[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 133 (Thursday, September 25, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H8909-H8916]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS, FISCAL YEAR 2004
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, under the previous order of the
House, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 69) making continuing
appropriations for the fiscal year 2004, and for other purposes, and
ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
The text of House Joint Resolution 69 is as follows:
H.J. Res. 69
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
following sums are hereby appropriated, out of any money in
the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, and out of
applicable corporate or other revenues, receipts, and funds,
for the several departments, agencies, corporations, and
other organizational units of Government for fiscal year
2004, and for other purposes, namely:
Sec. 101. Such amounts as may be necessary under the
authority and conditions provided in the applicable
appropriations Act for fiscal year 2003 for continuing
projects or activities including the costs of direct loans
and loan guarantees (not otherwise specifically provided for
in this joint resolution) which were conducted in fiscal year
2003, at a rate for operations not exceeding the current
rate, and for which appropriations, funds, or other authority
was made available in the following appropriations Acts:
(1) The Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,
2003.
(2) The Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the
Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2003,
notwithstanding section 15 of the State Department Basic
Authorities Act of 1956, section 313 of the Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law
103-236), and section 504(a)(1) of the National Security Act
of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 414(a)(1)).
(3) The District of Columbia Appropriations Act, 2003.
(4) The Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act,
2003, notwithstanding section 504(a)(1) of the National
Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 414(a)(1)).
(5) The Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related
Programs Appropriations Act, 2003, notwithstanding section 10
of Public Law 91-672 and section 15 of the State Department
Basic Authorities Act of 1956.
(6) The Department of the Interior and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2003.
(7) The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services,
and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2003.
(8) The Military Construction Appropriations Act, 2003.
(9) The Department of Transportation and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2003.
[[Page H8910]]
(10) The Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2003.
(11) The Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and
Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations
Act, 2003.
Sec. 102. Appropriations made by section 101 shall be
available to the extent and in the manner which would be
provided by the pertinent appropriations Act.
Sec. 103. The appropriations Acts listed in section 101
shall be deemed to include supplemental appropriation laws
enacted during fiscal year 2003.
Sec. 104. No appropriation or funds made available or
authority granted pursuant to section 101 shall be used to
initiate or resume any project or activity for which
appropriations, funds, or other authority were not available
during fiscal year 2003.
Sec. 105. Appropriations made and authority granted
pursuant to this joint resolution shall cover all obligations
or expenditures incurred for any program, project, or
activity during the period for which funds or authority for
such project or activity are available under this joint
resolution.
Sec. 106. (a) The matter under the heading ``Department of
Education--Education for the Disadvantaged'' in division G of
Public Law 108-7 is amended--
(1) by striking ``$4,651,199,000'' and inserting
``$6,895,199,000''; and
(2) by striking ``$9,027,301,000'' and inserting
``$6,783,301,000''.
(b) The amendments made by subsection (a) shall take effect
on the date of the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 107. Unless otherwise provided for in this joint
resolution or in the applicable appropriations Act,
appropriations and funds made available and authority granted
pursuant to this joint resolution shall be available until
(a) enactment into law of an appropriation for any project or
activity provided for in this joint resolution, or (b) the
enactment into law of the applicable appropriations Act by
both Houses without any provision for such project or
activity, or (c) October 31, 2003, whichever first occurs.
Sec. 108. Expenditures made pursuant to this joint
resolution shall be charged to the applicable appropriation,
fund, or authorization whenever a bill in which such
applicable appropriation, fund, or authorization is contained
is enacted into law.
Sec. 109. Appropriations and funds made available by or
authority granted pursuant to this joint resolution may be
used without regard to the time limitations for submission
and approval of apportionments set forth in section 1513 of
title 31, United States Code, but nothing herein shall be
construed to waive any other provision of law governing the
apportionment of funds.
Sec. 110. Notwithstanding any other provision of this joint
resolution, except section 107, for those programs that had
high initial rates of operation or complete distribution of
fiscal year 2003 appropriations at the beginning of that
fiscal year because of distributions of funding to States,
foreign countries, grantees or others, similar distributions
of funds for fiscal year 2004 shall not be made and no grants
shall be awarded for such programs funded by this resolution
that would impinge on final funding prerogatives.
Sec. 111. This joint resolution shall be implemented so
that only the most limited funding action of that permitted
in the joint resolution shall be taken in order to provide
for continuation of projects and activities.
Sec. 112. For entitlements and other mandatory payments
whose budget authority was provided in appropriations Acts
for fiscal year 2003, and for activities under the Food Stamp
Act of 1977, activities shall be continued at the rate to
maintain program levels under current law, under the
authority and conditions provided in the applicable
appropriations Act for fiscal year 2003, to be continued
through the date specified in section 107(c): Provided, That
notwithstanding section 107, funds shall be available and
obligations for mandatory payments due on or about November 1
and December 1, 2003, may continue to be made.
Sec. 113. Section 1316(c) of Public Law 108-11 shall be
applied by substituting the date specified in section 107(c)
of this joint resolution for ``September 30, 2003'' each
place it appears.
Sec. 114. Activities authorized by section 403(f) of Public
Law 103-356, as amended by section 634 of Public Law 107-67,
and activities authorized under the heading ``Treasury
Franchise Fund'' in the Treasury Department Appropriations
Act, 1997 (Public Law 104-208), as amended by section 120 of
the Treasury Department Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law
106-554), may continue through the date specified in section
107(c) of this joint resolution.
Sec. 115. Notwithstanding section 235(a)(2) of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2195(a)(2)), the authority
of subsections (a) through (c) of section 234 of such Act,
shall remain in effect through the date specified in section
107(c) of this joint resolution.
Sec. 116. Section 503(f) of the Small Business Investment
Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 697(f)) shall be applied by
substituting the date specified in section 107(c) of this
joint resolution for ``October 1, 2003''.
Sec. 117. Section 303(g)(2) of the Small Business
Investment Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 683(g)(2)) is amended by
striking ``1.38 percent'' in the last sentence and inserting
``1.46 percent''.
Sec. 118. Collection and use of maintenance fees as
authorized by section 4(i) and 4(k) of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. Sec.
136a-1(i) and (k)) may continue through the date specified in
section 107(c) of this joint resolution. Prohibitions against
collecting ``other fees'' as described in section 4(i)(6) of
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7
U.S.C. 136a-1(i)(6)) shall continue in effect through the
date specified in section 107(c) of this joint resolution.
Sec. 119. The full amount provided under this joint
resolution for necessary expenses to carry out the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), section 118(f) of the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, and
section 3019 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, shall be
derived from the general fund.
Sec. 120. National Aeronautics and Space Administration is
authorized to implement full cost accounting as of October 1,
2003, in the account structure that is consistent with the
President's request for fiscal year 2004.
Sec. 121. Notwithstanding any other provision of this joint
resolution, except section 107(c), the limitation on new loan
guarantee commitments of the Federal Housing Administration,
General and Special Risk Insurance Fund, shall be
$3,800,000,000 for the period of applicability of this joint
resolution to continue projects and activities under that
account: Provided, That the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development shall submit daily reports to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate
on the total amount of new loan guarantee commitments issued
during the period of applicability of this joint
resolution.
Sec. 122. For the period covered by this joint resolution,
there shall be available, at the current rate of operations
for fiscal year 2003, such funds as may be necessary for
grants and necessary expenses as provided for, in accordance
with, and subject to the requirements set forth in the
Compacts of Free Association, as amended, and their related
agreements, (sections 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, and 217) as
between the Government of the United States of America and
the Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands
(signed April 30, 2003), and (sections 211, 212, 213, 214,
and 216) as between the Government of the United States of
America and the Federated States of Micronesia (signed May
14, 2003); to remain available until expended: Provided, That
if H.J. Res. 63 of the 108th Congress, or similar legislation
to approve the Compacts of Free Association, is enacted, any
funding made available in this appropriation shall be
considered to have been made available and expended for the
purposes of funding for fiscal year 2004 as provided for in
such enacted legislation.
Sec. 123. From amounts available to the Bureau of Indian
Affairs under this joint resolution, $123,500 shall be
available to satisfy the requirements specified in sections
10(f), 11(b)(2), and 11(c) of Public Law 106-263.
Sec. 124. Notwithstanding any other provision of this joint
resolution, except section 107(c), the District of Columbia
may expend local funds for programs and activities under the
heading ``District of Columbia Funds-Operating Expenses'' at
the rate set forth for such programs and activities under
title II of H.R. 2765, 108th Congress, as passed by the House
of Representatives.
Sec. 125. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of
this joint resolution, except section 107, amounts provided
in this joint resolution and in prior Appropriations Acts
from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund shall be available for
fiscal year 2004, at a rate for operations not exceeding the
current rate and for which authority was made available under
the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2003, for expenditures to meet
obligations, heretofore and hereafter incurred, as paid from
the Airport and Airway Trust Fund in fiscal year 2003.
Sec. 126. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of
this joint resolution, except section 107, such amounts as
may be necessary for administrative expenses of the Federal
Highway Administration, for purposes described in 23 U.S.C.
104(a)(1)(A), shall continue to be transferred and credited
to the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit
Account), to be available to the Secretary of Transportation,
at a rate for operations not exceeding the current rate and
for which authority was made available under the Department
of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,
2003: Provided, That funds authorized under this section
shall be available for obligation in the same manner as if
the funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23,
United States Code, and shall be subject to any limitation on
obligations for Federal-aid highways and highway safety
construction programs.
Sec. 127. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of
this joint resolution, except section 107, such amounts as
may be necessary for administrative expenses of the Bureau of
Transportation Statistics, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 111,
shall continue to be transferred and credited to the Highway
Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account), to be
available to the Secretary of Transportation, at a rate for
operations not exceeding the current rate and for which
authority was made available under the Department of
Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2003:
Provided, That funds authorized under this section shall be
available for obligation in the same manner as if the funds
were apportioned
[[Page H8911]]
under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code, and shall be
subject to any limitation on obligations for Federal-aid
highways and highway safety construction programs.
Sec. 128. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of
this joint resolution, except section 107, such amounts as
may be necessary for administrative expenses of the Federal
Transit Administration, in accordance with the Federal
Transit Administration's programs authorized by chapter 53 of
title 49, United States Code, shall continue to be
transferred and credited to the Mass Transit Account of the
Highway Trust Fund, to be available to the Secretary of
Transportation, at a rate for operations not exceeding the
current rate and for which authority was made available under
the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2003: Provided, That funds authorized
under this section shall be available for obligation in the
same manner provided under section 5338(g) of title 49,
United States Code.
Sec. 129. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of
this joint resolution, except section 107, such amounts as
may be necessary for administrative expenses of the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in accordance with 23
U.S.C. 402, 403, 405, 410 and chapter 303 of title 49, United
States Code, shall continue to be transferred and credited
to the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit
Account), to be available to the Secretary of
Transportation, at a rate for operations not exceeding the
current rate and for which authority was made available
under the Department of Transportation and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2003: Provided, That funds
authorized under this section shall be available for
obligation in the same manner as if the funds were
apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States
Code.
Sec. 130. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of
this joint resolution, except section 107, such amounts as
may be necessary for administrative expenses of the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Administration, for purposes described
in 23 U.S.C. 104(a)(1)(B), shall continue to be transferred
and credited to the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass
Transit Account), to be available to the Secretary of
Transportation, at a rate for operations not exceeding the
current rate and for which authority was made available under
the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2003: Provided, That funds authorized
under this section shall be available for obligation in the
same manner as if the funds were apportioned under chapter 1
of title 23, United States Code.
Sec. 131. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
amounts shall continue to be appropriated or credited to the
Airport and Airway Trust Fund and the Highway Trust Fund
after the date of any expenditure pursuant to this Act.
Sec. 132. Notwithstanding rule 3 of the Budget Scorekeeping
Guidelines set forth in the joint explanatory statement of
the committee of conference accompanying Conference Report
105-217, the provisions of sections 125 through 130, and
section 134, of this joint resolution that would change
direct spending or receipts under section 252 of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 were they
included in an Act other than an appropriations Act shall be
treated as direct spending or receipts legislation, as
appropriate, under section 252 of the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, and by the Chairmen of
the House and Senate Budget Committees, as appropriate, under
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
Sec. 133. Notwithstanding any other provision of this joint
resolution, during fiscal year 2004, direct loans under
section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act may be made
available for the Czech Republic, gross obligations for the
principal amounts of which shall not exceed $550,000,000:
Provided, That such loans shall be repaid in not more than
twelve years, including a grace period of up to five years on
repayment of principal: Provided further, That no funds are
available for the subsidy costs for these loans: Provided
further, That the Government of the Czech Republic shall pay
the full cost, as defined in section 502 of the Federal
Credit Reform Act of 1990, associated with these loans,
including the cost of any defaults: Provided further, That
any fees associated with these loans shall be paid by the
Government of the Czech Republic prior to any disbursement of
any loan proceeds: Provided further, That no funds made
available to the Czech Republic under this joint resolution
or any other Act may be used for payment of any fees
associated with these loans.
Sec. 134. The following provisions of law shall continue in
effect through the date specified in section 107(c) of this
joint resolution:
(1) Sections 9(b)(7), 14(a), 17(a)(2)(B)(i), and 18(f)(2)
of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42
U.S.C. 1758(b)(7), 1762a(a), 1766(a)(2)(B)(i), and
1769(f)(2)).
(2) Section 15 of the Commodity Distribution Reform Act and
WIC Amendments of 1987 (7 U.S.C. 612c note; Public Law 100-
237).
Sec. 135. Section 8144(b) of the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 2003, Public Law 107-248, is amended by
striking ``on September 30, 2003'' and inserting ``October
31, 2003''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of
Wednesday, September 24, 2003, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young)
and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) each will control 30
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young).
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
(Mr. YOUNG of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, the legislation before the House,
H.J. Res. 69, is a continuing resolution for fiscal year 2004, and it
would extend until the end of October. Normally we do a 3- or 4- or 5-
day CR, but the wiser approach is to do this for the entire month of
October because there is considerable work still to do that has not yet
been completed. This legislation is needed to continue the operation of
the Federal Government for the first month of the new fiscal year.
I think everyone is aware that the Committee on Appropriations
continues to work on the fiscal year 2004 bills. The House, as a matter
of fact, has passed all of our appropriations bills, we passed three
conference reports, and we have two more bills in conference with the
other body as we speak today. Yesterday, we passed the conference
reports for three very important appropriations bills: the Defense
Appropriations bill, the Homeland Security Appropriations bill, and the
Legislative Branch Appropriations bill that also included supplemental
appropriations for natural disasters and forest fires.
We are continuing to move forward on conferences with the other body.
We hope to have the conference reports for Energy and Water and
Military Construction ready for House consideration very soon.
As I think we all know, in addition to our regular appropriations
bills, we are also in the process of considering an $87 billion budget
amendment for the war against terror. Yesterday, we began oversight
hearings on this request. There is still a considerable amount of work
for our committee to do before we are able to adjourn.
That is the reason for this continuing resolution. Let me now briefly
describe the terms and conditions of the continuing resolution. It will
continue all ongoing activities at current rates, including
supplemental funding, under the same terms and conditions as fiscal
year 2003. As in past CRs, it does not allow new starts, and it
restricts obligations on high initial spend-out programs so the
annualized funding levels in this bill will not impinge on our final
budget deliberations.
It includes provisions that allow for the continuation of programs
and fee collections that would otherwise expire, for example,
entitlement payments under the Food Stamp program, certain child
nutrition programs, certain SBA loan programs, and payments to military
personnel for imminent danger special pay and family separation
allowances. The CR also allows the District of Columbia to spend local
funds through the period of the CR at budget levels as passed by the
House. The CR ensures that funding is available during the period of
the CR to conduct administrative oversight and to pay certain
Department of Transportation personnel managing surface and aviation
programs in the absence of reauthorizations for such programs.
A provision was also requested by the Administration that is included
in the CR that provides legislative authorization to implement a new,
no-subsidy $550 million Foreign Military Financing 12-year loan to the
Czech Republic for the purchase of 14 of our used F-16 aircraft,
weapons, training, and related logistics support from the United
States.
Mr. Speaker, I do not think this CR is controversial, and I urge the
House to move it to the Senate so the government may continue to
operate efficiently and so that we can continue our work to finish the
balance of the appropriations bills and the substantial request that we
have for the $87 billion war against terrorism.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 14 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, this continuing resolution will, I assume, be known as
the Halloween appropriation bill for the year 2003, because what it
does is to extend government activities until October 31 of this coming
year. I am looking around the floor, looking for the
[[Page H8912]]
chickens, and I do not see any. And I am a little confused by that,
because this is the day that the chickens come home to roost. I guess
they are invisible, much like much of the truth is in the budget
resolution that passed earlier this year. But I think we need to
understand how we got to this situation today.
As of today, even though we are supposed to have all 13 appropriation
bills passed by October 1, plus any supplementals for that fiscal year,
despite that fact, this House has passed only three of the 13
conference reports that it would have to pass on appropriation bills in
order to do its work. Now, that is not the fault of the Committee on
Appropriations; it certainly is not the fault of the gentleman from
Florida. The problem is that we have a budget process which has been
stood on its head.
The idea behind the original budget resolution was that it was
supposed to force all of the players in the Congress to face reality.
Instead, it has been used increasingly each year by the House
Republican leadership to assist the House in avoiding reality and
ignoring reality.
What happens is this: the budget resolution for the year is produced
by a committee that has absolutely no responsibility to implement it.
The Committee on the Budget produces unreal numbers; they produce
numbers that pretend that this Congress will spend less money than will
actually wind up being spent on discretionary appropriations. It
pretends in the budget resolution, as it did in April, that budget
resolution pretended that we were going to meet the goals that many
moderate Republicans had in this House for special education and for
the No Child Left Behind Act, for instance. And then as soon as the
budget resolution was passed, then the Committee on Appropriations is
given the responsibility to deliver reality. And because the majority
did not provide sufficient room in the budget resolution for this House
to meet the promises that were laid out in the Republican budget
resolution, then the Committee on Appropriations is stuck with the job
of being the bad guy messenger.
{time} 1030
So then poor Ralph Regula, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Labor,
Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, has to come
to the floor and say, ``Sorry, boys and girls, we do not have enough
room in the resolution to do what we promised we would do just 3 weeks
ago.'' So we cannot fund special education the way we were going to
fund it, and we cannot keep our promises on title I or the No Child
Left Behind Act, and the list goes on and on and on.
So because that budget resolution starts out with an unrealistic set
of numbers, then the next 6 months the House and the other body try to
get a double hernia trying to lift enough weight in order to get and
pack all of these obligations into a tiny overall budget ceiling bag,
and they cannot do it because they cannot repeal the basic laws of
mathematics.
So now we are here with only three of the 13 appropriation bills
passed. Last year when this happened, our friends on the majority side
of the aisle blamed the other body because it was under Democratic
control. Well, this year that is not the case. This year the Republican
Party has all the marbles. They run the House, they run the Senate,
they run the White House, and on good days, they even run the Supreme
Court. And now what happened is that they do not have anybody to blame
anymore. And the fact is, right now the majority Republican Party is
having a fight with itself and it cannot win the debate. So it is
stuck.
And so the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), who has done his job,
I mean the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) has been a loyal soldier,
followed his marching orders, even though the orders produced turkey
results. He is a good, loyal soldier, and he has followed them; and so
now he has to come to the floor and say, ``Folks, guess what, because
the budget resolution was not real, we have not been able to move these
bills forward, and so we are stuck way behind on the calendar.'' And
that is not the whole story.
In addition, yesterday we had a hearing on the supplemental for Iraq.
Now, we were told in March of this year by the wizard who ran OMB for
the past 2 years, Mitch Daniels, we were told by the resident wizard
over there that Iraq was only going to cost the $60 billion that the
White House had already asked for in their first appropriation and
there would not be any more need for money for Iraq for this year. They
were only off by $87 billion. So now we have got to come in and pass a
supplemental, even though the witnesses yesterday did not have a clue,
or at least they would not tell us if they did, about what it was going
to cost us over the next 5 years to carry out, not our program, but
their program in Iraq.
So, very frankly, this Congress has no budget process at this point.
The truth is revealed to us on the installment plan by the
administration in terms of the cost of the effort for Iraq, and the
truth is obscured as far as the domestic budget is concerned in order
to maintain the fiction that, even though we have conducted a
unilateral war, we can afford to continue to provide $88,000 tax cuts
to millionaires in this country, and that is the biggest fiction of
all.
So this bill is here trying to put a reality patch on an Alice in
Wonderland fairy tale which is what the budget resolution has been. And
so I do not blame the press for not covering it. This is too absurd a
story to cover, and so we are left here facing inevitability; and we
have no choice but to pass this resolution today.
Now, I would like to think that we would see a new sense of reality
in the coming months, but I do not think so; and I go back to the
conversation that I had years ago with Dick Bolling who served in this
House, very distinguished career, and who wrote the Budget Act under
which the budget resolution comes to the floor every year. Dick Bolling
told me the night before he finalized his recommendations that he had
one hard choice to make. He said, ``I do not know whether we should set
up the Committee on the Budget so that people who are on the Committee
on the Budget are people who represent the power centers in this
institution, like the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on
Ways and Means and the other committees with direct spending authority.
I do not know whether we ought to require that it be made up of people
like that or whether we ought to require that it be made up of
independent players appointed by the caucuses without respect to what
committees they serve on.'' He decided to do the latter. But when he
did, he said, ``If the party leaders do not take this process seriously
and if they do not use it to force reality, then,'' he said, ``I will
have made a bad mistake. ''
And in fact, I think what has happened is that the majority party
leadership has decided to use the budget process, not as an instrument
to force Members of Congress to make hard choices but, rather, as an
instrument that facilitates the pretense that we can have it all. And
so we pretend that we can provide $3 trillion-plus in tax cuts, even
though we no longer have the surpluses that we had, that we were
expecting when those tax cuts were passed.
We pretend we can fight a war in Iraq and charge every single dime to
our grandchildren, and we pretend that that war will not have a
consequence in terms of denied opportunities for kids to get a decent
education and denied opportunities for people without health care to
get some coverage. We pretend there are no consequences to the free-
lunch budget that this place has passed. Well, there are in the real
world, outside of this Chamber. And in this Chamber, probably the least
consequential consequence is that we get stuck with having to pass a
CR.
Now, this is not the first time that this has happened, but each year
the problem gets worse because each year the Committee on
Appropriations is asked to perform an act that is more and more
impossible because the budget resolution is less and less responsible
and real. And sooner or later we will come to the conclusion that the
only way to return credibility to this House on the budget matter is to
start with a budget resolution that makes sense and is honest in the
first place.
We have not done that in years; and I will readily grant that in some
years, when our party was in control, we did not have budget
resolutions that were
[[Page H8913]]
the finest in the world either. But none of them, none of them departed
as much from reality as the budget resolutions the last 3 years in this
place; and so that is why we are here today, not because the Committee
on Appropriations has not done its work, but because the Committee on
Appropriations is asked to perform an impossible act. It is supposed to
tell the truth in the context of a budget resolution which is a public
lie; and that, no one can do.
So I sympathize with the gentleman from Florida. I will support this
resolution because it is the only alternative we have, but the reasons
we are here, indeed, do no great credit to this institution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) for pointing
out that basically the Committee on Appropriations in the House has
done its job. There are other reasons that are beyond our control that
require us to have this CR. So I appreciate him pointing that out.
As he speaks to the budget issue, I want to defend the chairman and
the ranking member and every member of the Committee on the Budget, but
I would join the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) in not having very
complimentary comments about the product that eventually came to us as
a budget resolution. It required considerable creativity on the part of
the Committee on Appropriations in order to do what we had to do and
still comply with the budget; and the fact that we were able to
conclude our 13 bills early on is in no small part thanks to the
cooperation that the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and I had with
each other as we proceeded through some of these rocky paths, some of
the very difficult differences that we had that we were able to finally
work out.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman indicated that the budget resolution
required a great degree of creativity. I would like to explain to the
House what one of those creative measures has been.
Last year, in order to pretend that the budget resolution provided
adequate funding for education, the committee provided what was known
as ``advance funding'' for education to the tune of $2.2 billion. That
meant that, for Enron accounting purposes, that $2.2 billion, which was
appropriated last year, was not going to count until the next fiscal
year, 2004; but now, guess what. Now we are at the end of fiscal 2003.
So nobody is watching what happens to the deficit for 2003 anymore. So
what happens instead is that now we get a double reverse because this
proposal, this resolution today contains a gimmick that can only be
labeled ``Enron accounting 1A'' because what this resolution does now
is to move that $2.2 billion back to fiscal 2003.
So you have to play the shell game when they are looking at what
happened in 2003, slip the money into the fiscal 2004 budget, and then
when people take their eyes off 2003 and now focus on 2004, then you
slip the same money into 2003. Great gimmick. It technically works, but
if the SEC were supervising this, I think they would have the same kind
of questions about our bookkeeping that we have had about Enron.
So that is just one of the creative accounting measures that the
committee has been reduced to following. I see the gentleman smiling.
He knows what I am talking about.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Hoyer), the distinguished minority whip.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me
the time, and I agree with everything he said; and I think the chairman
agrees with most of what he said.
Usually when we discuss these issues, almost invariably those of us
on this side of the aisle rise and first say that we do not hold
responsible our chairman for the policies that are being pursued. It is
his responsibility, however, to practically try to carry out flawed
policies. He does so with a great deal of skill, with eminent fairness
and with grace for which all of us who serve on his committee are very
thankful.
But, Mr. Speaker, the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations is
operating in the context of the most fiscally irresponsible policy that
any administration and majority has followed in the history of this
country. I pause for emphasis. The children of America, the
grandchildren of America are going to be called upon to pay the bill
for this irresponsible policy. That is what the ranking member meant
when he said that all of the dollars that are being requested to pursue
a policy that I supported in Iraq will be paid for by our children and
grandchildren.
{time} 1045
An irresponsible policy. An unrealistic policy.
And I would recall for Members that just a few months ago, when we
adopted that budget resolution, of which the gentleman from Wisconsin
(Mr. Obey) spoke, we adopted it on a Thursday. No Democrats voted for
it. Not one. We then, on the Tuesday following that Thursday, had a
motion made by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), and that
motion simply said that we instructed the conference not to do what was
in the budget; not to cut veterans by $1.5 billion; not to cut housing,
which is in short supply for middle America; not to do many of the
things that would have undercut education, health care, and the
environment that were proposed in that budget.
And I would further recall for Members, and unfortunately there are
no press here, but I recall that the chairman of the Committee on the
Budget (Mr. Nussle), sitting where the chairman of the Committee on
Appropriations now sits, railed for about 29 minutes about how awful
the motion to instruct was and how Members ought to vote against it.
And then, lo and behold, the majority leader came to the floor, spoke
quietly to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle), and the vote was
called.
Many Republicans rushed to the floor to vote against that motion to
instruct, and, lo and behold, as the minutes went by, votes were
changed. Lo and behold, as the minutes went by, the rhetoric of the
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) was forgotten quickly when the reality
of the votes and the necessity to report at home the consequences of
those votes was realized by our Republican friends on the majority
side. So they changed their votes; or if they had not voted, voted for
the motion to instruct offered by the gentleman from South Carolina
(Mr. Spratt). How ironic.
And now the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) is confronted with
another reality. Last year, we could not pass appropriation bills.
Eight of them were passed not only after the fiscal year, but after the
Congress had adjourned. Why? Because the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Young) was forced to operate within a context of a totally unrealistic
budget. And what did the Republicans say? They said, oh, it is Mr.
Daschle's fault. It is the Senate's fault. They have not adopted a
budget.
Well, now, they control the House, they control the Senate, they
control the administration, and as the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Obey) pointed out, on a good day, they control the Supreme Court. I
thought that was a good line and, unfortunately, true at times as well.
But the fact of the matter is they control it all. And the lamentation
that they put forward last year, the excuse that they put forward last
year, the rationalization they pursued last year is not available to
them; not to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) but to the majority
leadership.
And so we are confronted with, yes, having passed our bills, and I
might say some without a single Democratic vote. As a matter of fact,
one of the largest bills, one of the most important bills for education
of our children, for the health care of our families and citizens, not
one Democrat voted for it. Not because we are not for education and
health care, but because we knew that bill was an unrealistic bill.
So we are confronted today with a resolution that the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Young) is required to put forward, and acting as he always
does, responsibly, he must put forward, and
[[Page H8914]]
which I am going to support, as the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey)
is going to support. It is the alternative we ought to pursue.
I said the most fiscally irresponsible administration. Why? Because
after we adopt this budget or these appropriation bills, which will
spend a lesser and lesser percentage of the gross domestic product of
our country on discretionary spending that we will make decisions
about, we will have created over a $.5 trillion deficit in this single
year, more debt than we incurred in the first 90 percent of the days of
this Republic, and our children are going to pay the bill. How tragic.
How irresponsible.
We passed a bankruptcy bill in which we made it harder to declare
bankruptcy, and each of us on the floor said we need to require
personal responsibility of those who seek credit. If we applied that
same criteria to this administration and to the Congress of the United
States, we would fail. We are not exercising personal responsibility.
In this instance, we must pass this resolution, and I will vote for it,
but I lament the fact that it is passed in the context of the most
irresponsible fiscal policy that I have ever seen and this country has
ever seen, and which is disadvantaging our country and our ability to
invest in the future.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time, and I wish to associate myself with the comments made by the
gentleman from Wisconsin and the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. Speaker, we have entered into a new era of irresponsibility in
government, and this continuing resolution is representative of that. I
understand the good work that went into trying to put this effort
together, but as a Nation, we have very serious unmet needs: Health
care, education, retirement security, and pension reform.
Our States are laboring under the biggest fiscal crises that we have
seen since World War II. We have an economy that is faltering. Millions
of workers are unemployed. We have nine million workers unemployed and
3.3 private sector jobs gone in the last couple of years. We have 41
million without health insurance and an entire generation on the cusp
of retirement.
The people in charge have no plan to deal with these pressing needs,
rather we have simply and systematically starved our capacity to do
anything by imposing incredibly irresponsible tax cuts that benefit
just a few wealthy individuals and special interests.
We come to this piece in the process where we say we have limited
resources in order to deal with these very serious unmet needs, but the
fact of the matter is we need to deal with the fundamental question of
why do we have so few resources? It is because so few in our society
are receiving so much. We have 184,000 millionaires in the United
States who are going to get a tax cut of $93,000, and yet we cannot do
anything about people who make between $10,500 and $26,000 in terms of
a child tax credit because we say we do not have the money to do it.
With 184,000 people getting $93,000 in a tax break, we have so few
getting so much. That is what we ought to be debating on the floor of
this House.
This Congress is undermining the capacity and the obligation of
government to provide key social support to reflect the values and the
issues and the interests of the American people. From prescription
drugs to education, from veterans health and housing programs, they are
undermining the idea that our society can act with a shared sense of
purpose, with a shared sense of responsibility to address the tasks
that are before our country.
When we starve the government of the resources to meet its public
commitments, in essence, we then are saying that government has no role
to play. And while we know and we understand that government cannot
play the sole role in people's lives, I believe that all Americans
believe that we have, at the State and local and the Federal level, the
obligation to assist people in a time of need to face the challenges
that they have in their lives.
We cannot remove government from participating in the lives of the
American people. We cannot undo our social responsibility. We cannot
let it happen. The American people deserve better. And as we strive to
finish the remaining appropriation bills, we should remember that this
Congress, this House, the people's House, has an obligation to promote
the capacity of our country to act together on our shared values. That
is what we were elected to do.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Florida and I are personal friends.
And I take some pride in the fact that although this institution has
become incredibly political over the last 15 years, and although it has
become incredibly partisan, I take some pride in the fact that our
friendship has withstood the context in which that friendship operates
every day. I think, frankly, that the unreal demands on the part of the
power centers in this institution have put greater strains on our
friendship than is the case with any other chair and ranking member in
the House, and yet we remain good friends. Because I know that the
gentleman is trying to do his duty, and I think he understands that I
am trying to do mine, and I think we genuinely like each other and
respect each other.
But he is given the job of bringing some of the saddest pieces of
legislation to this floor of anyone in the House, simply because he is
denied the resources to meet our responsibilities to the citizens we
represent. We had $6 trillion in surpluses when the majority party 2
years ago started passing out its tax cuts. We are now facing $2
trillion to $3 trillion in deficits over that same time frame. And on
top of that, we are going to have to pay for Iraq, which will add a
whole lot more than the $87 billion that we have been told about so
far.
And so in a rational world, one would think that when conditions
change to that degree, assumptions would also change and conduct would
change, and we might reconsider some of our past decisions. But that is
evidently not going to occur, so we are still going to continue to
pretend that we can afford these huge tax cuts that have been passed
out to high-income people in this country.
This Congress faces a very simple choice: What kind of country do we
want America to be? Are we satisfied with the prospect of having a
country which in 10 years will have 50 million people without health
insurance, rather than 40? Are we satisfied with the pretensions that
we provide equal opportunity for education, when in fact we do not? Are
we satisfied with the meager enforcement that protects private pension
systems and that protects and enforces honest accounting by
corporations so that investors can know what the rules of the game
really are? Are we satisfied facing the long-term shortfalls that will
occur in Social Security?
I am not satisfied with that prospect, and I do not think most
Members of this institution are either. If that is the case, we need to
act like it, and we need to have a reconsideration of what the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) correctly calls the most
colossally, fiscally irresponsible actions on the part of any
administration certainly in my lifetime.
{time} 1100
Mr. Speaker, having said that, I would simply urge Members for the
time being to support this continuing resolution to give the Committee
on Appropriations more time to perform its impossible responsibilities,
and in hopes that eventually the majority leadership of this House will
see the necessity to reconsider some of its most reckless fiscal
actions.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
Mr. Speaker, I want to say that I appreciate more than I can say, the
friendship that I enjoy with the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey)
and the strong spirit of cooperation, as the leadership of the
Committee on Appropriations, and also with the gentleman from Maryland
(Mr. Hoyer), as we work together to meet our responsibilities to the
Congress and to the country. The gentleman from Maryland and I have not
only a friendship, but a mutual respect.
But, Mr. Speaker, I think it is fair to point out that we have
political and philosophical differences. There is no
[[Page H8915]]
doubt about that. That is basically why we have two parties, because
one party believes one way and the other party believes another way on
many issues. While our appropriations bills have received very large
votes on the Republican side as well as the Democratic side, as we
prepared those bills, we dealt with a lot of amendments in our
committee. Most of those amendments were to increase spending and to
increase taxes. Our committee does not have the jurisdiction to raise
taxes, and we make that case when necessary in the committee.
If we were to add up all of the amendments offered by the minority
party alone in committee, the deficit would really be big. They believe
we do not spend enough money in many areas, and we believe that
sometimes we spend too much money.
I want to say that I meet with my leadership, with the Speaker of the
House and the majority leader, on a very regular basis. In fact, they
probably get tired of seeing me, but I would say they are genuine in
understanding their responsibility to the country. They are genuine and
sincere in having a reasonable, responsible fiscal policy; and they are
determined to allow the American workers to keep as much of their own
money as they can without passing it on to the Congress.
We are in an unusual time. We have a war going in Iraq and a war
going in Afghanistan and to a lesser extent a war going in many other
parts of the world against terrorists, against people who are
determined to do harm to the American people and to our country.
This did not just start on September 11. On February 26, 1993,
terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in New York. Six lives were
lost. The response was some harsh words, but basically nothing else.
On June 25, 1996, Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia which housed our
United States Air Force personnel was bombed by terrorists. Nineteen
American airmen lost their lives. Again, there were words but no
action, no response; and the terrorists grew bolder because they
believed if America was not going to fight back, they should continue.
So they did.
On August 7, 1998, terrorists bombed American embassies in Kenya and
Tanzania, and 259 lives were lost. Well, we took some action then. We
fired a couple of cruise missiles into abandoned terrorist training
camps in Afghanistan. That was the extent of it.
On October 12, 2000, the USS Cole, a Navy warship, was bombed off the
shore of Yemen. Seventeen sailors lost their lives, and many others
were injured; again, harsh words, but no action.
On September 11, 2001, under a new Administration, a new President, a
hijacked plane crashed into the Pentagon, and 189 lives were lost.
September 11, 2001, hijacked planes crashed into the World Trade Center
Towers, and nearly 3,000 lives were lost. September 11, 2001, a
hijacked plane crashes into rural Pennsylvania, and 44 lives were lost.
A new Administration, a new President as of September 11, and the words
were harsh, the words were threatening; but there was more action. The
attack was massive against the terrorist trainers and the terrorist
supporters and the terrorist camps in Afghanistan. Further, we sent
nearly 200,000 American troops into Iraq to rid the world of a tyrant
who supported terrorist activities.
There is a major difference. This President, George Bush, took action
to defend America. We have spent a lot of money since September 11, and
that is one of the reasons we have a larger deficit. But let me say
this to those Members who believe this money is nothing more than a
mortgage on the future of our children and future generations. I say it
is different. I say what we are doing to fight terrorism, wherever it
raises its ugly head, is to secure future generations, to guarantee
that our children and our grandchildren and future generations do not
have to worry about being on a hijacked airplane or having a building
they are inhabiting being attacked by a bomber or a hijacked airplane,
or that future generations are going to be as secure as we can make
them, to be free from anthrax, to be free from sarin gases, and to be
free from nuclear exchanges.
Mr. Speaker, that is what we are doing today. We are spending
considerable money to guarantee the future security and safety of
Americans; and it is better to do that at the source, beyond the United
States boundaries, than to do it here in the streets of Washington,
D.C. or to do it in the streets of New York or Pennsylvania or any one
of our districts that could be a target.
I say this is the proper philosophy. This is the proper way to secure
the future generations, to invest what we must today to eliminate the
ability of terrorists to threaten our future generations, our children
and our grandchildren and our great grandchildren.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, there are some philosophical differences, some
political differences among friends; but this is a brief statement of
our position. I urge the passage of this continuing resolution.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share my disappointment
that the Republican leadership must resort to this resolution to ensure
the continuity of our Nation's vital programs. Instead of staying here
and finishing the work that needs to be done, the Republican leadership
continues to schedule short workweeks. Everyday that they drag their
feet is another day our Nation's working families continue to struggle.
Our priorities should be passing a child tax credit that extends to
low-income families denied a break in the Republican tax package, and,
approving welfare reform that will not only reduce welfare rolls but
also reduce poverty.
No person should go a day longer forced to choose between paying
their rent and paying for their prescription drugs while a prescription
drug plan awaits a final vote by Congress. Sensible and popular
initiatives such as education reform, homeland security and affordable
housing continue to be either inadequately addressed or drastically
underfunded by this leadership.
Mr. Speaker, it is time for the Republican leadership to wake up and
put America's priorities first. Our country's working families are
working hard everyday to strengthen this nation and we should be
working just as hard to support them.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). All time for debate has
expired.
The joint resolution is considered read for amendment and pursuant to
the order of the House of Wednesday, September 24, 2003, the previous
question is ordered.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint
resolution.
The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third
time, and was read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the joint
resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 407,
nays 8, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 520]
YEAS--407
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Ballance
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Carter
Case
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Clay
Clyburn
Coble
Cole
Collins
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Dunn
Ehlers
Emanuel
[[Page H8916]]
Emerson
Engel
English
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Farr
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall
Harman
Harris
Hart
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Janklow
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kleczka
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Manzullo
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Owens
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrock
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Toomey
Turner (OH)
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watson
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--8
DeFazio
Duncan
Flake
Ford
Nussle
Paul
Royce
Smith (MI)
NOT VOTING--19
Bishop (GA)
Davis (FL)
Delahunt
Edwards
Eshoo
Frost
Gephardt
Istook
Kucinich
Larson (CT)
Lewis (GA)
Marshall
Oberstar
Pastor
Reyes
Shays
Towns
Watt
Weldon (PA)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette) (during the vote). Members
are advised that there are 2 minutes remaining in this vote.
{time} 1134
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona and Mr. PEARCE changed their vote from ``nay''
to ``yea.''
So the joint resolution was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________