakota:
Fargo, Federal Building--Post Office, $5,801,000
Ohio:
Columbus, John W. Bricker Federal Building, $10,707,000
Washington:
Auburn, Building 7, Auburn Federal Building, $18,315,000
Seattle, Henry M. Jackson Federal Building, $6,868,000
Special Emphasis Programs:
Chlorofluorocarbons Program, $5,000,000
Energy Program, $5,000,000
Glass Fragmentation Program, $20,000,000
Design Program, $41,462,000
Basic Repairs and Alterations, $365,000,000:
Provided further, That of the funds provided in this Act for
the repair of the Eisenhower
[[Page H7906]]
Executive Office Building, $30,757,000 is not available for
obligation until 15 days after the Executive Office of the
President submits a report to the Committees on
Appropriations regarding the use of non-Federal funding in
renovation and furnishing efforts for the Eisenhower
Executive Office Building: Provided further, That funds made
available in any previous Act in the Federal Buildings Fund
for Repairs and Alterations shall, for prospectus projects,
be limited to the amount identified for each project, except
each project in any previous Act may be increased by an
amount not to exceed 10 percent unless advance approval is
obtained from the Committees on Appropriations of a greater
amount: Provided further, That additional projects for which
prospectuses have been fully approved may be funded under
this category only if advance approval is obtained from the
Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That the
amounts provided in this or any prior Act for ``Repairs and
Alterations'' may be used to fund costs associated with
implementing security improvements to buildings necessary to
meet the minimum standards for security in accordance with
current law and in compliance with the reprogramming
guidelines of the appropriate Committees of the House and
Senate: Provided further, That the difference between the
funds appropriated and expended on any projects in this or
any prior Act, under the heading ``Repairs and Alterations'',
may be transferred to Basic Repairs and Alterations or used
to fund authorized increases in prospectus projects: Provided
further, That all funds for repairs and alterations
prospectus projects shall expire on September 30, 2005 and
remain in the Federal Buildings Fund except funds for
projects as to which funds for design or other funds have
been obligated in whole or in part prior to such date:
Provided further, That the amount provided in this or any
prior Act for Basic Repairs and Alterations may be used to
pay claims against the Government arising from any projects
under the heading ``Repairs and Alterations'' or used to fund
authorized increases in prospectus projects; (3) $169,745,000
for installment acquisition payments including payments on
purchase contracts which shall remain available until
expended; (4) $3,308,187,000 for rental of space which shall
remain available until expended; and (5) $1,608,708,000 for
building operations which shall remain available until
expended: Provided further, That funds available to the
General Services Administration shall not be available for
expenses of any construction, repair, alteration and
acquisition project for which a prospectus, if required by
the Public Buildings Act of 1959, as amended, has not been
approved, except that necessary funds may be expended for
each project for required expenses for the development of a
proposed prospectus: Provided further, That funds available
in the Federal Buildings Fund may be expended for emergency
repairs when advance approval is obtained from the Committees
on Appropriations: Provided further, That amounts necessary
to provide reimbursable special services to other agencies
under section 210(f)(6) of the Federal Property and
Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended (40 U.S.C.
592(b)(2)) and amounts to provide such reimbursable fencing,
lighting, guard booths, and other facilities on private or
other property not in Government ownership or control as may
be appropriate to enable the United States Secret Service to
perform its protective functions pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3056,
shall be available from such revenues and collections:
Provided further, That revenues and collections and any other
sums accruing to this Fund during fiscal year 2004, excluding
reimbursements under section 210(f)(6) of the Federal
Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C.
592(b)(2)) in excess of $6,557,518,000 shall remain in the
Fund and shall not be available for expenditure except as
authorized in appropriations Acts.
General Activities
governmentwide policy
For expenses authorized by law, not otherwise provided for,
for Government-wide policy and evaluation activities
associated with the management of real and personal property
assets and certain administrative services; Government-wide
policy support responsibilities relating to acquisition,
telecommunications, information technology management, and
related technology activities; and services as authorized by
5 U.S.C. 3109, $56,383,000.
operating expenses
For expenses authorized by law, not otherwise provided for,
for Government-wide activities associated with utilization
and donation of surplus personal property; disposal of real
property; telecommunications, information technology
management, and related technology activities; providing
Internet access to Federal information and services; agency-
wide policy direction and management, and Board of Contract
Appeals; accounting, records management, and other support
services incident to adjudication of Indian Tribal Claims by
the United States Court of Federal Claims; services as
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; and not to exceed $7,500 for
official reception and representation expenses, $79,110,000.
office of inspector general
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General
and services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $39,169,000:
Provided, That not to exceed $15,000 shall be available for
payment for information and detection of fraud against the
Government, including payment for recovery of stolen
Government property: Provided further, That not to exceed
$2,500 shall be available for awards to employees of other
Federal agencies and private citizens in recognition of
efforts and initiatives resulting in enhanced Office of
Inspector General effectiveness.
electronic government fund
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary expenses in support of interagency projects
that enable the Federal Government to expand its ability to
conduct activities electronically, through the development
and implementation of innovative uses of the Internet and
other electronic methods, $1,000,000, to remain available
until expended: Provided, That these funds may be transferred
to Federal agencies to carry out the purposes of the Fund:
Provided further, That this transfer authority shall be in
addition to any other transfer authority provided in this
Act: Provided further, That such transfers may not be made
until 10 days after a proposed spending plan and
justification for each project to be undertaken has been
submitted to the Committees on Appropriations.
allowances and office staff for former presidents
(including transfer of funds)
For carrying out the provisions of the Act of August 25,
1958, as amended (3 U.S.C. 102 note), and Public Law 95-138,
$3,393,000: Provided, That the Administrator of General
Services shall transfer to the Secretary of the Treasury such
sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of such
Acts.
General Provisions--General Services Administration
Sec. 501. The appropriate appropriation or fund available
to the General Services Administration shall be credited with
the cost of operation, protection, maintenance, upkeep,
repair, and improvement, included as part of rentals received
from Government corporations pursuant to law (40 U.S.C. 129).
Sec. 502. Funds available to the General Services
Administration shall be available for the hire of passenger
motor vehicles.
Sec. 503. Funds in the Federal Buildings Fund made
available for fiscal year 2004 for Federal Buildings Fund
activities may be transferred between such activities only to
the extent necessary to meet program requirements: Provided,
That any proposed transfers shall be approved in advance by
the Committees on Appropriations.
Sec. 504. No funds made available by this Act shall be used
to transmit a fiscal year 2005 request for United States
Courthouse construction that: (1) does not meet the design
guide standards for construction as established and approved
by the General Services Administration, the Judicial
Conference of the United States, and the Office of Management
and Budget; and (2) does not reflect the priorities of the
Judicial Conference of the United States as set out in its
approved 5-year construction plan: Provided, That the fiscal
year 2005 request must be accompanied by a standardized
courtroom utilization study of each facility to be
constructed, replaced, or expanded.
Sec. 505. None of the funds provided in this Act may be
used to increase the amount of occupiable square feet,
provide cleaning services, security enhancements, or any
other service usually provided through the Federal Buildings
Fund, to any agency that does not pay the rate per square
foot assessment for space and services as determined by the
General Services Administration in compliance with the Public
Buildings Amendments Act of 1972 (Public Law 92-313).
Sec. 506. Funds provided to other Government agencies by
the Information Technology Fund, General Services
Administration, under section 110 of the Federal Property and
Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 757) and
sections 5124(b) and 5128 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996
(40 U.S.C. 1424(b) and 1428), for performance of pilot
information technology projects which have potential for
Government-wide benefits and savings, may be repaid to this
Fund from any savings actually incurred by these projects or
other funding, to the extent feasible.
Sec. 507. From funds made available under the heading
``Federal Buildings Fund, Limitations on Availability of
Revenue'', claims against the Government of less than
$250,000 arising from direct construction projects and
acquisition of buildings may be liquidated from savings
effected in other construction projects with prior
notification to the Committees on Appropriations.
Sec. 508. None of the funds in this Act may be used by the
General Services Administration to develop or implement a
mandatory system without exceptions that requires agencies
government-wide to use a specific electronic travel solution
or the eTravel Service: Provided, That this section shall
also apply to the Department of Transportation in any
development of electronic travel solutions for its modal
administrations.
Sec. 509. (a) The Administrator of General Services shall
carry out the authority of the Election Assistance Commission
to make election assistance payments under subtitle D of
title II of the Help America Vote Act of 2002, including the
authority under such subtitle to receive statements and
applications from entities seeking such payments and reports
from entities receiving such payments.
(b) The authority of the Administrator of General Services
under subsection (a) shall apply with respect to amounts
appropriated
[[Page H7907]]
for fiscal year 2004 and amounts appropriated for fiscal year
2003 which remain unobligated and unexpended at the end of
fiscal year 2003, except that this authority shall expire
upon the earlier of--
(1) the expiration of the 3-month period which begins on
the date on which all members of the Election Assistance
Commission are appointed; or
(2) June 30, 2004.
(c) Upon the appointment of all members of the Election
Assistance Commission, the Administrator of General Services
shall transmit to the Commission all statements,
applications, and reports received by the Administrator in
carrying out this section.
Sec. 510. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used by the General Services Administration to establish a
quick response team processing center on East Brainerd Road
in Chattanooga, Tennessee.
MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD
Salaries and Expenses
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Merit
Systems Protection Board pursuant to Reorganization Plan
Numbered 2 of 1978 and the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978,
including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, rental of
conference rooms in the District of Columbia and elsewhere,
hire of passenger motor vehicles, and direct procurement of
survey printing, $32,877,000, together with not to exceed
$2,626,000 for administrative expenses to adjudicate
retirement appeals to be transferred from the Civil Service
Retirement and Disability Fund in amounts determined by the
Merit Systems Protection Board.
MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY FOUNDATION
Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental
Policy Trust Fund
For payment to the Morris K. Udall Scholarship and
Excellence in National Environmental Policy Trust Fund,
pursuant to the Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in
National Environmental and Native American Public Policy Act
of 1992 (20 U.S.C. 5601 et seq.), $1,300,000, to remain
available until expended of which $100,000 shall be used to
conduct financial audits pursuant to the Accountability of
Tax Dollars Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-289) notwithstanding
sections 8 and 9 of Public Law 102-259: Provided, That up to
70 percent of such funds may be transferred by the Morris K.
Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental
Policy Foundation for the necessary expenses of the Native
Nations Institute.
Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund
For payment to the Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund to
carry out activities authorized in the Environmental Policy
and Conflict Resolution Act of 1998, $1,300,000, to remain
available until expended.
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION
Operating Expenses
For necessary expenses in connection with the
administration of the National Archives and Records
Administration (including the Information Security Oversight
Office) and archived Federal records and related activities,
as provided by law, and for expenses necessary for the review
and declassification of documents, and for the hire of
passenger motor vehicles, $255,191,000: Provided, That the
Archivist of the United States is authorized to use any
excess funds available from the amount borrowed for
construction of the National Archives facility, for expenses
necessary to provide adequate storage for holdings: Provided
further, That, of the funds provided in this paragraph,
$600,000 shall be for the preservation of the records of the
Freedmen's Bureau.
Electronic Records Archive
For necessary expenses in connection with the development
of an electronic records archive, to include all direct
project costs associated with research, analysis, design,
development, and program management, $35,914,000, of which
$22,000,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2006.
Repairs and Restoration
For the repair, alteration, and improvement of archives
facilities, and to provide adequate storage for holdings,
$6,458,000, to remain available until expended, of which
$500,000 is for the Military Personnel Records Center
requirements study.
National Historical Publications and Records Commission
grants program
For necessary expenses for allocations and grants for
historical publications and records as authorized by 44
U.S.C. 2504, as amended, $10,000,000, to remain available
until expended.
OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Office
of Government Ethics pursuant to the Ethics in Government Act
of 1978, as amended and the Ethics Reform Act of 1989,
including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, rental of
conference rooms in the District of Columbia and elsewhere,
hire of passenger motor vehicles, and not to exceed $1,500
for official reception and representation expenses,
$10,738,000.
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Salaries and Expenses
(including transfer of trust funds)
For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Office
of Personnel Management pursuant to Reorganization Plan
Numbered 2 of 1978 and the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978,
including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; medical
examinations performed for veterans by private physicians on
a fee basis; rental of conference rooms in the District of
Columbia and elsewhere; hire of passenger motor vehicles; not
to exceed $2,500 for official reception and representation
expenses; advances for reimbursements to applicable funds of
the Office of Personnel Management and the Federal Bureau of
Investigation for expenses incurred under Executive Order No.
10422 of January 9, 1953, as amended; and payment of per diem
and/or subsistence allowances to employees where Voting
Rights Act activities require an employee to remain overnight
at his or her post of duty, $119,498,000, of which $2,000,000
shall remain available until expended for the cost of the
enterprise human resources integration project, $2,500,000
shall remain available until expended for the cost of leading
the government-wide initiative to modernize federal payroll
systems and service delivery, and $2,500,000 shall remain
available through September 30, 2005 to coordinate and
conduct program evaluation and performance measurement; and
in addition $126,854,000 for administrative expenses, to be
transferred from the appropriate trust funds of the Office of
Personnel Management without regard to other statutes,
including direct procurement of printed materials, for the
retirement and insurance programs, of which $27,640,000 shall
remain available until expended for the cost of automating
the retirement recordkeeping systems: Provided, That the
provisions of this appropriation shall not affect the
authority to use applicable trust funds as provided by
sections 8348(a)(1)(B), 8909(g), and 9004(f)(1)(A) and (2)(A)
of title 5, United States Code: Provided further, That no
part of this appropriation shall be available for salaries
and expenses of the Legal Examining Unit of the Office of
Personnel Management established pursuant to Executive Order
No. 9358 of July 1, 1943, or any successor unit of like
purpose: Provided further, That the President's Commission on
White House Fellows, established by Executive Order No. 11183
of October 3, 1964, may, during fiscal year 2004, accept
donations of money, property, and personal services in
connection with the development of a publicity brochure to
provide information about the White House Fellows, except
that no such donations shall be accepted for travel or
reimbursement of travel expenses, or for the salaries of
employees of such Commission.
Office of Inspector General
Salaries and Expenses
(including transfer of trust funds)
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General
in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act,
as amended, including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C.
3109, hire of passenger motor vehicles, $1,498,000, and in
addition, not to exceed $14,427,000 for administrative
expenses to audit, investigate, and provide other oversight
of the Office of Personnel Management's retirement and
insurance programs, to be transferred from the appropriate
trust funds of the Office of Personnel Management, as
determined by the Inspector General: Provided, That the
Inspector General is authorized to rent conference rooms in
the District of Columbia and elsewhere.
Government Payment for Annuitants, Employees Health Benefits
For payment of Government contributions with respect to
retired employees, as authorized by chapter 89 of title 5,
United States Code, and the Retired Federal Employees Health
Benefits Act (74 Stat. 849), as amended, such sums as may be
necessary.
Government Payment for Annuitants, Employee Life Insurance
For payment of Government contributions with respect to
employees retiring after December 31, 1989, as required by
chapter 87 of title 5, United States Code, such sums as may
be necessary.
Payment to Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund
For financing the unfunded liability of new and increased
annuity benefits becoming effective on or after October 20,
1969, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 8348, and annuities under
special Acts to be credited to the Civil Service Retirement
and Disability Fund, such sums as may be necessary: Provided,
That annuities authorized by the Act of May 29, 1944, as
amended, and the Act of August 19, 1950, as amended (33
U.S.C. 771-775), may hereafter be paid out of the Civil
Service Retirement and Disability Fund.
Human Capital Performance Fund
(including transfer of funds)
For a human capital performance fund, $2,500,000: Provided,
That such amount shall not be available for obligation or
transfer until enactment of legislation that establishes a
human capital performance fund within the Office of Personnel
Management: Provided further, That such amounts as determined
by the Director of the Office of Personnel Management may be
transferred to federal agencies to carry out the purposes of
this fund as authorized: Provided further, That no funds
shall be available for obligation or transfer to any federal
agency until the Director has notified the relevant
subcommittees of jurisdiction of the Committees on
Appropriations of the approval of a
[[Page H7908]]
performance pay plan for that agency, and the prior approval
of such subcommittees has been attained.
OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Office
of Special Counsel pursuant to Reorganization Plan Numbered 2
of 1978, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-
454), as amended, the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989
(Public Law 101-12), as amended, Public Law 103-424, and the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Act of 1994
(Public Law 103-353), including services as authorized by 5
U.S.C. 3109, payment of fees and expenses for witnesses,
rental of conference rooms in the District of Columbia and
elsewhere, and hire of passenger motor vehicles; $13,504,000.
UNITED STATES TAX COURT
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses, including contract reporting and
other services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $40,187,000:
Provided, That travel expenses of the judges shall be paid
upon the written certificate of the judge.
WHITE HOUSE COMMISSION ON THE NATIONAL MOMENT OF REMEMBRANCE
For necessary expenses of the White House Commission on the
National Moment of Remembrance, $250,000.
TITLE VI--GENERAL PROVISIONS
This Act
(including transfers of funds)
Sec. 601. During the current fiscal year applicable
appropriations to the Department of Transportation shall be
available for maintenance and operation of aircraft; hire of
passenger motor vehicles and aircraft; purchase of liability
insurance for motor vehicles operating in foreign countries
on official department business; and uniforms, or allowances
therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-5902).
Sec. 602. Such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year
2004 pay raises for programs funded in this Act shall be
absorbed within the levels appropriated in this Act or
previous appropriations Acts.
Sec. 603. Appropriations contained in this Act for the
Department of Transportation shall be available for services
as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for individuals
not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the rate for an
Executive Level IV.
Sec. 604. None of the funds in this Act shall be available
for salaries and expenses of more than 110 political and
Presidential appointees in the Department of Transportation:
Provided, That none of the personnel covered by this
provision may be assigned on temporary detail outside the
Department of Transportation.
Sec. 605. None of the funds in this Act shall be used for
the planning or execution of any program to pay the expenses
of, or otherwise compensate, non-Federal parties intervening
in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act.
Sec. 606. None of the funds appropriated in this Act shall
remain available for obligation beyond the current fiscal
year, nor may any be transferred to other appropriations,
unless expressly so provided herein.
Sec. 607. The expenditure of any appropriation under this
Act for any consulting service through procurement contract
pursuant to section 3109 of title 5, United States Code,
shall be limited to those contracts where such expenditures
are a matter of public record and available for public
inspection, except where otherwise provided under existing
law, or under existing Executive order issued pursuant to
existing law.
Sec. 608. None of the funds in this Act shall be used to
implement section 404 of title 23, United States Code.
Sec. 609. (a) No recipient of funds made available in this
Act shall disseminate personal information (as defined in 18
U.S.C. 2725(3)) obtained by a State department of motor
vehicles in connection with a motor vehicle record as defined
in 18 U.S.C. 2725(1), except as provided in 18 U.S.C. 2721
for a use permitted under 18 U.S.C. 2721.
(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), no department or agency
shall withhold funds provided in this Act for any grantee if
a State is in noncompliance with this provision.
Sec. 610. Funds received by the Federal Highway
Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and Federal
Railroad Administration from States, counties,
municipalities, other public authorities, and private sources
for expenses incurred for training may be credited
respectively to the Federal Highway Administration's
``Federal-Aid Highways'' account, the Federal Transit
Administration's ``Transit Planning and Research'' account,
and to the Federal Railroad Administration's ``Safety and
Operations'' account, except for State rail safety inspectors
participating in training pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 20105.
Sec. 611. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, rule
or regulation, the Secretary of Transportation is authorized
to allow the issuer of any preferred stock heretofore sold to
the Department to redeem or repurchase such stock upon the
payment to the Department of an amount determined by the
Secretary.
Sec. 612. None of the funds in title I of this Act may be
used to make a grant unless the Secretary of Transportation
notifies the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations
not less than 3 full business days before any discretionary
grant award, letter of intent, or full funding grant
agreement totaling $1,000,000 or more is announced by the
department or its modal administrations from: (1) any
discretionary grant program of the Federal Highway
Administration other than the emergency relief program; (2)
the airport improvement program of the Federal Aviation
Administration; or (3) any program of the Federal Transit
Administration other than the formula grants and fixed
guideway modernization programs: Provided, That no
notification shall involve funds that are not available for
obligation.
Sec. 613. For the purpose of any applicable law, for fiscal
year 2004, the city of Norman, Oklahoma, shall be considered
to be part of the Oklahoma City Transportation Management
Area.
Sec. 614. None of the funds in this Act may be obligated
for the Office of the Secretary of Transportation to approve
assessments or reimbursable agreements pertaining to funds
appropriated to the modal administrations in this Act, except
for activities underway on the date of enactment of this Act,
unless such assessments or agreements have completed the
normal reprogramming process for Congressional notification.
Sec. 615. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality
of the United States Government, except pursuant to a
transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act
or any other appropriations Act.
Sec. 616. Rebates, refunds, incentive payments, minor fees
and other funds received by the Department of Transportation
from travel management centers, charge card programs, the
subleasing of building space, and miscellaneous sources are
to be credited to appropriations of the Department of
Transportation and allocated to elements of the Department of
Transportation using fair and equitable criteria and such
funds shall be available until expended.
Sec. 617. Amounts made available in this or any other Act
that the Secretary determines represent improper payments by
the Department of Transportation to a third party contractor
under a financial assistance award, which are recovered
pursuant to law, shall be available--
(1) to reimburse the actual expenses incurred by the
Department of Transportation in recovering improper payments;
and
(2) to pay contractors for services provided in recovering
improper payments: Provided, That amounts in excess of that
required for paragraphs (1) and (2)--
(A) shall be credited to and merged with the appropriation
from which the improper payments were made, and shall be
available for the purposes and period for which such
appropriations are available; or
(B) if no such appropriation remains available, shall be
deposited in the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts: Provided
further, That prior to the transfer of any such recovery to
an appropriations account, the Secretary shall notify the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of the amount
and reasons for such transfer: Provided further, That for
purposes of this section, the term ``improper payments,'' has
the same meaning as that provided in section 2(d)(2) of
Public Law 107-300.
Sec. 618. The Secretary of Transportation is authorized to
transfer the unexpended balances available for the bonding
assistance program from ``Office of the Secretary, Salaries
and expenses'' to ``Minority Business Outreach''.
Sec. 619. None of the funds made available by this Act
shall be available for any activity or for paying the salary
of any Government employee where funding an activity or
paying a salary to a Government employee would result in a
decision, determination, rule, regulation, or policy that
would prohibit the enforcement of section 307 of the Tariff
Act of 1930.
Sec. 620. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall be available to pay the salary for any person
filling a position, other than a temporary position, formerly
held by an employee who has left to enter the Armed Forces of
the United States and has satisfactorily completed his period
of active military or naval service, and has within 90 days
after his release from such service or from hospitalization
continuing after discharge for a period of not more than 1
year, made application for restoration to his former position
and has been certified by the Office of Personnel Management
as still qualified to perform the duties of his former
position and has not been restored thereto.
Sec. 621. No funds appropriated pursuant to this Act may be
expended by an entity unless the entity agrees that in
expending the assistance the entity will comply with sections
2 through 4 of the Act of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c,
popularly known as the ``Buy American Act'').
Sec. 622. Except as otherwise specifically provided by law,
not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances remaining
available at the end of fiscal year 2004 from appropriations
made available for salaries and expenses for fiscal year 2004
in this Act, shall remain available through September 30,
2005, for each such account for the purposes authorized:
Provided, That a request shall be submitted to the Committees
on Appropriations for approval prior to the expenditure of
such funds: Provided further, That these requests shall be
made in compliance with reprogramming guidelines.
Sec. 623. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used by the Executive Office of the President to request
from the Federal Bureau of Investigation any official
background investigation report on any individual, except
when--
(1) such individual has given his or her express written
consent for such request not
[[Page H7909]]
more than 6 months prior to the date of such request and
during the same presidential administration; or
(2) such request is required due to extraordinary
circumstances involving national security.
Sec. 624. For the purpose of resolving litigation and
implementing any settlement agreements regarding the
nonforeign area cost-of-living allowance program, the Office
of Personnel Management may accept and utilize (without
regard to any restriction on unanticipated travel expenses
imposed in an Appropriations Act) funds made available to the
Office pursuant to court approval.
Sec. 625. No funds appropriated or otherwise made available
under this Act shall be made available to any person or
entity that has been convicted of violating the Buy American
Act (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c).
Sec. 626. No funds appropriated by this Act shall be
available to pay for an abortion, or the administrative
expenses in connection with any health plan under the Federal
employees health benefits program which provides any benefits
or coverage for abortions.
Sec. 627. The provision of section 626 shall not apply
where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus
were carried to term, or the pregnancy is the result of an
act of rape or incest.
Sec. 628. For the purpose of assisting State-supported
intercity rail service, in order to demonstrate whether
competition will provide higher quality rail passenger
service at reasonable prices, the Secretary of
Transportation, working with affected States, shall develop
and implement a procedure for fair competitive bidding by
Amtrak and non-Amtrak operators for State-supported routes:
Provided, That in the event a State desires to select or
selects a non-Amtrak operator for the route, the State may
make an agreement with Amtrak to use facilities and equipment
of, or have services provided by, Amtrak under terms agreed
to by the State and Amtrak to enable the non-Amtrak operator
to provide the State-supported service: Provided further,
That if the parties cannot agree on terms, the Secretary
shall, as a condition of receipt of Federal grant funds,
order that the facilities and equipment be made available and
the services be provided by Amtrak under reasonable terms and
compensation: Provided further, That when prescribing
reasonable compensation to Amtrak, the Secretary shall
consider quality of service as a major factor when
determining whether, and the extent to which, the amount of
compensation shall be greater than the incremental costs of
using the facilities and providing the services: Provided
further, That the Secretary may reprogram up to $5,000,000
from the Amtrak operating grant funds for costs associated
with the implementation of the fair bid procedure and
demonstration of competition under this section.
Sec. 629. None of the funds provided in this Act, provided
by previous appropriations Acts to the agencies or entities
funded in this Act that remain available for obligation or
expenditure in fiscal year 2004, or provided from any
accounts in the Treasury derived by the collection of fees
and available to the agencies funded by this Act, shall be
available for obligation or expenditure through a
reprogramming of funds that--
(1) creates a new program;
(2) eliminates a program, project, or activity;
(3) increases funds for any program, project, or activity
for which funds have been denied or restricted by the
Congress;
(4) proposes to use funds directed for a specific activity
by either the House or Senate Committees on Appropriations
for a different purpose;
(5) augments existing programs, projects, or activities in
excess of $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; or
(6) reduces existing programs, projects, or activities by
10 percent--
unless the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations are
notified at least 15 days in advance of such reprogramming.
Sec. 630. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to require a State or local government to post a
traffic control device or variable message sign, or any other
type of traffic warning sign, in a language other than
English, except with respect to the names of cities, streets,
places, events, or signs related to an international border.
Sec. 631. Exemption From Limitations on Procurement of
Foreign Information Technology That Is a Commercial Item.--
(a) Exemption.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
in order to promote Government access to commercial
information technology, the restriction on purchasing
nondomestic articles, materials, and supplies set forth in
the Buy American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a et seq.), and the
prohibition on acquiring foreign products under section
302(a)(1) of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Public Law 96-
39; 19 U.S.C. 2512(a)(1)), shall not apply to the acquisition
by the Federal Government of information technology (as
defined in section 11101 of title 40, United States Code,
that is a commercial item (as defined in section 4(12) of the
Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 403(12)).
(b) Definition.--Section 11101(6) of title 40, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by inserting after ``storage,''
the following: ``analysis, evaluation,''; and
(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``ancillary
equipment,'' and inserting ``ancillary equipment (including
imaging peripherals, input, output, and storage devices
necessary for security and surveillance), peripheral
equipment designed to be controlled by the central processing
unit of a computer,''.
Sec. 632. It is the sense of the House of Representatives
that empowerment zones within cities should have the
necessary flexibility to expand to include relevant
communities so that empowerment zone benefits are equitably
distributed.
Sec. 633. It is the sense of the House of Representatives
that all census tracts contained in an empowerment zone,
either fully or partially, should be equitably accorded the
same benefits.
Sec. 634. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to finalize, implement, administer, or enforce--
(1) the proposed rule relating to the determination that
real estate brokerage is an activity that is financial in
nature or incidental to a financial activity published in the
Federal Register on January 3, 2001 (66 Fed. Reg. 307 et
seq.); or
(2) the revision proposed in such rule to section 1501.2 of
title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
Sec. 635. It is the sense of Congress that, after proper
documentation, justification, and review, the Department of
Transportation should consider programs to reimburse general
aviation ground support services at Ronald Reagan Washington
National Airport, and airports located within fifteen miles
of Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, for their
financial losses due to Government actions after the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Sec. 636. It is the sense of the House of Representatives
that public private partnerships (PPPs) could help eliminate
some of the cost drivers behind complex, capital-intensive
highway and transit projects. The House of Representatives
encourages the Secretary of Transportation to apply available
funds to select projects that are in the development phase,
eligible under title 23 and title 49, United States Code,
except 23 U.S.C. 133(b)(8), and that employ a PPP strategy.
TITLE VII--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Departments, Agencies, and Corporations
Sec. 701. Funds appropriated in this or any other Act may
be used to pay travel to the United States for the immediate
family of employees serving abroad in cases of death or life
threatening illness of said employee.
Sec. 702. No department, agency, or instrumentality of the
United States receiving appropriated funds under this or any
other Act for fiscal year 2004 shall obligate or expend any
such funds, unless such department, agency, or
instrumentality has in place, and will continue to administer
in good faith, a written policy designed to ensure that all
of its workplaces are free from the illegal use, possession,
or distribution of controlled substances (as defined in the
Controlled Substances Act) by the officers and employees of
such department, agency, or instrumentality.
Sec. 703. Unless otherwise specifically provided, the
maximum amount allowable during the current fiscal year in
accordance with section 16 of the Act of August 2, 1946 (60
Stat. 810), for the purchase of any passenger motor vehicle
(exclusive of buses, ambulances, law enforcement, and
undercover surveillance vehicles), is hereby fixed at $8,100
except station wagons for which the maximum shall be $9,100:
Provided, That these limits may be exceeded by not to exceed
$3,700 for police-type vehicles, and by not to exceed $4,000
for special heavy-duty vehicles: Provided further, That the
limits set forth in this section may not be exceeded by more
than 5 percent for electric or hybrid vehicles purchased for
demonstration under the provisions of the Electric and Hybrid
Vehicle Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 1976:
Provided further, That the limits set forth in this section
may be exceeded by the incremental cost of clean alternative
fuels vehicles acquired pursuant to Public Law 101-549 over
the cost of comparable conventionally fueled vehicles.
Sec. 704. Appropriations of the executive departments and
independent establishments for the current fiscal year
available for expenses of travel, or for the expenses of the
activity concerned, are hereby made available for quarters
allowances and cost-of-living allowances, in accordance with
5 U.S.C. 5922-5924.
Sec. 705. Unless otherwise specified during the current
fiscal year, no part of any appropriation contained in this
or any other Act shall be used to pay the compensation of any
officer or employee of the Government of the United States
(including any agency the majority of the stock of which is
owned by the Government of the United States) whose post of
duty is in the continental United States unless such person:
(1) is a citizen of the United States; (2) is a person in the
service of the United States on the date of the enactment of
this Act who, being eligible for citizenship, has filed a
declaration of intention to become a citizen of the United
States prior to such date and is actually residing in the
United States; (3) is a person who owes allegiance to the
United States; (4) is an alien from Cuba, Poland, South
Vietnam, the countries of the former Soviet Union, or the
Baltic countries lawfully admitted to the United States for
permanent residence; (5) is a South Vietnamese, Cambodian, or
Laotian refugee paroled in the United States after January 1,
1975; or (6) is a national of the People's Republic of China
who qualifies for adjustment of status pursuant to the
Chinese
[[Page H7910]]
Student Protection Act of 1992: Provided, That for the
purpose of this section, an affidavit signed by any such
person shall be considered prima facie evidence that the
requirements of this section with respect to his or her
status have been complied with: Provided further, That any
person making a false affidavit shall be guilty of a felony,
and, upon conviction, shall be fined no more than $4,000 or
imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both: Provided
further, That the above penal clause shall be in addition to,
and not in substitution for, any other provisions of existing
law: Provided further, That any payment made to any officer
or employee contrary to the provisions of this section shall
be recoverable in action by the Federal Government. This
section shall not apply to citizens of Ireland, Israel, or
the Republic of the Philippines, or to nationals of those
countries allied with the United States in a current defense
effort, or to international broadcasters employed by the
United States Information Agency, or to temporary employment
of translators, or to temporary employment in the field
service (not to exceed 60 days) as a result of emergencies.
Sec. 706. Appropriations available to any department or
agency during the current fiscal year for necessary expenses,
including maintenance or operating expenses, shall also be
available for payment to the General Services Administration
for charges for space and services and those expenses of
renovation and alteration of buildings and facilities which
constitute public improvements performed in accordance with
the Public Buildings Act of 1959 (73 Stat. 749), the Public
Buildings Amendments of 1972 (87 Stat. 216), or other
applicable law.
Sec. 707. In addition to funds provided in this or any
other Act, all Federal agencies are authorized to receive and
use funds resulting from the sale of materials, including
Federal records disposed of pursuant to a records schedule
recovered through recycling or waste prevention programs.
Such funds shall be available until expended for the
following purposes:
(1) Acquisition, waste reduction and prevention, and
recycling programs as described in Executive Order No. 13101
(September 14, 1998), including any such programs adopted
prior to the effective date of the Executive order.
(2) Other Federal agency environmental management programs,
including, but not limited to, the development and
implementation of hazardous waste management and pollution
prevention programs.
(3) Other employee programs as authorized by law or as
deemed appropriate by the head of the Federal agency.
Sec. 708. Funds made available by this or any other Act for
administrative expenses in the current fiscal year of the
corporations and agencies subject to chapter 91 of title 31,
United States Code, shall be available, in addition to
objects for which such funds are otherwise available, for
rent in the District of Columbia; services in accordance with
5 U.S.C. 3109; and the objects specified under this head, all
the provisions of which shall be applicable to the
expenditure of such funds unless otherwise specified in the
Act by which they are made available: Provided, That in the
event any functions budgeted as administrative expenses are
subsequently transferred to or paid from other funds, the
limitations on administrative expenses shall be
correspondingly reduced.
Sec. 709. No part of any appropriation for the current
fiscal year contained in this or any other Act shall be paid
to any person for the filling of any position for which he or
she has been nominated after the Senate has voted not to
approve the nomination of said person.
Sec. 710. No part of any appropriation contained in this or
any other Act shall be available for interagency financing of
boards (except Federal Executive Boards), commissions,
councils, committees, or similar groups (whether or not they
are interagency entities) which do not have a prior and
specific statutory approval to receive financial support from
more than one agency or instrumentality.
Sec. 711. Funds made available by this or any other Act to
the Postal Service Fund (39 U.S.C. 2003) shall be available
for employment of guards for all buildings and areas owned or
occupied by the Postal Service and under the charge and
control of the Postal Service, and such guards shall have,
with respect to such property, the powers of special
policemen provided by the first section of the Act of June 1,
1948, as amended (62 Stat. 281; 40 U.S.C. 318), and, as to
property owned or occupied by the Postal Service, the
Postmaster General may take the same actions as the
Administrator of General Services may take under the
provisions of sections 2 and 3 of the Act of June 1, 1948, as
amended (62 Stat. 281; 40 U.S.C. 318a and 318b), attaching
thereto penal consequences under the authority and within the
limits provided in section 4 of the Act of June 1, 1948, as
amended (62 Stat. 281; 40 U.S.C. 318c).
Sec. 712. None of the funds made available pursuant to the
provisions of this Act shall be used to implement,
administer, or enforce any regulation which has been
disapproved pursuant to a resolution of disapproval duly
adopted in accordance with the applicable law of the United
States.
Sec. 713. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
and except as otherwise provided in this section, no part of
any of the funds appropriated for fiscal year 2004, by this
or any other Act, may be used to pay any prevailing rate
employee described in section 5342(a)(2)(A) of title 5,
United States Code--
(1) during the period from the date of expiration of the
limitation imposed by the comparable section for the previous
fiscal years until the normal effective date of the
applicable wage survey adjustment that is to take effect in
fiscal year 2004, in an amount that exceeds the rate payable
for the applicable grade and step of the applicable wage
schedule in accordance with such section; and
(2) during the period consisting of the remainder of fiscal
year 2004, in an amount that exceeds, as a result of a wage
survey adjustment, the rate payable under paragraph (1) by
more than the sum of--
(A) the percentage adjustment taking effect in fiscal year
2004 under section 5303 of title 5, United States Code, in
the rates of pay under the General Schedule; and
(B) the difference between the overall average percentage
of the locality-based comparability payments taking effect in
fiscal year 2004 under section 5304 of such title (whether by
adjustment or otherwise), and the overall average percentage
of such payments which was effective in the previous fiscal
year under such section.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
prevailing rate employee described in subparagraph (B) or (C)
of section 5342(a)(2) of title 5, United States Code, and no
employee covered by section 5348 of such title, may be paid
during the periods for which subsection (a) is in effect at a
rate that exceeds the rates that would be payable under
subsection (a) were subsection (a) applicable to such
employee.
(c) For the purposes of this section, the rates payable to
an employee who is covered by this section and who is paid
from a schedule not in existence on September 30, 2003, shall
be determined under regulations prescribed by the Office of
Personnel Management.
(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, rates of
premium pay for employees subject to this section may not be
changed from the rates in effect on September 30, 2003,
except to the extent determined by the Office of Personnel
Management to be consistent with the purpose of this section.
(e) This section shall apply with respect to pay for
service performed after September 30, 2003.
(f) For the purpose of administering any provision of law
(including any rule or regulation that provides premium pay,
retirement, life insurance, or any other employee benefit)
that requires any deduction or contribution, or that imposes
any requirement or limitation on the basis of a rate of
salary or basic pay, the rate of salary or basic pay payable
after the application of this section shall be treated as the
rate of salary or basic pay.
(g) Nothing in this section shall be considered to permit
or require the payment to any employee covered by this
section at a rate in excess of the rate that would be payable
were this section not in effect.
(h) The Office of Personnel Management may provide for
exceptions to the limitations imposed by this section if the
Office determines that such exceptions are necessary to
ensure the recruitment or retention of qualified employees.
Sec. 714. During the period in which the head of any
department or agency, or any other officer or civilian
employee of the Government appointed by the President of the
United States, holds office, no funds may be obligated or
expended in excess of $5,000 to furnish or redecorate the
office of such department head, agency head, officer, or
employee, or to purchase furniture or make improvements for
any such office, unless advance notice of such furnishing or
redecoration is expressly approved by the Committees on
Appropriations. For the purposes of this section, the term
``office'' shall include the entire suite of offices assigned
to the individual, as well as any other space used primarily
by the individual or the use of which is directly controlled
by the individual.
Sec. 715. Notwithstanding section 1346 of title 31, United
States Code, or section 710 of this Act, funds made available
for the current fiscal year by this or any other Act shall be
available for the interagency funding of national security
and emergency preparedness telecommunications initiatives
which benefit multiple Federal departments, agencies, or
entities, as provided by Executive Order No. 12472 (April 3,
1984).
Sec. 716. (a) None of the funds appropriated by this or any
other Act may be obligated or expended by any Federal
department, agency, or other instrumentality for the salaries
or expenses of any employee appointed to a position of a
confidential or policy-determining character excepted from
the competitive service pursuant to section 3302 of title 5,
United States Code, without a certification to the Office of
Personnel Management from the head of the Federal department,
agency, or other instrumentality employing the Schedule C
appointee that the Schedule C position was not created solely
or primarily in order to detail the employee to the White
House.
(b) The provisions of this section shall not apply to
Federal employees or members of the armed services detailed
to or from--
(1) the Central Intelligence Agency;
(2) the National Security Agency;
(3) the Defense Intelligence Agency;
(4) the offices within the Department of Defense for the
collection of specialized national foreign intelligence
through reconnaissance programs;
(5) the Bureau of Intelligence and Research of the
Department of State;
[[Page H7911]]
(6) any agency, office, or unit of the Army, Navy, Air
Force, and Marine Corps, the Department of Homeland Security,
the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement
Administration of the Department of Justice, the Department
of Transportation, the Department of the Treasury, and the
Department of Energy performing intelligence functions; and
(7) the Director of Central Intelligence.
Sec. 717. No department, agency, or instrumentality of the
United States receiving appropriated funds under this or any
other Act for the current fiscal year shall obligate or
expend any such funds, unless such department, agency, or
instrumentality has in place, and will continue to administer
in good faith, a written policy designed to ensure that all
of its workplaces are free from discrimination and sexual
harassment and that all of its workplaces are not in
violation of title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
amended, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967,
and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
Sec. 718. No part of any appropriation contained in this or
any other Act shall be available for the payment of the
salary of any officer or employee of the Federal Government,
who--
(1) prohibits or prevents, or attempts or threatens to
prohibit or prevent, any other officer or employee of the
Federal Government from having any direct oral or written
communication or contact with any Member, committee, or
subcommittee of the Congress in connection with any matter
pertaining to the employment of such other officer or
employee or pertaining to the department or agency of such
other officer or employee in any way, irrespective of whether
such communication or contact is at the initiative of such
other officer or employee or in response to the request or
inquiry of such Member, committee, or subcommittee; or
(2) removes, suspends from duty without pay, demotes,
reduces in rank, seniority, status, pay, or performance of
efficiency rating, denies promotion to, relocates, reassigns,
transfers, disciplines, or discriminates in regard to any
employment right, entitlement, or benefit, or any term or
condition of employment of, any other officer or employee of
the Federal Government, or attempts or threatens to commit
any of the foregoing actions with respect to such other
officer or employee, by reason of any communication or
contact of such other officer or employee with any Member,
committee, or subcommittee of the Congress as described in
paragraph (1).
Sec. 719. (a) None of the funds made available in this or
any other Act may be obligated or expended for any employee
training that--
(1) does not meet identified needs for knowledge, skills,
and abilities bearing directly upon the performance of
official duties;
(2) contains elements likely to induce high levels of
emotional response or psychological stress in some
participants;
(3) does not require prior employee notification of the
content and methods to be used in the training and written
end of course evaluation;
(4) contains any methods or content associated with
religious or quasi-religious belief systems or ``new age''
belief systems as defined in Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission Notice N-915.022, dated September 2, 1988; or
(5) is offensive to, or designed to change, participants'
personal values or lifestyle outside the workplace.
(b) Nothing in this section shall prohibit, restrict, or
otherwise preclude an agency from conducting training bearing
directly upon the performance of official duties.
Sec. 720. No funds appropriated in this or any other Act
may be used to implement or enforce the agreements in
Standard Forms 312 and 4414 of the Government or any other
nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement if such policy,
form, or agreement does not contain the following provisions:
``These restrictions are consistent with and do not
supersede, conflict with, or otherwise alter the employee
obligations, rights, or liabilities created by Executive
Order No. 12958; section 7211 of title 5, United States Code
(governing disclosures to Congress); section 1034 of title
10, United States Code, as amended by the Military
Whistleblower Protection Act (governing disclosure to
Congress by members of the military); section 2302(b)(8) of
title 5, United States Code, as amended by the Whistleblower
Protection Act (governing disclosures of illegality, waste,
fraud, abuse or public health or safety threats); the
Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (50 U.S.C. 421
et seq.) (governing disclosures that could expose
confidential Government agents); and the statutes which
protect against disclosure that may compromise the national
security, including sections 641, 793, 794, 798, and 952 of
title 18, United States Code, and section 4(b) of the
Subversive Activities Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 783(b)). The
definitions, requirements, obligations, rights, sanctions,
and liabilities created by said Executive order and listed
statutes are incorporated into this agreement and are
controlling.'': Provided, That notwithstanding the preceding
paragraph, a nondisclosure policy form or agreement that is
to be executed by a person connected with the conduct of an
intelligence or intelligence-related activity, other than an
employee or officer of the United States Government, may
contain provisions appropriate to the particular activity for
which such document is to be used. Such form or agreement
shall, at a minimum, require that the person will not
disclose any classified information received in the course of
such activity unless specifically authorized to do so by the
United States Government. Such nondisclosure forms shall also
make it clear that they do not bar disclosures to Congress or
to an authorized official of an executive agency or the
Department of Justice that are essential to reporting a
substantial violation of law.
Sec. 721. No part of any funds appropriated in this or any
other Act shall be used by an agency of the executive branch,
other than for normal and recognized executive-legislative
relationships, for publicity or propaganda purposes, and for
the preparation, distribution or use of any kit, pamphlet,
booklet, publication, radio, television or film presentation
designed to support or defeat legislation pending before the
Congress, except in presentation to the Congress itself.
Sec. 722. None of the funds appropriated by this or any
other Act may be used by an agency to provide a Federal
employee's home address to any labor organization except when
the employee has authorized such disclosure or when such
disclosure has been ordered by a court of competent
jurisdiction.
Sec. 723. None of the funds made available in this Act or
any other Act may be used to provide any non-public
information such as mailing or telephone lists to any person
or any organization outside of the Federal Government without
the approval of the Committees on Appropriations.
Sec. 724. No part of any appropriation contained in this or
any other Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda
purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized
by the Congress.
Sec. 725. Unless authorized in accordance with law or
regulations to use such time for other purposes, an employee
of an agency shall use official time in an honest effort to
perform official duties. An employee not under a leave
system, including a Presidential appointee exempted under
section 6301(2) of title 5, United States Code, has an
obligation to expend an honest effort and a reasonable
proportion of such employee's time in the performance of
official duties: Provided, That in this section the term
``agency''--
(1) means an Executive agency as defined under section 105
of title 5, United States Code;
(2) includes a military department as defined under section
102 of such title, the Postal Service, and the Postal Rate
Commission; and
(3) shall not include the General Accounting Office.
Sec. 726. Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1346 and section 710 of
this Act, funds made available for the current fiscal year by
this or any other Act to any department or agency, which is a
member of the Joint Financial Management Improvement Program
(JFMIP), shall be available to finance an appropriate share
of JFMIP administrative costs, as determined by the JFMIP,
but not to exceed a total of $800,000 including the salary of
the Executive Director and staff support.
Sec. 727. Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1346 and section 710 of
this Act, the head of each Executive department and agency is
hereby authorized to transfer to or reimburse the
``Governmentwide Policy'' account, General Services
Administration, with the approval of the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget, funds made available for the
current fiscal year by this or any other Act, including
rebates from charge card and other contracts. These funds
shall be administered by the Administrator of General
Services to support Government-wide financial, information
technology, procurement, and other management innovations,
initiatives, and activities, as approved by the Director of
the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with the
appropriate interagency groups designated by the Director
(including the Chief Financial Officers Council and the Joint
Financial Management Improvement Program for financial
management initiatives, the Chief Information Officers
Council for information technology initiatives, and the
Procurement Executives Council for procurement initiatives).
The total funds transferred or reimbursed shall not exceed
$17,000,000. Such transfers or reimbursements may only be
made 15 days following notification of the Committees on
Appropriations by the Director of the Office of Management
and Budget.
Sec. 728. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a
woman may breastfeed her child at any location in a Federal
building or on Federal property, if the woman and her child
are otherwise authorized to be present at the location.
Sec. 729. Nothwithstanding section 1346 of title 31, United
States Code, or section 710 of this Act, funds made available
for the current fiscal year by this or any other Act shall be
available for the interagency funding of specific projects,
workshops, studies, and similar efforts to carry out the
purposes of the National Science and Technology Council
(authorized by Executive Order No. 12881), which benefit
multiple Federal departments, agencies, or entities:
Provided, That the Office of Management and Budget shall
provide a report describing the budget of and resources
connected with the National Science and Technology Council to
the Committees on Appropriations, the House Committee on
Science; and the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation 90 days after enactment of this Act.
Sec. 730. Any request for proposals, solicitation, grant
application, form, notification,
[[Page H7912]]
press release, or other publications involving the
distribution of Federal funds shall indicate the agency
providing the funds, the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance Number, as applicable, and the amount provided.
This provision shall apply to direct payments, formula funds,
and grants received by a State receiving Federal funds.
Sec. 731. Subsection (f) of section 403 of Public Law 103-
356 (31 U.S.C. 501 note) is amended by striking ``October 1,
2001'' and inserting ``October 1, 2004''.
Sec. 732. (a) Prohibition of Federal Agency Monitoring of
Personal Information on Use of Internet.--None of the funds
made available in this or any other Act may be used by any
Federal agency--
(1) to collect, review, or create any aggregate list,
derived from any means, that includes the collection of any
personally identifiable information relating to an
individual's access to or use of any Federal Government
Internet site of the agency; or
(2) to enter into any agreement with a third party
(including another government agency) to collect, review, or
obtain any aggregate list, derived from any means, that
includes the collection of any personally identifiable
information relating to an individual's access to or use of
any nongovernmental Internet site.
(b) Exceptions.--The limitations established in subsection
(a) shall not apply to--
(1) any record of aggregate data that does not identify
particular persons;
(2) any voluntary submission of personally identifiable
information;
(3) any action taken for law enforcement, regulatory, or
supervisory purposes, in accordance with applicable law; or
(4) any action described in subsection (a)(1) that is a
system security action taken by the operator of an Internet
site and is necessarily incident to the rendition of the
Internet site services or to the protection of the rights or
property of the provider of the Internet site.
(c) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
(1) The term ``regulatory'' means agency actions to
implement, interpret or enforce authorities provided in law.
(2) The term ``supervisory'' means examinations of the
agency's supervised institutions, including assessing safety
and soundness, overall financial condition, management
practices and policies and compliance with applicable
standards as provided in law.
Sec. 733. (a) None of the funds appropriated by this Act
may be used to enter into or renew a contract which includes
a provision providing prescription drug coverage, except
where the contract also includes a provision for
contraceptive coverage.
(b) Nothing in this section shall apply to a contract
with--
(1) any of the following religious plans:
(A) Personal Care's HMO; and
(B) OSF Health Plans, Inc.; and
(2) any existing or future plan, if the carrier for the
plan objects to such coverage on the basis of religious
beliefs.
(c) In implementing this section, any plan that enters into
or renews a contract under this section may not subject any
individual to discrimination on the basis that the individual
refuses to prescribe or otherwise provide for contraceptives
because such activities would be contrary to the individual's
religious beliefs or moral convictions.
(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to require
coverage of abortion or abortion-related services.
Sec. 734. The Congress of the United States recognizes the
United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) as the official
anti-doping agency for Olympic, Pan American, and Paralympic
sport in the United States.
Sec. 735. Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Inspector General of each
applicable department or agency shall submit to the Committee
on Appropriations a report detailing what policies and
procedures are in place for each department or agency to give
first priority to the location of new offices and other
facilities in rural areas, as directed by the Rural
Development Act of 1972.
Sec. 736. Each Executive department and agency shall
evaluate the creditworthiness of an individual before issuing
the individual a government travel charge card. The
department or agency may not issue a government travel charge
card to an individual that either lacks a credit history or
is found to have an unsatisfactory credit history as a result
of this evaluation: Provided, That this restriction shall not
preclude issuance of a restricted-use charge, debit, or
stored value card made in accordance with agency procedures
to (a) an individual with an unsatisfactory credit history
where such card is used to pay travel expenses and the agency
determines there is no suitable alternative payment mechanism
available before issuing the card, or (b) an individual who
lacks a credit history. Each Executive department and agency
shall establish guidelines and procedures for disciplinary
actions to be taken against agency personnel for improper,
fraudulent, or abusive use of government charge cards, which
shall include appropriate disciplinary actions for use of
charge cards for purposes, and at establishments, that are
inconsistent with the official business of the Department or
agency or with applicable standards of conduct.
Sec. 737. Notwithstanding section 1346 of title 31, United
States Code, or section 710 of this Act, funds made available
for the current fiscal year by this or any other Act shall be
available for the interagency funding of the National
Oceanographic Partnership Program Office, authorized by 10
U.S.C. 7902, and the Coastal America program, which benefit
multiple Federal departments, agencies, or entities:
Provided, That the Department of Commerce shall provide a
report describing the budget of and resources connected with
the National Oceanographic Partnership Program Office and the
Coastal America program to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations, the House Committee on Science, and the
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 90
days after the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 738. Section 640(c) of the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 106-58; 2
U.S.C. 437g note 1), as amended by section 642 of the
Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2002
(Public Law 107-67), is amended by striking ``December 31,
2003'' and inserting ``December 31, 2005''.
Sec. 739. Section 304(a) of the Federal Election Campaign
Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434(a)) is amended as follows:
(1) in clauses (a)(2)(A)(i) and (a)(4)(A)(ii) by striking
the parenthetical ``(or posted by registered or certified
mail no later than the 15th day before)'' and inserting in
its place, ``(or posted by any of the following: registered
mail, certified mail, priority mail having a delivery
confirmation, or express mail having a delivery confirmation,
or delivered to an overnight delivery service with an on-line
tracking system, if posted or delivered no later than the
15th day before)''; and
(2) by striking paragraph (a)(5) and inserting in its
place,
``(5) If a designation, report, or statement filed pursuant
to this Act (other than under paragraph (2)(A)(i) or
(4)(A)(ii) or subsection (g)(1)) is sent by registered mail,
certified mail, priority mail having a delivery confirmation,
or express mail having a delivery confirmation, the United
States postmark shall be considered the date of filing the
designation, report or statement. If a designation, report or
statement filed pursuant to this Act (other than under
paragraph (2)(A)(i) or (4)(A)(ii), or subsection (g)(1)) is
sent by an overnight delivery service with an on-line
tracking system, the date on the proof of delivery to the
delivery service shall be considered the date of filing of
the designation, report, or statement.''.
Sec. 740. (a) The adjustment in rates of basic pay for
employees under the statutory pay systems that takes effect
in fiscal year 2004 under sections 5303 and 5304 of title 5,
United States Code, shall be an increase of 4.1 percent, and
this adjustment shall apply to civilian employees in the
Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security
and such adjustments shall be effective as of the first day
of the first applicable pay period beginning on or after
January 1, 2004.
(b) Notwithstanding section 713 of this Act, the adjustment
in rates of basic pay for the statutory pay systems that take
place in fiscal year 2004 under sections 5344 and 5348 of
title 5, United States Code, shall be no less than the
percentage in paragraph (a) as employees in the same location
whose rates of basic pay are adjusted pursuant to the
statutory pay systems under section 5303 and 5304 of title 5,
United States Code. Prevailing rate employees at locations
where there are no employees whose pay is increased pursuant
to sections 5303 and 5304 of title 5 and prevailing rate
employees described in section 5343(a)(5) of title 5 shall be
considered to be located in the pay locality designated as
``Rest of US'' pursuant to section 5304 of title 5 for
purposes of this paragraph.
(c) Funds used to carry out this section shall be paid from
appropriations, which are made to each applicable department
or agency for salaries and expenses for fiscal year 2004.
Sec. 741. Not later than December 31 of each year, the head
of each agency shall submit to Congress a report on the
competitive sourcing activities performed during the previous
fiscal year by Federal Government sources that are on the
list required under the Federal Activities Inventory Reform
Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-270; 31 U.S.C. 501 note). The
report shall include--
(1) the number of full time equivalent Federal employees
studied for competitive sourcing;
(2) the total agency cost required to carry out its
competitive sourcing program;
(3) the costs attributable to paying outside consultants
and contractors to carry out the agency's competitive
sourcing program;
(4) the costs attributable to paying agency personnel to
carry out its competitive sourcing program; and
(5) an estimate of the savings attributed as a result of
the agency competitive sourcing program.
Points of Order
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his point of order.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against section 164
which begins on page 53, line 3 and ends on page 54, line 12. This
section amends the Buy America requirements for transit capital
purchases of steel, iron, manufactured goods, and rolling stock. The
amendments made by section 164 are meant to strengthen Buy America, but
the Department of Transportation
[[Page H7913]]
analysis has determined that there will be serious unintended
consequences that will significantly slow the purchase and construction
of transit system components and systems and also will result in more
foreign-made products being purchased by transit agencies. This
provision is legislative in nature and also in violation of rule XXI.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, we would concede the point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is conceded and sustained, and this
section is stricken from the bill.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his point of order.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order
against section 212 on the grounds that the section changes existing
law in violation of clause 2(b) of House rule XXI and is therefore
legislation included in a general appropriations bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Do any Members wish to be heard on the point of order?
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, we would concede the point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is conceded and sustained, and this
section is stricken from the bill.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his point of order.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order
against section 621. This section changes existing law in violation of
clause 2(b) of House rule XXI and is therefore legislation included in
a general appropriations bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, we would concede that point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is conceded and sustained, and that
section is stricken from the bill.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his point of order.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order against
the words ``notwithstanding any other provision of law'' on page 126,
lines 15 and 16, and beginning with the words ``the prohibition'' on
page 126, line 20 through ``2512(a)(1)'' on line 23 on the grounds that
this provision violates clause 2(b) of House rule XXI because it is
legislation included in a general appropriations bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, we would concede the point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is conceded and sustained and the
language is stricken from the bill.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Cooper
Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Cooper:
Page 67, line 23, after the first dollar amount insert
``(reduced by $75,000,000) (increased by $75,000,000)''.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper) and a Member opposed will each
control 30 minutes.
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) will control
the time in opposition.
The proponent of the amendment, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr.
Cooper), is recognized for 30 minutes in support of his amendment.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, the purpose of the amendment that I am offering tonight
along with the distinguished gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick)
and the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) is to decrease
funding for very ill-considered and heavy-handed IRS enforcement effort
that tries to precertify working poor families for the earned income
tax credit or the EITC.
The amendment we are proposing will reduce funding by $75 million for
the IRS's precertification proposal and it would in turn increase
funding by $75 million for investigation and audit of large and mid-
size corporations. The amendment would continue to allow $25 million
for implementation of the precertification program.
I certainly understand the Treasury's concerns about high error rates
associated with the EITC. And as a proponent of good government, I am
eager to reduce any waste, fraud or abuse in government. But the
Treasury's proposal will create, probably, an even more burdensome
bureaucracy than they realize, and it is a clumsy and heavy-handed
attack on the poor.
Even the IRS realizes this because in a recent announcement they
decided to delay and decrease their precertification program. EITC
compliance accounts for about 3 percent of the estimated total taxes
that go uncollected, about 3 percent. But in contrast, according to the
General Accounting Office, individuals who under report business income
on their taxes are defrauding the government by about $40 billion a
year or about 12 percent of uncollected taxes, more than the cost of
the entire EITC program. Yet, guess what? There is no major effort to
target these taxpayers even though it is a much larger amount.
I suggest we follow the Willie Sutton rule, the famous bank robber,
who when asked why he robbed banks, he said, ``That's where the money
is.''
Instead, the IRS has requested a 68.5 percent increase in EITC
enforcement while barely increasing their other enforcement efforts. In
my mind, this represents a gross misallocation of resources, especially
in view of declining overall tax enforcement by the IRS.
I am willing to bet that the administrative costs of precertification
will far outstrip any potential savings, especially if the IRS goes
forward with the plans to eventually expand the precertification
process to as many as two million taxpayers. That is why our amendment
would direct $75 million toward much more sensible and cost-effective
compliance efforts, where the money is, toward auditing and
investigating mid-size and large corporations. Because according to the
IRS, 7,000 corporations that should be audited every year are not. This
translates into a direct loss to the Treasury of $6.5 billion a year in
tax revenues.
Moreover, according to a recent report by former IRS Commissioner
Rossotti, the IRS lacks the resources to carry out nearly a third of
the corporate audits it should be accomplishing each year.
So why is the administration focusing on the few dollars of poor
working families under the EITC and not on the big dollars of these
companies? Why is the U.S. Government trying to make this vital tax
credit so hard to claim? I am afraid the real IRS motive may not be
just a desire to curb waste, fraud and abuse. It may be gross
insensitivity to the needs of working poor families, simple hard-
heartedness and lack of compassion for these hard-pressed American
families.
In the national metropolitan area which makes up the heart of my
congressional district, approximately 14 percent of my constituents
rely on the EITC every year, receiving a credit of about $1,500. In
total, this credit puts about $87 million a year into these families
and into the national economy. Nationally, the EITC is directly
responsible for lifting some four million people every year above the
poverty line, including two million children. Precertification
programs, as proposed by the IRS, will discourage many of these
families from even applying for the EITC.
Under the precertification proposal, the IRS now says it will now
want to prove that children claimed under the credit have been living
with the claiming taxpayer for the required six months. The practical
obstacles posed by this requirement are mind boggling. Although the IRS
would allow a landlord or property manager to submit an affidavit, what
landlords would testify on penalty of perjury to the intimate living
arrangements of their tenants? Neighbors and relatives who are, in
fact, in the best position to know these arrangements, are forbidden
under the IRS approach from providing supporting documentation.
I also object to the discriminatory treatment of lower income tax
payers that would result from precertification. For those subject to
the process of precertification, this effectively means a 100 percent
chance of
[[Page H7914]]
audit in advance of even filing your tax return. No other taxpayers in
America face a comparable burden. Why is the IRS not also demanding
precertification for taxpayers claiming credits for dependent care
expenses, educational expenses, or charitable contributions? There is
significant evidence that these credits are a widespread source of
exaggeration and noncompliance and abuse, yet no one is requiring these
other taxpayers to file receipts in advance for day care expenses or
donations of such things as used automobiles or clothing.
I fear that rather than reducing errors, the IRS proposal would, in
fact, intimidate people into not using the EITC at all, and that would
be a severe injustice to these people.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, people are easily confused about what we are talking
about here. And it is a very strange amendment that is being offered
because, frankly, the amendment does not really do anything. It is an
opportunity for people to get up and speak, but I will read, Mr.
Chairman, what the text of the amendment says. It says: Take the dollar
amount on page 67, line 23 and first reduce it by $75 million and then
increase it by $75 million.
{time} 1930
Well, the net effect of that is zero. The amendment makes no change
in the amount of the money in the bill for the IRS to enforce the tax
laws. No change whatsoever. It is simply an opportunity for people to
get up and talk about it.
It deserves to be opposed as something that is senseless and, for
that matter, that blocks reform. Because although it is labeled as a,
quote, tax credit, the EITC, earned income tax credit, is not a tax
credit program. It is an assistance program designed for people with
low income that says you tell us how much you made, and if it is not
enough we are going to send you a check. It is a public assistance
program.
Now, any other public assistance program, you have to go through a
process of showing that you are eligible. If you want food stamps, you
go through a process to be certified that you are eligible for it. If
you want housing subsidies, you go through a process to be certified
that before you get this money from taxpayers that you are actually
eligible for it, you qualify. If you want temporary assistance to needy
families, you are certified in advance as being eligible.
The big problem with the EITC is it is a public assistance program
where there is no oversight. There are 19 million, let me repeat that
figure, 19 million Americans each year that file an income tax return
and say send me a check, I claim this. It is not a tax refund. It is a
check over and beyond whatever you may have paid in in your income
taxes.
And it has been proven over the years that a fourth to a third of all
those claims are for people who do not qualify. It is costing taxpayers
$10 billion a year. That is not small change.
That is not harassing people as the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr.
Cooper) I believe represented. That is saying if we are going to have
$35 billion and $10 billion of it goes to people who do not qualify
under the program going out of the Treasury, not a refund, not getting
a refund for taxes you paid in, but a form of public assistance, maybe
we ought to pay attention to whether people are actually eligible
before we spend this much money.
The program that the IRS is putting into place will not affect 80
percent of these 19 million people, but it is targeted to those that
the IRS has reason to believe are the ones that are most likely to be
part of that $10 billion a year that we are paying out that should not
be paid out.
We are saying we need you to do some verification to show to us that
you are entitled to this taxpayer money just the same as you would do
if you are asking for a government check for anything else. That is not
burdensome. That is not too much.
It really bothers me to hear the way that some of this rhetoric is
being tossed about as though we are picking on people. No. People want
the government to give them the check. If they qualify under the
government program, then they have it coming. But they would not say I
am just going to walk in off the street and say I ought to get food
stamps, and that is it, and nobody ever checks to see if you are
eligible.
That is why we have this error rate, because we do not have anybody
checking up on it. The IRS is trying to establish a system for the
first time of doing some checking on this.
Some people are more concerned about shoveling money out of the
Federal Treasury faster, rather than saying we ought to be good
stewards and prudent watchdogs of the taxpayers' money. That is all the
IRS has tried to put into place.
It really is rather silly to say that somehow we are even talking
about or addressing this situation with an amendment that says add $75
million to this tax enforcement program and then take $75 million of it
away. It is a wash. It does nothing.
The IRS is trying to do something. It is trying to be good stewards
of our money. And it is not only going after the people in the EITC
that are not eligible for it, it is going after the corporate
scofflaws. It is going after the big businesses or small businesses or
whatever they may be that are not being honest in how they file with
the IRS and treat their taxes.
The provision of the bill that we are talking about on page 67 makes
it clear that this overall figure is for necessary expenses of the
Internal Revenue Service for determining and establishing tax
liabilities; providing litigation support; conducting criminal
investigation and enforcement activities; securing unfiled tax returns,
collecting unpaid accounts; conducting a document matching program;
resolving taxpayer problems through prompt identification, referral and
settlement; compiling statistics of income and conducting compliance
research; funding essential earned income tax credit compliance and
error reduction initiatives and services as authorized by law. All of
these, one big catch-all figure.
The gentleman has not singled out in his amendment the earned income
tax initiative or compliance of it. He has taken all of the enforcement
activities of the IRS, a $4.2 billion account, and said from that $4.2
billion, subtract $75 million and then add $75 million. Total net
change, zero.
The amendment does not do what the gentleman has represented that it
would do because it is not specific to EITC, but furthermore, the IRS
needs to be going forward with this enforcement program. Those that say
the government should send me a check above and beyond what may be a
refund on my income taxes, they should have a little bit of burden of
proof when the IRS says they ought to substantiate this; they ought to
show something so that we can separate the honest people from the
dishonest people that are costing taxpayers $10 billion a year.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The gentleman from Oklahoma has been quite unfair in his
characterization, first in the nature of the amendment. We drafted this
with the advice of the Parliamentarian as the only way to affect this
important area in the bill without being subject to a point of order. I
think the gentleman really thinks a more explicit amendment would have
been subject to a point of order, which is exactly what the gentleman
from Oklahoma would have preferred.
Second point, picking on poor people. If my colleague is going to do
it, at least be fair about it. Remember, under this bill we would still
allow $25 million to be spent to implement the IRS precertification.
Remember, again, that even the IRS has admitted that their prior
efforts have gone too far because they, IRS, on their own initiative
has delayed and canceled their program because even they have realized
they were insensitive to the needs of these families.
Another mischaracterization, the program was put into place, as I
recall, years ago before my time by a Republican President, and I think
it was Richard Nixon, because he and many Americans realized the
detrimental effect of a high marginal rate of taxation. As a person
works and moves out of poverty, they are subject to an extraordinarily
high and punitive tax
[[Page H7915]]
rate. The EITC is designed to bring that back to a decent, bearable
level for these hardworking families.
So it is basically a Republican program we are talking about here. No
one wants it to be abused. But I would suggest to the gentleman that
there are other, fairer ways to police this program, and guess what,
this and prior Congresses have already thought up several of them
because, guess what, the study that the gentleman cited about waste or
abuse in the program is from a 1999 study, and this Congress has
already implemented several reforms to improve administration of this
program. No study has been conducted since 1999. So let us at least
find out the true facts before we jump to conclusions, especially when
at the same time we are jumping on the backs of the poor.
This is an important opportunity to balance IRS enforcement, to allow
the IRS to go where the money really is. As I mentioned, the average
recipient in my district, at least of this money, gets $1,500. There
are many other places the IRS could go to really retrieve big dollars
for the taxpayer. The IRS has listed them. We are allowing $75 million
to go help the IRS in these efforts while we still preserve $25 million
for this precertification program.
So if the gentleman were more careful with his facts and more
sensitive to the needs of the working poor, he would not simply dismiss
this as a public assistance program. This is an example, if my
colleague wants to use it, of compassionate conservatism, but
unfortunately in this Congress we are seeing very little compassion.
Let us have some compassion for the working poor, and this amendment
is an opportunity to show it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms.
Kilpatrick).
Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague very much for
bringing forth this very well-thought-out amendment in the time that we
have, and I do know that he worked with the Parliamentarian to make it
germane.
Let me back up just a moment here before I get started. In the early
seventies when the earned income tax credit was started, it was a
Republican initiative, and the reason they put it forth and it was
adopted is because they said if we give people who earn income, low
income, I might tell my colleagues, with children, $34,600 and less,
with children, if they will remain working, we will give them an earned
income tax credit so that they can keep working and not go onto the
welfare rolls. That was the reason for the earned income tax credit as
it passed this Congress in the early seventies by Republican
initiatives, and I think it was good then and it is certainly good now.
As the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper) states, this is a hit at
those who can least afford it. Statistics show that this may recoup
some $9 billion, and we need to go back for that. We need to go and
look for the $9 billion for those people who have used the earned
income tax credit and are not to get it, that they do not take that
from the Treasury. We do need to go back on that, and I think we all
feel that.
We also ought to go after the $132 billion that individual taxpayers
cheat on their tax forms with. We also need to go for the $70 billion
that offshore corporations steal from our Federal Government, and we
also need to go for the $46 billion that corporations cheat our Federal
Government for.
Our point is that in this budget, where I am proud to serve as a
member of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury and Independent
Agencies with my esteemed chairman and ranking member, $100 million is
allowed to go after 45,000 low-income people who work every day and
earn less than $34,000 with children, one or more children. Why not go
back where the money is?
We have got the biggest deficit our country has ever seen. We need to
go back and recoup some of that money. I am standing here in the well
of the House tonight to tell my colleagues that money, yes, go get it
from those people from the earned income tax credit who are cheating
our government; but, more importantly, go after the big corporations,
those offshore corporations and other high income and other individuals
who cheat our country. This is not the time to again put a black eye
and to go after those families who are working every day trying to
raise their children. The earned income tax credit is a great program,
and we ought not go after it to decimate it.
So what our amendment says is of the $100 million that has been
appropriated in this budget, leave $25 million there and go after them,
try to find those low-income people who are using the system to cheat
our government. We hope that we find them. But with the $75 million
that is left of the $100 million, go after the offshore corporations
who cheat our country, over $170 billion worth. Go after those
corporations who cheat our citizens out of $46 billion. So we want to
make it even. Go after those in the earned income tax credit who may be
making those claims, and not justifiably, appropriately, for them.
This line in our budget, enforcement compliance in the EITC has
increased 68 percent over last year's budget. Do we need to increase it
that much or should we go after where the big money is? That is all the
Congressman is doing, and I surely support the Congressman and commend
him for bringing the amendment forward. I am happy to be a cosponsor
with it.
The working poor deserve our support during these difficult times.
Many of the working poor have sons and daughters who are fighting
offshore. I have some of those in my district. I want to try to help
them keep their families together, keep their children safe. And the
EITC is just one small thing that this government gives them so that
they continue to work, yes, many times with no health insurance,
earning less than $35,000 a year, raising their families so that they
do not go on welfare.
{time} 1945
Of course we can do this, and we offer this amendment to say work
with the low-income families. They are not asking for a handout. They
just need a hand. And we are the Congress that can do that for them. So
I support the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper). I think he has
done an outstanding job here. I am proud to be a cosponsor. Let us go
after the big cheats. That is what that $75 million is there for.
All of us want to encourage policies that encourage tax compliance
among tax filers, but we know 100 percent compliance is impossible to
obtain. Part of the problem is that the IRS does not have the resources
to perform the investigations and audits in just about all filing
categories.
However, over the years Congress has concentrated its emphasis on tax
compliance efforts at the working poor. None of us wants to encourage
tax scofflaws, but focusing greater tax compliance solely on the
working poor who qualify for the earned income tax credit demonstrates
the mistaken tax priorities of this administration.
Former IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti has offered the estimate
that the IRS assesses almost $30 billion of taxes that is cannot
collect because of tax fraud. That is a big problem, especially when
our government is going to generate a budget deficit of $480 billion
and possibly even more by the end of the fiscal year.
This bill provides more money for increase tax compliance efforts.
But where does it focus its efforts at greater tax compliance: fraud
and mistakes in the Earned Income Tax Credit Program. The
administration is shocked by that the EITC has an error rate that is
estimated between 27 and 32 percent. According to the IRS, the
avoidance costs amount to $7.8 billion or 2.8 percent of the tax
compliance problem. Now that's going after the big bucks.
If you looked at the tax compliance mandate contained in this, you
would come away with the impression that the working poor are the
number one tax scofflaw problem facing the nation. This bill increases
provides $100 million in the EITC enforcement budget, over a 68.percent
increase. Never mind the fact that 56 percent of the non-compliant
taxpayers have incomes in excess of $100,000, and yet they are in the
income category that is less likely to be audited.
Simply put, the tax compliance priorities contained in this bill is a
misallocation of funds.
The Cooper, DeLauro, Kilpatrick amendment scales back the EITC
precertification pilot program to $25 million and intends to restore
greater balance in our tax compliance efforts by making more money
available for investigating and auditing large and medium sized
businesses. That's where the money is. That's where the greater
incidence of tax cheating occurs.
[[Page H7916]]
The amendment allows the IRS to move forward with the
precertification program, but it also encourages the IRS to go after
the big tax dodgers like major tax shelters such as corporate trusts,
offshore accounts, other abusive corporate tax shelters.
This amendment says lets go after tax cheats poor and rich, and
represents a departure from the administration's policy of increasing
the tax burden on the poor.
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The error rate we are discussing regarding the EITC is not an old
number. This was something that a special task force was formed within
the IRS and the Treasury Department, and their most recent
comprehensive survey was January of last year, January of 2002, where
they established the EITC error rate is between 27 and 32 percent. If
we compare that with other major social benefit programs, such as
temporary assistance to needy families, food stamps, Social Security,
disability, and Medicaid, they have the error rates below 10 percent,
whereas the EITC error rate is 27 to 32 percent. Three times as many
mistakes. Why? Because we do not have any checking up on people.
And we are not just checking up on this program. We have, in the IRS
budget, an increase of $160 million going after upper-income taxpayers,
people that may be scofflaws and trying to bend or twist or distort our
tax laws. We are trying to go after this across the board, but we need
to have verification and documentation for people that expect the
taxpayers to be doing this for them.
Under the EITC, a person can receive a check from the Federal
Treasury for as much as $4,204. That is above and beyond whatever they
might or might not have paid in income taxes. On average, for these 19
million people, on average they receive $1,705 above and beyond what
they paid in income taxes. Is it asking too much for someone that
expects the taxpayers to write them a check for an average of $1,700 to
do a little bit of documentation in 20 percent of the cases to show
that they actually qualify? That is not asking much.
In fact, it is not picking on the poor either, because more than a
third, about 35 percent, more than a third of the EITC recipients
exceed the poverty guidelines in their income. This is a program that
goes beyond just helping the poor because it has become so easy for
people to falsely or fraudulently, and, yes, sometimes mistakenly get
this money from the Federal Treasury. We should not close the door on
efforts to try to stop a wrongful outflow of $10 billion a year out of
the Federal Treasury. We should oppose the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume
to note once again that my friend, the gentleman from Oklahoma, is
being unfair. We are not trying to stop enforcement of EITC. We are
trying to do it in a fair and balanced way so that the IRS can go after
where the big money is as well as where the small money is.
And the gentleman is unfair as well because it is not just a little
bit of paperwork. They have to find folks who will certify that their
own children have been living with them for 6 months, and they
disqualify relatives and neighbors and building managers. So who else
can they turn to, people who do not know them? And under penalty of
perjury, they want an absentee landlord to sign a piece of paper saying
someone's kids have been living with them? Why not a simpler approach?
Why not say, in the situation of a divorce or legal separation, why not
go to the court and find out who has custody of the children and get a
certificate there and make that work? That would be a simple, fair way
to do it. But, no, the IRS has not chosen that path.
There are other simpler ways of solving this problem, and that is all
that we ask. Even the IRS acknowledges that. That is why they have, on
their own initiative, delayed and downsized their proposed program.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut
(Ms. DeLauro), my good friend and colleague and cosponsor of this key
amendment.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I cannot tell you how proud I am to stand
tonight with the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper) and the
gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) to offer this amendment,
which in essence just says let us redirect. It does not close any
doors. Let us redirect some of the funds intended for the IRS's EITC
precertification program to increase tax compliance for mid- and large
corporations. In fact, what this new IRS rule is all about is creating
a two-tiered tax enforcement system, one for high-income Americans and
one for low-wage workers that is far more burdensome.
My colleague from Tennessee pointed out child care records, school
records, medical records, leases, religious records, a letter on
letterhead from a member of the clergy, child care providers,
employers, health care providers, landlords, utility managers, third-
party affidavits. That is what they are asking of low-wage workers. No
other group of taxpayers has got to go through those kinds of
gyrations.
But it is what we could anticipate. This is the same crowd that says
no to a child tax credit for people who make $10,500 a year to $26,000
a year. They are workers, hard workers; they just happen to make low
wages, so let us go after them. That is what this new rule is about. We
know their problems with the EITC.
No one here is defending overclaims, but let us not forget a 2001 GAO
report found that about 4.3 million eligible households did not claim
the EITC in 1999. Overall, we know that every year we lose about $30
billion through underpayment of taxes. Only a very small proportion of
this comes from the EITC. The vast majority is high-income earners and
corporations. And it is worth repeating what my colleagues have said
tonight. The estimate of taxes that the IRS says are avoided, evaded or
not paid by individuals, $132 billion, offshore accounts $70 billion.
Let us remember offshore accounts. Only a few minutes ago on this
floor the gentleman from Virginia got up and said we should not take up
the issue of expatriates. These are companies that go offshore to avoid
paying taxes then come back to the Federal Government to get contracts
to further their own business interests. They do not want to discuss
that. Seventy billion dollars is lost on taxes by those corporations
who go offshore just specifically for the purpose of not paying taxes
to the U.S. Government. Where is the task force, where is the task
force that is going after that $70 billion? They do not want to go down
that route.
Partnership investors. Thirty billion dollars is lost. The fact of
the matter is that the number that my colleague uses of $10 billion is
a 1999 number as well. There have been subsequent changes to the tax
law that would reduce that. We are talking about $6.5 billion, yes,
that undeserved EITC tax credits paid, nowhere near what individuals or
offshore accounts do. The government loses $6.5 billion in direct tax
revenue annually from mid- and large corporations not audited due to
the fact that the IRS does not have enforcement dollars to go after
them.
According to an end-of-term report by former IRS Commissioner
Rossotti, the IRS lacks the resources to address 28 percent of the mid-
and large corporation workload that should be accomplished each year.
This amendment would begin to address that problem. It redirects $75
million of funding from the EITC precertification initiative towards
the investigation of high-yielding tax compliance activities. It does
not stop the EITC initiative from moving forward. It will provide $25
million for that program in addition to the $150 million that is
already there to take a look at this issue.
It simply ensures, quite frankly, that we will focus our interests on
the area that gives us more bang for the buck. None of us wants to see
fraud go unpunished; but let us be fair, my friends. Let us not require
the lowest-income Americans to meet precertification standards that no
one else is required to meet while at the same time failing to crack
down at all on fraud in businesses and higher-income taxpayers.
Support the Cooper-DeLauro-Kilpatrick amendment.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn).
Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
[[Page H7917]]
this time and for bringing this amendment forward.
I want to say something about this issue that has to do with the
broader impact that it has on the people of my State of South Carolina.
If you were to look at the fact that according to GAO about 3 percent
of the estimated total taxes that go uncollected for noncompliance
compares with the fact that the underreporting of business income for
taxes in fraud are over $40 billion a year, which is around $10 billion
a year more than the EITC program is all together. I think the program
is around $31 billion. Now, if we were to look at this and take into
account what kind of fraud is taking place, one of the things we are
going to see is what was just talked about, and that is about $70
billion a year going to offshore companies.
I have a real problem with that because in my State one of the
industries that the people who are eligible for the earned income tax
credits, one of the categories of work that they have relied on for
years, working in the textile and apparel industry, has gone offshore
to the tune of 50 percent in South Carolina. Ten years ago we had
126,000 textile jobs in our State. Today, 63,000 textile jobs are going
offshore. So not only do we see the money going offshore, we also see
the jobs that these people have to rely upon going offshore.
So I think this is a very good amendment because it will work to help
us focus protection.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Olver), the ranking member of the subcommittee.
Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time, and I rise in support of his amendment.
The IRS has started, has already started an earned income tax credit
pilot program that will require 45,000 EITC recipients in the 2003
taxable year to precertify their eligibility before they can claim the
tax credit. Without examining the results of that pilot and whatever
impacts that precertification program would have on the participation
in the program, and in fact the IRS has now slowed down their pilot
project because of controversies it has raised, the IRS has included
$100 million, and this budget includes that in their budget, so they
can precertify not 45,000, but 2 million, households, and later
increase that, ramp it up to 4 or 5 million households thereafter.
Under the IRS proposal, 25 to 30 percent of all low-income working
families that receive the EITC would be subject to the
precertification. Well, that sounds like being guilty until you can
prove yourself innocent to me. Clearly, this money would be better
spent investigating high-yielding audits of midsize and large
corporations.
Let me remind my colleagues that the EITC is a tax credit program for
the working poor, a program which former President Ronald Reagan called
our most effective program to fight poverty. It is not a welfare
program. No other group of tax filers is required to precertify 6
months before filing their taxes for tax credits and deductions.
{time} 2000
We do not require precertification for families and individuals that
claim the child tax credit, home mortgage deductions, student loan
deductions, lifetime learning credits, or any other tax program. Why
target the working poor? Well, there is no question we should reduce
illegitimate payments in the EITC. The highest estimates peg EITC
overpayments at between $8 and $10 billion. Those estimates do not even
take into account the tax changes in 2001 which are expected to reduce
the overpayments by at least $2 billion.
Finally, the alleged overpayments are a pittance compared to $132
billion in lost tax revenue for individuals, the $70 billion in lost
tax revenue for offshore accounts, and the $46 billion in lost tax
revenues for corporations. Again I ask, why target the working poor?
Let us put our enforcement resources where we get the highest return. I
urge an aye vote for the Cooper amendment.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
Mr. Chairman, I remain concerned that the proposed funding for the
EITC compliance activities will create an undue burden on our most
vulnerable citizens. The bill includes $100 billion to make it more
difficult for hardworking families with low incomes to apply for the
credit. That does not sound to me like the opportunity of society which
the majority party talks so long and often about.
If we must spend that much on EITC compliance, and all of us want to
ensure that there is not fraud in the system, we agree on that.
However, it would be better spent on hiring more customer service and
assistant personnel to make sure that those who President Reagan
thought ought to be helped were helped in a positive way by giving them
a tax credit as opposed to a handout.
Statistics illustrate that the focus on low-income filers rather than
higher-income filers may be unwarranted. Audit rates are not consistent
for different income levels. On 4-27 the New York Times said 1 of every
175 individual tax returns was audited in 2002; 1 of every 64 EITC
claimants was audited; but 1 of every 120 taxpayers with annual incomes
over $100,000 was audited. In other words, we are doing one sixty-
fourth in terms of poorer people, and we are doing half of that for
wealthier people.
One in about every 400 partnerships were audited. Under the EITC
precertification proposal, which is essentially a preaudit, between 1
out of every 4 to 8 EITC claimants would be audited.
That is a big expenditure for very small returns. Approximately 70
percent of all EITC claimants receive tax return assistance from
commercial tax preparers. Among taxpayers with incomes above $100,000,
the chance of being audited fell 26 percent last year to an all-time
low, yet this group is most likely to have income that is easiest to
hide.
The overwhelming majority of Americans, whether rich or poor,
cooperate and are honest in filing their taxes; but clearly the people
with the most income have the most incentive not to disclose income
because they have the much greater savings, and in fact they have ways
and means to hide it better.
Since 1996, the number of revenue agents has dropped by 14,949 to
11,752 in 2002. The number of collection revenue officers has dropped
from 5,537 in 1996 to approximately 3,500 today.
What is the point of all this? The point is if we are going to put
resources in, as the chairman has suggested, and I might say the
chairman has had a focus on EITC since becoming the chairman, but it is
ironic in my opinion that a party that talked about opportunity for
hardworking Americans is being so hard on those hard- working
Americans.
If there is fraud, we need to ferret it out; but we need to ferret it
out whether you are making $10,000 or $100,000 or $1 million. And we
ought to do it fairly, across the board, and not target the least among
us.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
Mr. Chairman, if it is just a little bit of paperwork, if it is not
much hassle, if it is easy to comply with precertification, then I
would suggest that the gentleman from Oklahoma in the next Congress
apply the same rulings and regulations to all of the other taxpayers in
this country.
I think the gentleman will find that these paperwork requirements are
indeed burdensome, unfair, and are indeed insensitive to the working
poor, the folks we should be trying to help in this Congress, as they
lift themselves out of poverty, using a Republican-borne program which
has helped millions of Americans and their families escape the poverty
trap, and it does so by allowing them to avoid the punitive marginal
tax rates that the working poor face.
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume
in closing.
Mr. Chairman, if someone wants taxpayer money to assist them with
temporary assistance to needy families, they would fill out the
paperwork and show they are eligible before they received it; 100
percent would go through that process.
If someone wants Social Security disability, for taxpayers to write a
check
[[Page H7918]]
for your disability, you would go through a precertification process
100 percent.
If someone wanted Medicaid, if they wanted food stamps, they would,
100 percent of the citizens that want that assistance, would go through
a process in advance.
Here we have a program that on average writes a check of $1,700
beyond whatever they paid on their income taxes, writes a check on
average for $1,700, and it goes out to 19 million Americans. And we are
talking about saying maybe we ought to have at least a few thousand of
them, of the people that are in the most questionable circumstances, go
through a process of certification before they receive this taxpayers'
money. And the $1,700 is an average. It goes up to $4,200.
Only a fraction of the people under this program will be put through
a certification, but maybe if we had more people going through the
process, we would not have this error rate of a fourth to a third of
the applicants, $10 billion a year, getting money to which they are not
entitled. That is 3 times the error rate of these programs where they
put 100 percent of the applicants through a certification process.
We do not pick on people when we say they ought to show they are
eligible before they ask for a check to be written out of the Treasury.
We are not picking on anybody, and we are putting a lot more resources
into going after the upper-income taxpayers. There is $4 billion for
tax compliance efforts in this bill, and the other side of the aisle is
complaining because we are spending a couple of hundred million on
trying to keep $10 billion from walking out the door.
We are not talking about people who are failing to send income to the
Treasury, we are talking about people who are getting a check from the
United States Government. It is common sense. It is just common sense
to say that we ought to be doing a better job of making sure that
people are eligible. It is not imposing on people that have to go
through a lot more onerous requirements for other social assistance
programs than this is asking a small fraction of those 19 million of
those people to go through. This is common sense.
And the amendment is saying well, we are going to reduce $75 million
in this account and then add $75 million back in, and then claim they
are accomplishing something. Talk about cosmetics, we do not need a
cosmetic approach to this problem. We need a realistic approach to the
problem. That is what the IRS is trying to do and that is why we are
trying to help them do it.
Mr. Chairman, hardworking people do not want people who are not
qualified taking some of their hard-earned money, $10 billion a year,
out of the U.S. Treasury. I ask that this amendment be defeated.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Sessions). The question is on the
amendment offered by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Tennessee
(Mr. Cooper) will be postponed.
Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. OLVER. I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for giving me the
opportunity to talk for a moment about the issue of corporate
expatriates.
I would like to express a serious opposition to the point of order
that was offered by the gentleman from Virginia earlier tonight which
removed the corporate expatriates contracting ban from this bill. I
would like to point out the hypocrisy of what my friends on the other
side of the aisle are doing here this evening.
This is like deja vu for me. The same thing happened in June when we
debated the homeland security appropriations bill. The Committee on
Appropriations accepted my amendment by voice vote, only to turn around
and use a legislative technicality to justify stripping it from the
bill.
In fact, the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young), for whom I have
the utmost respect, promised during the committee consideration that he
would support protecting this amendment when it went to the Committee
on Rules.
This amendment, let me just be honest, is a simple one; very, very
simple. Quite frankly, some of what we are talking about here tonight
would simply prohibit the Treasury Department from contracting with
corporate expatriates. These are companies that operate here in the
United States but they set up a shell corporation overseas for the
express purpose of avoiding paying their taxes. They do not want to pay
their taxes; and once again, we have not set up any kind of special
task force within the IRS or anywhere else to investigate these folks.
No one is doing that. It is the height of irony.
Even the IRS, the agency that we have been talking about here
tonight, which is looking at low-income wage earners and enforcement of
low-income wage earners and what they ought to be doing to pay their
taxes and not take any taxpayer dollars without precertifying, the IRS,
the agency charged with collecting taxes, has willingly contracted with
a company that has moved overseas in an effort to avoid paying their
taxes.
{time} 2015
I think we have an obligation to address this issue. American
companies, particularly those contracting with our government, ought to
pay American taxes just like every citizen in this country. By this
action, the Republican majority is once again demonstrating that they
do not hold these same values.
Recent data show that corporate expatriates have actually increased
the amount of Federal contracts they receive. Despite abandoning our
country and costing our government $5 billion in lost tax revenue,
corporate expatriates reaped $1.4 billion in Federal contracts last
year alone. They do not pay their taxes; they go overseas and they get
the largesse of the Federal Government to the tune of $1.4 billion,
funds sorely needed particularly in the current fiscal climate. One
example: While the committee has provided $900 million in funding for
Amtrak, that funding level is far below the $1.8 billion requested by
Amtrak and which is sorely needed to address a backlog of capital
repairs. It is long past time that we stopped hiding behind procedural
sleight-of-hand to disguise the fact that some in this body want to
condone this practice.
I will not call for a vote at this time, but I want to make clear
that this issue is not going to go away. It is time that we draw a line
in the sand and tell these corporate expatriates that they will no
longer be rewarded with government contracts for taking and putting
their business overseas, expressly for the purpose of not paying taxes
in the United States. Let us be honest about what we do in this body
and who ought to be paying their taxes if they expect to reap the
benefits of Federal contracts. Let us not go after low-wage workers and
have this two-tiered enforcement practice and allow these folks to get
away without paying their taxes and come back and get billions in
taxpayers' dollars that we so earnestly do not want to allow to low-
income wage workers but are willing to squander billions to those who
care not to pay their taxes to the United States Government while they
make their profits here.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. OLVER. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I thank the gentleman for yielding. The
gentlewoman from Connecticut is exactly correct. The chairman did state
that he would ask the rule to protect the amendment. The chairman did
just that in a written request to the Committee on Rules to protect all
of the amendments adopted during the full committee markup.
So the gentlewoman is correct. The Committee on Rules chose not to
agree with my request.
Ms. DeLAURO. I thank the chairman for his efforts.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Sessions). The time of the gentleman
[[Page H7919]]
from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver) has expired.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Olver was allowed to proceed for 30
additional seconds.)
Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to reiterate what had been
said earlier today by my colleague from Massachusetts on this same
point of the expatriate taxation, that what was won within the
Committee on Appropriations and what the chairman of the Committee on
Appropriations attempted to protect was in fact lost by the actions of
the Committee on Rules at a later point. I think that is unfortunate.
Amendment Offered by Ms. Kaptur
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Ms. Kaptur:
Page 106, insert after line 4 the following:
Sec. 511. Section 257(a) of the Help America Vote Act of
2002 (42 U.S.C. 15407(a)) is amended by striking ``the
following amounts'' and all that follows and inserting ``an
aggregate amount of $3,000,000,000 for fiscal years 2003
through 2005''.
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The point of order is reserved.
Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the gentlewoman from
Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I begin by saying nothing is more sacred than our citizens' right to
vote. The amendment that I seek to offer this evening would preserve
the $3.65 billion in Federal funds that this Congress authorized over
the next 3 years under the Help America Vote Act for upgrading election
systems across our country. We originally passed this over 2 years ago,
and I make this effort to preserve these funds because the Bush
administration has not provided the necessary funds as authorized, and
it is also 320 days late in appointing the election commission that was
supposed to establish the Federal standards and guidelines to prevent
fraud and abuse in these new electronic election technologies.
The national election debacle that we witnessed as a country in the
year of 2000 simply cannot ever happen again. That is why we passed the
Help America Vote Act. Already, $650 million has gone out to the
States, but only for the hardware. $3 billion that should be out there
in the hands of the States is not there in order to buy the proper
equipment, provide the training, register the voters, and really
provide a revolution in new technology at the polls.
Importantly, the election commission authorized by the Help America
Vote Act has not been appointed. Indeed, the President is 320 days late
in sending the nominees to the Senate, to the other body, for approval.
That means there are no Federal standards and guidelines to prevent
fraud and abuse. And so the States are floundering around out there
being besieged by various companies trying to offer machines that they
say are the greatest in the world when in fact they really are not.
What this amendment seeks to do is to preserve the funds that we said
were necessary and to preserve them over the 3-year period. Unless this
amendment is adopted, the funding will expire, which means the States
will even be in a worse position than they are today. The President
should have had his nominees to the Federal Election Commission
appointed February 26 of this year. That has not been done. That means
there are no Federal standards or guidelines for election technologies.
In my own State of Ohio, for example, we assembled a computer
security team and sent them down to our State House to review the
various election technologies. There was not one set of technologies
that came back as either excellent or very good in the two most
important categories of judgment, first, security of the system, the
ability to prevent fraud and abuse in the software; and, secondly, ease
of use by the voter. No system qualified. We have to get the money down
there to these States and localities. There have to be Federal
standards. Right now, less than half of the money that we should have
appropriated has been provided in the 2004 bill; and in this year of
2003, the money has not arrived. Less than half the money is there.
What are we doing? We are setting ourselves up for another failure. So
at least my amendment attempts to preserve the funds that were
originally authorized.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) who
understands this issue so well.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding, and I thank her for
her amendment. I believe the amendment is not at all harmful to the
objective of putting in place an election system that works for every
American and is accurate and accessible and trustworthy. Her suggestion
that the money not lapse, that it moves forward, I think is an
excellent suggestion. I strongly support her amendment and thank her
for her work in this effort.
Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman for his leadership in this in
trying to provide an election system across this country that has
integrity, dependability and sufficient funds to assure those
qualities. What we are being given are half measures, empty promises
and what is becoming more and more confusing at the local county level.
No State standards, no Federal standards, and not enough money. America
really deserves better. If we can afford to spend $4 billion a month in
Iraq to secure democracy, can we not afford to spend $3 billion over 3
years in our own country to help secure our democratic voting systems
here in this Republic? I think it is really an important question for
the Congress. In hopes of resolving this issue amicably, I will
withdraw my amendment at this point in hopes that we might be able to
deal with it in the upcoming supplemental.
Mr. Chairman, I include the following material for the Record:
[From the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Aug. 28, 2003]
Voting Machine Controversy
(By Julie Carr Smyth)
Columbus.--The head of a company vying to sell voting
machines in Ohio told Republicans in a recent fund-raising
letter that he is ``committed to helping Ohio deliver its
electoral votes to the president next year.''
The Aug. 14 letter from Walden O'Dell, chief executive of
Diebold Inc.--who has become active in the re-election effort
of President Bush--prompted Democrats this week to question
the propriety of allowing O'Dell's company to calculate votes
in the 2004 presidential election.
O'Dell attended a strategy pow-wow with wealthy Bush
benefactors--known as Rangers and Pioneers--at the
president's Crawford, Texas, ranch earlier this month. The
next week, he penned invitations to a $1,000-a-plate fund-
raiser to benefit the Ohio Republican Party's federal
campaign fund--partially benefiting Bush--at his mansion in
the Columbus suburb of Upper Arlington.
The letter went out the day before Ohio Secretary of State
Ken Blackwell, also a Republic, was set to qualify Diebold as
one of three firms eligible to sell upgraded electronic
voting machines to Ohio counties in time for the 2004
election.
Blackwell's announcement is still in limbo because of a
court challenge over the fairness of the selection process by
a disqualified bidder, Sequoia Voting Systems.
In his invitation letter, O'Dell asked guests to consider
donating or raising up to $10,000 each for the federal
account that the state GOP will use to help Bush and other
federal candidates--money that legislative Democratic leaders
charged could come back to benefit Blackwell.
They urged Blackwell to remove Diebold from the field of
voting-machine companies eligible to sell to Ohio counties.
This is the second such request in as many months. State
Sen. Jeff Jacobson, a Dayton-area Republic an, asked
Blackwell in July to disqualify Diebold after security
concerns arose over its equipment.
``Ordinary Ohioans may infer that Blackwell's office is
looking past Diebold's security issues because it CEO is
seeking $10,000 donations for Blackwell's party--donations
that could be made with statewide elected officials right
here in the same room,'' said Senate Democratic Leader Greg
DiDonato.
Diebold spokeswoman Michelle Griggy said O'Dell--who was
unavailable to comment personally--has held fund-raisers in
his home for many causes, including the Columbus Zoo,
Opera Columbus, Catholic Social Services and Ohio State
University.
Ohio GOP spokesman Jason Mauk said the party approached
O'Dell about hosting the event at his home, the historic
Cotswold Manor, and not the other way around. Mauk said that
under federal campaign finance rules, the party cannot use
any money from its federal account for state-level
candidates.
``To think that Diebold is somehow tainted because they
have a couple folks on their board who support the president
is just unfair,'' Mauk said.
[[Page H7920]]
Griggly said in an e-mail statement that Diebold could not
comment on the political contributions of individual company
employees.
Blackwell said Diebold is not the only company with
political connections--nothing that lobbyists for voting-
machine makers read like a who's who of Columbus' powerful
and politically connected.
``Let me put it to you this way: If there was one person
uniquely involved in the political process, that might be
troubling,'' he said. ``But there's no one that hasn't used
every legitimate avenue and bit of leverage that they could
legally use to get their product looked at. Believe me, if
there is a political lever to be pulled, all of them have
pulled it.''
Blackwell said he stands by the process used for selecting
voting machine vendors as fair, thorough and impartial.
As of yesterday, however, that determination lay with Ohio
Court of Claims Judge Fred Shoemaker.
He heard closing arguments yesterday over whether Sequoia
was unfairly eliminated by Blackwell midway through the final
phase of negotiations.
Shoemaker extended a temporary restraining order in the
case for 14 days, but said he hopes to issue his opinion
sooner than that.
____
[From the Toledo Blade, Sept. 3, 2003]
The Diebold Dilemma
Did the head of an Ohio company hoping to land a big job
with the state to supply upgraded electronic voting machines
for the 2004 elections simply commit a faux pax? Or did the
high-level fund-raising activity Diebold's CEO has undertaken
for the Bush re-election campaign give his company a
calculated edge in securing a lucrative state contract?
Either way the actions of chief executive Walden O'Dell and
the response of Ohio's Republican Secretary of State Ken
Blackwell raise inevitable and troubling questions about the
influence of money and politics on government decisions--
especially ones as sensitive as the operation of election
systems.
Mr. O'Dell is not just a contributor to GOP campaigns; he's
at the top of the fund-raising food chain. Recently,
according to published reports, he attended a strategy
session at the president's Crawford, Texas, ranch with other
top Bush benefactors known as ``Rangers'' or ``Pioneers,''
depending on the impressive amount of campaign money raised
for the Bush war chest.
No doubt inspired by his inclusion in the elite circle of
wealthy Bush backers, Diebold's CEO sent an impassioned fund-
raising letter to Ohio Republicans declaring that he is
``committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to
the President next year.'' The bad judgment from the head of
a firm trying to sell voting machines to the state is
obvious.
Moreover, in his note to party members pledging to deliver
Ohio to the President, Mr. O'Dell invited partisans to a
$1,000-a-plate fund-raiser at his Columbus area mansion and
nudged them to also consider donating or raising an
additional $10,000 each for the state of GOP's use on federal
campaigns.
Interestingly the missive was mailed the day before
Secretary of State Blackwell was due to name Diebold as one
of three firms eligible to sell voting machines to Ohio
counties. The Blackwell announcement was delayed by a court
challenge over the fairness of the state's bidding process by
one of the disqualified contenders.
Mr. Blackwell, who insists that state voting machine
vendors were selected fairly and impartially, downplayed the
political connections of Diebold's chief executive as par for
the course in legitimate Columbus lobbying for influence and
attention.
That may be so, but the appearance of conflict is clear
when a company that is spending money to influence the
outcome of an election also wants to help count the votes.
Democratic lawmakers in Ohio say that's disturbing enough
to warrant disqualifying Diebold from selling voting machines
in this state. Two months ago Republican state Sen. Jeff
Jacobson from Dayton asked Mr. Blackwell to do the same thing
when security concerns were raised about some of Diebold's
equipment.
Now critics are wondering if Mr. Blackwell's office
overlooked problems with Diebold because its CEO had
prominent GOP connections. It is premature to urge Diebold's
disqualification from the field of eligible vendors, but the
issue warrants the state's careful attention.
____
[From the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Sept. 1, 2003]
Taking Sides at Diebold
In a perfect world, companies that make voting equipment
would be apolitical. But it's not a perfect world.
Still, you would think that the CEO of a company that wants
to make a lot of money selling voting machines to Ohio would
see the value of at least pretending impartiality. Instead,
Diebold Chief Executive Walden O'Dell committed himself in a
recent fund-raising letter to work to ``deliver [Ohio's]
electoral votes'' to President George W. Bush.
The letter accompanied invitations to a $1,000-a-plate
fund-raiser at O'Dell's Upper Arlington mansion--an
invitation issued days after he attended a strategy session
with major contributors at Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas.
O'Dell's firm public commitment to work for a particular
candidate--while Diebold is engaged in a vigorous competition
to provide voting machines to Ohio--gives Democrats powerful
ammunition to use against his company.
Ohio, like many other states, decided it was time to retire
its punch-card machines after the Florida voting debacle
during the 2000 presidential election. And allegations have
been rampant recently that Ohio Secretary of State Ken
Blackwell would like to see the contract go to Canton-based
Diebold.
That's going to be harder sell now.
Makers of voting equipment routinely give to political
parties and candidates even as they are seeking lucrative
public contracts. That's bad enough. But O'Dell is setting
himself up as an integral part of Bush's re-election
apparatus. That's too close for comfort.
If Diebold just made ATM's and industrial safes, his
actions would not be an issue. But Diebold wants Ohioans to
trust it to be fair and accurate in recording and tabulating
their choices at the polls. That requires impartiality. And
in the wake of O'Dell's letter, impartiality is not a trait
anyone can associate with Diebold at the moment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Without objection, the gentlewoman's
amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Farr
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Farr:
Page 157, after line 2, insert the following:
Sec. 742. It is the sense of the Congress that none of the
funds made available in this Act should be used to
disestablish any pay locality (as defined by section 5302 of
title 5, United States Code).
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of
today, the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) and a Member opposed
each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr).
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I
would like to thank Chairman Istook and Ranking Member Olver for
accepting my sense of Congress amendment. Let me just quickly explain
what it does. Every 10 years after the national census is taken, the
Office of Management and Budget redefines and redesignates metropolitan
statistical areas, known as MSAs. Then the Office of Personnel
Management uses those MSA definitions to overlay their own geographic
boundaries for so-called locality pay areas.
This year the Office of Management and Budget came out with new
definitions in June, but they radically changed their methodology to a
point where the Office of Personnel Management said that the Office of
Management and Budget definitions no longer were usable for purposes of
determining locality pay boundaries. The Office of Personnel Management
has begun the process of determining how to draw locality pay
boundaries. The agency is more or less under the gun to do so by this
October 7 so as to have this decided by the 2005 budget cycle. But the
Office of Personnel Management held its first hearing on the issue only
yesterday, September 3. The issue is too complex and too sensitive to
figure out in a month. Thousands of Federal employee paychecks and
consequently Federal agency missions hang in the balance.
My amendment essentially states that Congress believes current
locality pay areas should be held harmless over the next year. We ask
that OPM not eliminate any current locality pay area, but we do not
object to OPM adding any new areas. In the interim, the Office of
Personnel Management has time to do the research right and to draw up a
fair and defensible plan for locality pay boundary designations.
I commend the chairman of the subcommittee for his leadership on this
issue and thank him for accepting the amendment.
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman has represented, I am
agreeable to accepting the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by
the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr).
The amendment was agreed to.
Sequential Votes Postponed in Committee of the Whole
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII,
proceedings will now resume on those
[[Page H7921]]
amendments on which further proceedings were postponed in the following
order: an amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-
Lee) and an amendment offered by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr.
Cooper).
The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. The
second will be a 5-minute vote.
Amendment Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of texas
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas
(Ms. Jackson-Lee) on which further proceedings were postponed and on
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The Clerk designated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 188,
noes 222, not voting 24, as follows:
[Roll No. 474]
AYES--188
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Ballance
Becerra
Bell
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Case
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cramer
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doyle
Edwards
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frost
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green (TX)
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kleczka
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Pelosi
Price (NC)
Rahall
Reyes
Ross
Rothman
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Weiner
Wexler
Wu
Wynn
NOES--222
Aderholt
Akin
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Bereuter
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cole
Collins
Cox
Crane
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Emerson
English
Everett
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Goss
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
McCotter
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Strickland
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Turner (OH)
Upton
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--24
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Clay
DeGette
Gephardt
Janklow
John
Keller
Kucinich
McCrery
Meehan
Mollohan
Myrick
Payne
Pickering
Rangel
Regula
Rodriguez
Roybal-Allard
Ryan (WI)
Thomas
Waxman
Woolsey
Young (AK)
{time} 2048
Messrs. GUTKNECHT, NEY, GILCHREST and EHLERS changed their vote from
``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. SPRATT, MURTHA, KANJORSKI, LUCAS of Kentucky and SKELTON
changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Announcement by the Chairman
Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVI, any record vote on this next
question will be a 5-minute vote.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Cooper
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper)
on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 192,
noes 219, not voting 23, as follows:
[Roll No. 475]
AYES--192
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Ballance
Becerra
Bell
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Case
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cramer
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
DeFazio
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doyle
Edwards
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frost
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green (TX)
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kleczka
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
[[Page H7922]]
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Reyes
Ross
Rothman
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Shays
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Weiner
Wexler
Wu
Wynn
NOES--219
Aderholt
Akin
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Bereuter
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cole
Collins
Cox
Crane
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Deal (GA)
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Emerson
English
Everett
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Goss
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
McCotter
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Turner (OH)
Upton
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--23
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Clay
Davis, Tom
DeGette
Gephardt
Janklow
John
Keller
Kucinich
Meehan
Mollohan
Myrick
Payne
Pickering
Rangel
Regula
Rodriguez
Roybal-Allard
Sherman
Waxman
Woolsey
Young (AK)
{time} 2057
Mr. LIPINSKI changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
LaHood) having assumed the chair, Mr. Dreier, Chairman 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. 2989) making
appropriations for the Departments of Transportation and Treasury, and
independent agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and
for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.
____________________