[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 155 (Thursday, October 30, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H10206-H10210]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 2046
WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO
CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED FROM THE COMMITTEE ON
RULES
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the
Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 421 and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 421
Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII
for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee
on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is
waived with respect to any resolution reported on the
legislative day of October 30, 2003, providing for
consideration or disposition of a conference report to
accompany the bill (H.R. 3289) making emergency supplemental
appropriations for defense and for the reconstruction of Iraq
and Afghanistan for the fiscal year ending September 30,
2004, and for other purposes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gillmor). The gentleman from Washington
(Mr. Hastings) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only,
I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Frost); pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purposes
of debate only.
(Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, our resolution would waive
clause 6(a) of rule XIII requiring a two-thirds vote to consider a rule
on the same day it is reported from the Committee on Rules against
certain resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules.
This resolution applies the waiver to any special rule reported on
the legislative day of October 30, 2003, providing for the
consideration or disposition of a conference report to accompany the
bill, H.R. 3289, making emergency supplemental appropriations for
defense and for the reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for other purposes.
Mr. Speaker, given the urgent need to move the Iraqi supplemental to
the President's desk without further delay, the Committee on Rules has
acted to expedite consideration of this critically important conference
agreement filed in the House just a short while ago. Members will have
ample opportunity to debate the merits of that conference agreement
once we move to its consideration here in the House.
Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to adopt this
resolution so that we may begin this important debate.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. FROST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I voted for the U.S. military action to
remove Saddam Hussein from power. I support the American troops and
civilians who are now in Iraq doing the dangerous job of rebuilding
that nation. And I expect to vote for President Bush's $87 billion
supplemental for the supplemental foreign aid package for Iraq even
though it still does too little for the U.S. troops and asks too much
of U.S. taxpayers.
But this martial law rule is the perfect example of what is wrong
with the approach the Bush administration and the Republican leadership
of this Congress have taken to rebuilding Iraq. Instead of being honest
with the American people about the dangers and difficulties of nation-
building in Iraq, they keep trying to sweep it all under the rug.
Earlier this week we had the literally unbelievable scene of
President Bush trying to spin the public into believing that
sophisticated and deadly terrorist attacks in Iraq actually demonstrate
``progress'' in Iraq. A similar thing is happening on the House floor
today, Mr. Speaker. Instead of being open with the public, the
President and the Members of this House, Republican leaders, want to
waive the House rules so that no one has time to actually read the text
of this $87 billion foreign aid package.
Make no mistake, this is exactly what this ``martial law'' rule does.
It is simply a procedural way to get around the House rule that would
otherwise guarantee everyone one legislative day to examine this
massive expenditure of American taxpayers' money.
Of course, Republican leaders long ago made secrecy a key component
of this strategy for running the House of Representatives. This martial
law is the 8th time this year that Republicans have waived the House
rules to rush legislation through the House. In the last Congress they
did it 27 times. But their secretive approach to this $87 billion
foreign aid package poses an even greater danger.
That is because President Bush and his administration have already
developed a dangerous credibility problem on Iraq, a credibility gap
that threatens to undermine our ability to win the peace.
For too long they have treated nation-building in Iraq as some sort
of political campaign, relying on spin, sophistry, and stagecraft to
hide from the public the true magnitude of the dangerous and difficult
job before us.
Mr. Speaker, the American people are smarter than that. They cannot
be spun by President Bush and they cannot be kept in the dark by this
Republican Congress. They know that more than 120 Americans have died
in Iraq since President Bush's carefully choreographed PR event to
declare victory on an aircraft carrier. They know that they have
already spent billions of dollars on Iraq, and the United States
already has a massive debt of its own, one that will raise the debt tax
on every American. They remember being told before the war that Iraq is
an oil-rich Nation that could pay for its own reconstruction.
That is why the process surrounding this supplemental spending bill
has been so controversial and why so many Members who support President
Bush's nation-building project may refuse to vote for it until he
finally presents to the American people a credible plan to
[[Page H10207]]
win the peace in Iraq. It is also a big part of the reason that we have
been losing the relatively meager international assistance we have had
so far, with the Red Cross and the United Nations scaling back their
presence in Iraq. And it is where so many Americans have such sincere
doubts about this effort with nearly a majority of Republicans wanting
to pull U.S. troops out of Iraq, according to a Gallup Poll this week.
Mr. Speaker, more secrecy from the Republican Congress will only make
the Bush administration's credibility gap worse. It will only make it
more difficult to maintain public support for the important job of
winning the peace in Iraq. Take, for example, the issue of
accountability. American taxpayers have already given the Bush
administration $79 billion to spend on Iraq. So when the chairman of
the Committee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young)
came before the Committee on Rules, the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Hastings) asked him whether he knew what had become of the previous $79
billion. He answered, ``I would like to tell you that I do, but if I
did I would not be telling the truth.'' If the chairman of the
Committee on Appropriations does not know, then presumedly no other
Member of Congress has any idea where that $79 billion has gone.
So during the conference an amendment was adopted to create an office
of the inspector general to find out where the money is going in Iraq.
Now, however, we find out that the conference report has been changed
to give President Bush the power to muzzle the inspector general
whenever he might have some bad news to report, which very likely means
that the public will never see a report from the new inspector general
that contradicts the Bush administration's PR campaign. So this $87
billion package may disappear into the same black hole that swallowed
up the first $79 billion.
Mr. Speaker, we should be giving the public more time to examine this
massive $87 billion package, not rushing it through before anyone can
read it. That is why I urge Members to oppose this martial law rule.
That way the Congress can try to begin repairing President Bush's
credibility problem on Iraq.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Royce.)
Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, this rule is important so that we can bring
up the supplemental conference report tonight to fund our troops. The
need is very urgent. This past weekend I had the privilege of traveling
to Iraq where I led a Congressional delegation. And I say
``privileged'' because it was a privilege to spend time with our brave
servicemen and women on the ground in Iraq who are doing a tremendous
job under difficult conditions. They deserve our greatest support.
And, Mr. Speaker, that is what this bill does. It supports our
servicemen and women with the resources that they need. And I would
like to commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) and the
ranking member, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), and all
the Members involved in working out this bill with the other body.
I would like to bring attention to one program in particular
contained in this bill: The Commanders Emergency Response Program,
which, fortunately, was agreed to by the conferees. Having seen this
program at work on the ground in Iraq, I would like to report to my
colleagues that it is effective and it is very efficient. This program
allows our military commanders in Iraq to respond to urgent
humanitarian relief and reconstruction needs. And with this program, we
have repaired roads, water treatment facilities, police stations, and
schools. We had an opportunity to see this work. And this is done hand
in hand with Iraqi labor and it is done very cost effectively.
To date, the program has been carried out with the funds seized from
Saddam's regime, including funds taken from overseas accounts and taken
out of the walls of Saddam Hussein's palaces in some cases. And these
funds are running out. And our troops are fighting to show the Iraqi
people that their best future lies with democracy and with the rule of
law. These projects give the Iraqi people hope for that future,
emboldening them to fight the Baathists and emboldening them to fight
the terrorists. And they also make our troops safer.
Our top commanders in the field see these projects as security for
our troops. They see these projects as winning friends and weakening
our enemies. One commander told me that this program was the most
important ammunition he had. It is my hope that this program continues
to be carried out in a streamlined and flexible way, taking the
greatest advantage of the ingenuity of the Americans and Iraqis working
together. It is not too much to say that this modest effort is a key to
our success in Iraq.
And that is why, Mr. Speaker, I support this rule because of the
urgency. And I support the next rule and the underlying bill to fund
our troops which will come up before this body tonight.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey.)
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, this is the largest supplemental appropriation
bill ever voted on by the Congress of the United States. And I think
that it is a shame that it is being debated under these circumstances
at this time of night. The only reason for the martial law rule is so
that Members will not be given the courtesy of having this bill lay
over one day so that they can examine what the details of the bill are.
{time} 2100
We are going to be held accountable for this vote for a long time.
Our constituents are going to ask us every time we are home how we
voted, what it contained. They are going to be asking us about the
loans. They will be asking us whether or not there is adequate
protection for taxpayers' money. And I venture to say that 90 percent
of the Members of this Congress have not had an opportunity to dig
deeply enough into this in order to be able to answer these questions.
There were a few of us on the conference committee, and so we have
been able to form our judgments. But I have to tell you that conference
committee in which we participated the last 2 days is one of the most
chaotic, and at some moments the most laughable, conference that I have
ever participated in. And I think that in terms of the details of this
bill, that will be demonstrated over time, because over time,
regardless of whether or not the average Member in this House knows
what is in this bill tonight, over time there will be a lot of good
reporters who dig deeply enough into it to discover what is in this
bill. They will be able to form a judgment about whether or not, for
instance, the Inspector General provision is something with teeth or
something that is nothing short of a sham.
I happen to think that there are loopholes in the Inspector General
provision of this bill big enough to drive a 65-foot truck through.
I also would point out that that provision was adopted as a way to
sandbag the GAO accounting procedures that Senator Byrd wanted attached
in the conference. So I think there are a lot of detailed questions
that Members ought to know the answers to. They will not by the time
they vote, and that is the purpose of this rule. Our constituents will
learn over time what is in this bill even if a lot of Members have not
learned tonight, and that is why if I were a Member who feels any
responsibility at all to my constituents, I would not vote for this
martial law rule regardless of how you vote on the final bill.
The Members owe it to the country to have taken the time to review
this. This proposal will provide per capita aid to the citizens of Iraq
that is more than 10 times as large as the per capita aid that was
provided during the Marshall Plan to all of Western Europe. Under those
circumstances, we ought to take a bit more time than this rule will
allow us to take tonight.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Kucinich).
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, the Iraq supplemental conference report
will continue a failed policy. This bill is not about supporting the
troops. This bill supports the continued occupation of Iraq by the
United States. If we truly want to support the troops, we should bring
them home.
[[Page H10208]]
We need to acknowledge that the continued U.S. presence in Iraq is
counterproductive. Every day that we are inside Iraq the situation gets
progressively worse as evidenced by the frequent and more sophisticated
attacks on our troops. More U.S. troops have died occupying Iraq than
died in the war for Iraq. We need to recognize that at this point
continuing the U.S. occupation is counterproductive and contributes to
instability. That is why we need to get the U.S. out and the U.N. in.
And to do that we will need a new resolution articulating a new policy
from this administration.
To approve a budget-busting $87 billion for the reconstruction of
Iraq would be to throw good money after bad, to throw good money at a
failed policy. I am not suggesting that we cut and run. But we must
begin the process of getting the U.N. in and the U.S. out. The U.S.
must pay for the rebuilding of all that we have damaged in the
invasion. We must compensate the Iraqi victims and contributed to
future U.N. efforts. The U.S. must bring our troops home. End the
occupation of Iraq.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Sherman).
Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, we all want to vote to support the troops.
This bill, however, contains provisions for $18 billion as gifts, and
none as loans, to Iraq. We ought to have a separate vote on that
provision. But what they have done is link the two provisions in this
rule, so that you cannot oppose the way they have structured the aid to
Iraq without, in the view of some, ``voting against the troops.'' But
that diabolical connection was insufficient, so they added one more;
and while homes are burning by the hundreds in California, they decide
to load into this bill additional money for FEMA: $500 million for FEMA
at a time when FEMA needs the money. It is outrageous to try to take a
bad policy towards aid to Iraq and use it as a pass on our natural
concern for the thousands who have lost their homes in California.
This is a martial law rule. So as the gentleman has pointed out, we
do not get a chance to read the bill and understand it before we vote
on it. Forty-seven Republicans voted for my amendment (on October 16),
along with all Democrats, to say that we have to have competitive
bidding on all the oil contracts in Iraq. As far as I know, that has
been stripped out of this bill so we will not have competitive bidding.
The 47 Republicans, who along with Democrats, realized we could not
trust this administration with no-bid contracts will not be able to
have that provision in the bill--or maybe they will because we are
still looking--because it is martial law, which means do not read the
bill, just vote on it.
Finally and most importantly, we just had a donors conference. The
vast majority of donors gave the vast majority of their aid in the form
of loans. We will not put in a single penny as loans. Why do the
American taxpayers not get paid back? Because these other people need
to be paid back; $116 billion of Saddam Hussein's debts are all on
Iraq's balance sheet. They should be renounced, but instead they will
be paid, and we will not.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).
Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in reluctant opposition to this martial rule. I
do not understand why we cannot follow regular process around here to
give this body a chance to actually look at the supplemental, $87
billion, the largest in our Nation's history, so we know the details
that are contained in it.
Just a couple of weeks ago, I had the opportunity to visit Iraq and
visit our troops in the field. They are doing an incredible job under
very difficult and dangerous circumstances. And, of course, this body
is going to do everything we can to make sure they have the tools and
the resources they need so they can do their mission safely and return
home soon. But this process is out of order, and we are derelict in our
duty in regard to the accountability to the American taxpayer.
We do need accountability, and that is why earlier the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Cardin) and I offered an amendment with this bill that
would have slashed the reconstruction funds in half, requiring the
administration to come back to account for how the money is being used
and to justify the need for more.
Instead, we are giving them $20 billion when the World Bank just
released a report indicating that Iraq cannot absorb more than $6
billion in the next year anyway for reconstruction.
But I am also concerned that these conference committees are becoming
the black hole of the democratic process. The will of the House and the
will of the Senate go in, but it never comes out. Specifically, in both
the House and the Senate with wide bipartisan majorities, it was
determined that we wanted to provide half the reconstruction funds in
grants and the other half in loans, recognizing Iraq is sitting on the
second largest oil reserve in the world, but also it would give us some
bargaining position with the rest of the nations holding debt over Iraq
to hopefully get them to forgive the debt. But any loan in this has
been vanished in the conference committee; and, instead, the
administration wants to just gift outright the $20 billion, requiring
our children and grandchildren to pick up the tab for many years to
come.
We want to do right in Iraq. We do not have the luxury of cutting and
running. We must succeed, but this process is not the way to do it.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished
ranking member of the Committee on Rules.
Mr. Speaker, I had hoped that with such a serious step being made by
this body that we would have an opportunity to give Members the time to
deliberate over, as what you have heard my colleagues say is the
largest supplemental in the history of this Congress.
I hope that my colleagues can understand the context in which we
speak. That means that World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam,
Kosovo, Bosnia, Somalia and other places, this is the largest amount,
in essence, this is a blank check to the administration. And on top of
this, Mr. Speaker, the American people do not feel any safer after the
war in Iraq with respect to the war against terrorism.
Right now, as my colleagues know, it seems as if we are facing an
enormous apocalypse, if you will, on the west coast and my sympathies
go to those families and those who have lost their lives.
I believe this Congress wants to do the right thing and would stand
up and debate the question of the resources that we need to be able to
deliver to our friends in California. But in the dark of night we now
have this martial rule where we understand that FEMA has been
increasing its funding somewhere cushioned inside this $87 billion so
that Members will feel hamstrung, if you will, to vote for something
that is reckless and irresponsible.
First of all, let me say that, being the largest one, it does not
make sense. In the Madrid donor conference, $13 billion was given; but
there were thousands, or at least thousands or let me say a large
number, of countries that were there and all we got was $13 billion to
aid us in Iraq; and most of that, Mr. Speaker, was in loans.
It is interesting that the administration could not even decipher for
Members of Congress how much were loans and how much were not. Then we
find embedded in the provisions of this supplemental a weak Inspector
General provision which is necessary in order not to give anyone a
blank check.
The three branches of government are just that by the Founding
Fathers. Congress provides oversight to the administration and to the
executive. It is a tragedy that we went to war without a constitutional
vote under section 1, article 8. It is a tragedy as well that we
continue to lose lives in Iraq and that the statement by the
administration says simply, It is to be expected. I do not think we
expect 40 deaths in 48 hours.
I have spoken to those troops who are bravely on the front lines and,
Mr. Speaker, they get it. They know our dissent is not against them.
They fully understand that we want them home. We do not want to run. We
want a real
[[Page H10209]]
democracy in Iraq, but we also want them to have the resources that
they need to have when they come home from Iraq such as veterans care,
hospital care, such as educational opportunities.
I see my colleague on the floor of the House, the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Watson), who has been a leader on this issue. We want
people like Shoshanna Johnson to be able to come and get the right kind
of benefits that they deserve having suffered as a POW. But yet with
this midnight rule, the martial rule, what we are facing are questions
left unanswered. Why can the United Nations not participate in the
aftermath and more of our allies be in place? Why have we not answered
the question of where are the weapons of mass destruction? And why have
we not answered the question of who did provide the leak of the CIA
agent and why is there not a special counsel being appointed?
Let me simply say that as we go into the dark night with a martial
rule, we have a Bush economic record where long-term unemployment has
tripled, and we have a Bush economic record where the median household
income has gone down $1,439; as well, jobs, long-term unemployment has
tripled from .66 to 2.10.
Mr. Speaker, I am not prepared to vote in the dark on something that
is as serious as this on behalf of the American people. I support the
troops. I want them to be paid on time.
{time} 2115
I want them to have body armor. I want them to be able to come home
safely. I want a democracy in Iraq, but I am not prepared to support a
reckless expenditure of money.
My final point, we are already going to spend $178 billion in the
effort in Iraq. If we stay there over a 10-year period and the
operations and the aftermath, we are going to be spending between $237
billion, and it could reach $418 billion, as analyzed by our
colleagues. This is a reckless decision.
I ask my colleagues to defeat the martial law and defeat the rule and
defeat the appropriations.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the gentleman if he has any
additional speakers.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, we have no additional
speakers.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
At this point I am prepared to yield back the balance of my time.
Before I do so, I urge my colleagues to vote no on martial law, no
matter how they may vote on the supplemental, and I personally intend
to vote in favor of the supplemental, but I am objecting to this
procedure under which it is brought to the floor tonight.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield back my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. FROST. 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.
This vote will be followed by two 5-minute votes on motions to
instruct conferees on H.R. 1 and on H.R. 6 postponed from yesterday.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 217,
nays 197, not voting 20, as follows:
[Roll No. 597]
YEAS--217
Aderholt
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Bereuter
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
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.
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Emerson
English
Everett
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
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
Janklow
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
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
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Oxley
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
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)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (FL)
NAYS--197
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Becerra
Bell
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Clay
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cramer
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
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
Hall
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kleczka
Kucinich
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)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--20
Akin
Ballance
Blumenauer
Boehlert
Bradley (NH)
Case
Doolittle
Fletcher
Gephardt
Goss
Gutierrez
McCollum
McCotter
Miller (NC)
Pearce
Sanchez, Linda T.
Stupak
Visclosky
Weldon (PA)
Young (AK)
Announcement By The Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ose) (during the vote). There are 2
minutes remaining in this vote.
{time} 2137
Mr. KILDEE and Mr. DAVIS of Florida changed their vote from ``yea''
to ``nay.''
Mr. SESSIONS changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
[[Page H10210]]
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________