[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 153 (Thursday, November 17, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H10531-H10535]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4241, DEFICIT REDUCTION ACT OF 2005
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 560 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution as follows:
H. Res. 560
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it
shall be in order without intervention of any point of order
to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4241) to provide for
reconciliation pursuant to section 201(a) of the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006. The bill shall
be considered as read. The amendment printed in the report of
the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be
considered as adopted. All points of order against provisions
in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question
shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to
final passage without intervening motion except: (1) two
hours of debate equally divided and controlled by the
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on the
Budget; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without
instructions.
Sec. 2. During consideration of H.R. 4241 pursuant to this
resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous
question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the
bill to a time designated by the Speaker.
Sec. 3. After passage of H.R. 4241, it shall be in order to
take from the Speaker's table S. 1932 and to consider the
Senate bill in the House. All points of order against the
Senate bill and against its consideration are waived. It
shall be in order to move to strike all after the enacting
clause of the Senate bill and to insert in lieu thereof the
provisions of H.R. 4241 as passed by the House. All points of
order against that motion are waived.
Unfunded Mandate Point of Order
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 426 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, I make a point of order against the
consideration of this rule, H. Res. 560.
Section 425 of that same act states that the point of order lies
against legislation which imposes an unfunded mandate in excess of
specified amounts against State or local governments.
Section 426 of the Budget Act specifically states that the Rules
Committee may not waive this point of order.
The first section of H. Res. 560 proposes to waive all points of
order against consideration of the bill and against provisions in the
bill, as amended.
The legislation, H.R. 4241, brought up by the rule, includes
provisions on child support enforcement, which the Congressional Budget
Office informs us impose an intergovernmental mandate as defined by the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
Therefore, I make a point of order that this rule may not be
considered pursuant to section 426.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington makes a point
of order that the resolution violates section 426(a) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
In accordance with section 426(b)(2) of that Act, the gentleman has
met the threshold burden to identify the specific language in the
resolution on which the point of order is predicated.
Under section 426(b)(4) of the Act, the gentleman from Washington
(Mr. McDermott) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Putnam) each will
control 10 minutes of debate on the question of consideration.
Pursuant to section 426(b)(3) of the Act, after the debate, the Chair
will put the question of consideration, to wit: Will the House now
consider the resolution?
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, Americans on the front line in protecting and defending
our most vulnerable children have been sending out an SOS. They do not
merely solve problems every day. They save lives.
Their message is loud and clear. The child support provisions
included in reconciliation undermine the Federal commitment to child
support enforcement. Republican reconciliation is reckless disregard
for safeguarding children.
It is a license for people to break their promise of child support
because enforcement will be lax. Eighty percent of the children
receiving support live in low- and moderate-income families. The bill
would reduce the share of child support enforcement costs that are paid
by the Federal Government from 66 percent to 50 percent by 2010.
Federal funding to the program would be cut by $5 billion over the next
5 years, a nearly 40 percent cut in funding for the program by 2010. We
make the money go away, but not the problems or the needs.
The CBO estimated that child support provisions in the reconciliation
bill would reduce collections sent to families by $21 billion over the
next 10 years.
As a result, more deadbeat dads will be left off the hook, while more
low-income families will look to State and Federal programs to make up
the difference in lost income. But we will not be there, just like the
deadbeat dads.
In 2004, more than $4 was collected for every dollar spent in the
program. Even President Bush's 2006 budget cites the program as
``effective'' and ``one of the highest rated block formula grants of
all reviewed programs government-wide.''
A hard-working program will fall on hard times if we leave the
reconciliation bill as it is. People will be hurt. Children will be
hurt. Republicans will be responsible. And for what?
Mr. Speaker, this is the season of giving, and Republicans are going
to be very generous with those very few Americans rolling in dough.
Republican leaders have scheduled their midnight express to roll
through town again tonight. Republicans will climb aboard to run over
the American people in the dead of the night.
Child Support Enforcement, that is not even in the baggage car.
Republicans like doing things in the dark, behind closed doors, in the
dead of night, hoping the American people will not notice.
Well, not today. Today's light shines on their darkness. If one
candle can curse the darkness, we are going to use a search light. It
is the Republican season of giving, and here is what it means: we take
from the sack of the poor children in this country 330,000 child-care
dollars and put it in the rich sock. It is Christmas time. Take $700
million from Social Security and put it in the rich stocking. Take
child support, $21 billion from Child Support Enforcement and put it in
the rich stocking.
[[Page H10532]]
Take Medicaid from the poor, $10 billion, and put it in the rich
stocking. Student loans, $14 million. I take $14 billion from student
loans and give that to the rich stocking. And food stamps from 300,000
tables we take and put it in the rich stocking. Finally, foster
children, $600 million from foster children in this country goes into
the sock, later tomorrow, of the rich because we have taken it from the
poor and we have given it to the rich.
That is what this bill before us is all about. Tonight in the dead of
night you are going to give to the rich who do not need it and take
from the needy who cannot afford to lose it. You will disguise this as
a Christmas stocking with presents, just in time for the holidays. But
it is a heavy-handed club used on the American people. The heartland is
not heartless. Not even the dead of the night will hide what you intend
to do to the American people tonight. Even the rich will be ashamed. I
wonder if the Republicans will. They should be.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman's clever props, notwithstanding the
holiday stockings, I would point out to the gentleman who repeatedly
referred to this being done in the dead of night that in his home
district it is 5:30 in the afternoon and people are driving home from
work. So for the dead of night on the west coast, the people on the
east coast will know that we are not working a nine to five job and
that we are pushing ahead with the agenda of reforming the
inefficiencies that lay in government.
I would also point out to the gentleman that between 1999 and 2003,
total child support enforcement administrative expenditures went up
almost 30 percent; 29 percent between 1999 and 2003, as the case load
declined 8 percent. Again, their rhetoric does not match well with the
facts.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is utilizing the rules that are at his
disposal, and I think that it is appropriate that he do that. It is a
positive reflection on this House that these types of tools are
available to the minority to stymie the progress, and we appreciate the
gentleman's ability to use those. But it would be important to have the
facts be accurate, and the facts are that these administrative costs
that are being discussed in this bill are a shift in what has been a
double-dipping practice that has been used by States to draw down
Federal dollars and then collect administrative costs as if the
original Federal dollar had been generated in that State in the first
place. This is not, as the gentleman has characterized, the Grinch or
any other mean-spirited person taking treats from children or from
their holiday stockings that have arrived a month and a half early.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Levin).
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Putnam, I will read you the facts from the
Congressional Budget Office estimate, that this action will result in a
reduction over the next 10 years of $24 billion in child support. That
is the Congressional Budget estimate, and that takes into account
adjustments the States might make in providing more money for
administration. This is the most callous, callous reflection of your
fiscal irresponsibility. You have driven yourselves and this country
into so much debt, now you are reaching into the homes of this country.
This is antifamily. This is antikids. There is no defense of it.
{time} 2030
This money is for administrative purposes. We have been paying two-
thirds. The result of it, and it was part of welfare reform, is that
child support has gone up and up. The kids have benefited. And now what
you are going to do is to reduce those benefits. And we will hear from
your side, oh, child support is going to go up, anyway. This is a fact
and I close with this. CBO says if anyone votes for this, they are
going to reduce child support payments over 10 years by $24 billion. I
say to you, you go home, you face the kids in your district, you face
the parents in your district, and you tell them you voted for this. If
you won't tell them, we will.
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's reference to
the CBO numbers. We also have the CBO numbers. They are available on a
bipartisan basis. The CBO numbers clearly show that total collections
will continue to go up. $24.8 billion in 2006, $26 billion in 2010,
$31.7 billion by 2015. The gentleman has referred to this provision as
the most callous part of the deficit reduction package. I hope that
everyone else on his team remembers that because you can only have one
number one. You can only have one most egregious part.
So as we get into the discussions about Medicaid and food stamps and
student loans and all the things that we heard about this morning when
we were talking about the continuing resolution, let us remember that
this one is the most egregious, that this one is the most callous
because you can only have one number one. I know that this is nothing
but the first salvo in a historic debate about the direction that this
country is heading.
I agree with the gentleman that it is important that we go back to
our districts and we talk about these plans, because the fact of the
matter is we have a plan. And the fact of the matter is that you don't.
The fact of the matter is that you can criticize all you want about
where we have chosen to reform government, to find efficiencies, to
better deliver services to the people who need them the most while you
can go home and criticize the changes that we offer without having to
defend your own plan.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy).
Mr. POMEROY. This chart says it all. CBO estimates lower spending on
child support program leads to lower collections to the tune of $21
billion. It is truly stunning to me that Republicans in this House
would line up together to cut the funds used to collect child support.
I just never expected to see them give deadbeat dads a pass, those
deadbeat dads who refuse to pay what they owe for the upbringing of
their own children.
The majority Members of this body are quick to boast of their support
for family values. Well, I ask you this, what kind of family value is
it that cuts back on the efforts to make deadbeat dads pay what they
owe, when deadbeat dads walk away from their obligations? It won't be
you smug in your own comfortable life who will feel the pain. It will
be young mothers who can't pay rent. It will be little children whose
lives are upended by financial abandonment. For every dollar we spend
collecting on child support, we collect more than $4. In North Dakota,
that means for every dollar collected, the Federal Government gets
$2.78 back in recoveries and costs forgone.
State governments also gain, which is precisely why the Congressional
Budget Office has found this to be an unfunded mandate. When
Republicans cut child support collections, deadbeat dads win. State
governments lose. That is why tonight's proposal is an unfunded mandate
and must be stopped.
CBO has estimated by cutting collections $4.9 billion as you do, we
lose more than $24 billion in support not collected. That hits
children. That hits families. And that hits States which is what makes
this an unfunded mandate. Support the effort to stop this unfunded
mandate. Support the effort to block this cut in child support
enforcement.
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from California (Mr. Costa).
Mr. COSTA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the point of order from
the gentleman from Washington. I am here to speak to my colleagues, but
especially the 235 of you who, like me, served in legislatures
throughout the country prior to coming to Congress. The fiscal sleight
of hand that we are undertaking here today is simply that of a
financial shell game, and the loser is already clear, it is our States.
You don't have to take my word for it.
The Congressional Budget Office has spoken and they have identified
that the reduction in child support without a change in the
requirements is a violation of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
that many of you were here that supported on a bipartisan basis. It is
a violation of the law.
[[Page H10533]]
We can play this ridiculous game of pretend and safely ensconce
ourselves in these walls but do you truly believe that the actions
today will go unnoticed and that State legislatures are not watching
what we do? I know that the National Conference of State Legislatures
is watching. I hope that ALEC is watching, too, and I suspect that the
National Governors Association is taking notes. I can assure you that
they are tuning in to C-SPAN and taking careful notice of today's
proceedings because besides illegal, today's vote will have a direct
impact on their ability to serve the people of their States, the same
people who live in our districts.
In fact, President Ronald Reagan's promise of federalism today is
nowhere in this Chamber. President Reagan's famous debate line with Mr.
Mondale is frighteningly apropos in this exercise: ``There you go
again.'' And yes, here we go again attempting to balance our Federal
budget on the backs of 50 States.
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt).
Mr. TIAHRT. I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding.
We have heard a lot about what devastation from this small little act
we are going tonight to try to reform welfare and improve the system of
delivering the services and goods to those who are truly in trouble in
our culture.
One of the things that is surprising to me, though, is that there is
really no plan on the other side. I have seen in the hallways of the
office buildings that house Members of Congress offices hold billboards
that are put up about the Federal deficit and how we must do something
about the Federal deficit, but I have yet to see a plan to try to deal
with the deficit that the Democrats themselves are complaining about.
Blue Dog Democrats, each in front of their office, have billboards
that says the Federal deficit so much for each family to pay back, we
have got to do something about it, but there is no plan. There are more
plans on the television show West Wing than the Democrats have here in
the United States House of Representatives. There are more plans on the
other political shows about how to deal with the problems of today but
we get no plans or help from the other side.
So what I think we ought to see here is some Blue Dog Democrats that
are the type of dogs that will actually hunt. Dogs that we have some
bite instead of the bark, because right now all we hear is a lot of
noise and we don't have any action or plan. We are hearing complaining
about how we are trying to improve the system.
I will give you one example quickly. In Kansas, delivering Medicaid
is only correct three out of four times. One out of four times the
payment is inaccurate. We need to reform that system. You would not get
on an airplane today if you had a three out of four chance of getting
to your destination. You would not start a trip today if you had only a
three out of four chance of getting to your destination. When we make a
Medicaid payment in the State of Kansas, our State government is wrong
24 percent of the time. This legislation has reforms in it to help
improve our Medicaid system, so those who are truly in need get the
services they require.
But we cannot do that according to the other side. We need to pass
this legislation, reform the welfare system, and do the right thing
about the Federal budget.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I have the responsibility of closure,
right?
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The gentleman from Florida has
the right to close.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Does he have any other speakers?
Mr. PUTNAM. We do not have any additional speakers, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington has 30
seconds.
Mr. McDERMOTT. He says a whole lot, but he has no one else to speak,
Mr. Speaker, because they want the people to believe that this is a
fight between Democrats and Republicans. But it is not true. In
reality, Republican Governors oppose these child support cuts,
including Governor Schwarzenegger of California. Republicans in the
Senate oppose these cuts including Senator Cornyn of Texas. Religious
organizations oppose these cuts, including the Conference of Catholic
Bishops. All program administrators and poverty experts oppose these
cuts. Cutting child support payments to needy families is a policy
supported only by the extreme right wing which currently is running the
House of Representatives. I urge the Members to vote ``no'' on this
motion.
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, this is an important opening to the grand
debate that we are unveiling here this evening about the direction of
entitlement spending and the direction of Federal spending in this
Congress and for our Nation. We have heard an awful lot about the term
``cuts'' and we have seen the cute props and we have heard the first of
what will be many metaphors of snatching food from the mouths of
children and all kinds of heated rhetoric. But at the end of the day,
the numbers don't lie. The numbers are that child support collections
under this proposal continue to go up.
Do they go up as fast as the Democrats would like? Apparently not,
judging by the rhetoric. But only in Washington and only in their
rhetoric is that a cut. The bottom line is that this next fiscal year,
2006, it is $23.8 billion. By 2010, it is $26 billion. And by 2015, it
is almost $32 billion. Under every arithmetic, old math, new math, poor
school districts, wealthy school districts, all across America, those
numbers are going up. Those numbers mean more money to those States for
the important task of enforcing child support responsibilities by all
noncustodial parents.
So despite the references to the smugness, despite the fact that we
have been accused of being in the pockets of deadbeat dads, the numbers
continue to climb for administrative costs. None of these even affect
the actual program. They are defending the administration of the
program instead of the outcome of that program, which is more money
getting to those families, more fathers, more mothers who are
noncustodial living up to their obligations. That is really what it
ought to be about, is it not, the outcome? Not the administrative fees,
that are going up anyway?
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the fact that the rule has given the
gentleman this opportunity for us to open the debate in this way.
Unfortunately his rhetoric outpaces the facts. I would urge the Members
to reject this proposal and allow us to move forward with reforming
government.
With that, I would ask the Members to vote ``yes.''
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is: Will the House now consider
the resolution?
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. McDERMOTT. 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 224,
nays 198, not voting 12, as follows:
[Roll No. 600]
YEAS--224
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis (KY)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeLay
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Feeney
Ferguson
Fitzpatrick (PA)
Flake
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hastert
[[Page H10534]]
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
Jindal
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Osborne
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pombo
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schmidt
Schwarz (MI)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Sodrel
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
NAYS--198
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson
Case
Chandler
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Emanuel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth
Higgins
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Menendez
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reichert
Reyes
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Sabo
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz (PA)
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--12
Boswell
Cardin
Engel
Fortenberry
Hoekstra
Hyde
Mollohan
Radanovich
Ryan (OH)
Towns
Walden (OR)
Young (FL)
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC.
Under clause 8 of rule XII, executive communications were taken from
the Speaker's table and referred as follows:
5266. A letter from the Acting Assistant Secretary for
Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting a
report on U.S. military personnel and U.S. individual
civilians retained as contractors involved in supporting Plan
Colombia, pursuant to Public Law 106-246, section 3204 (f)
(114 Stat. 577); to the Committee on Armed Services.
5267. A letter from the Under Secretary for Personnel and
Readiness, Department of Defense, transmitting a letter on
the approved retirement of General Robert H. Foglesong,
United States Air Force, and his advancement to the grade of
general on the retired list; to the Committee on Armed
Services.
5268. A letter from the Under Secretary for Personnel and
Readiness, Department of Defense, transmitting authorization
of the enclosed list of officers to wear the insignia of the
grade of brigadier general accordance with title 10, United
States Code, section 777; to the Committee on Armed Services.
5269. A letter from the Secretary, Department of Health and
Human Services, transmitting written notification of the
determination that a public health emergency exists and has
existed in the state of Texas and Louisiana since September
20, 2005, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 247d(a) Public Law 107-188,
section 144(a); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
5270. A letter from the Deputy Assistant Administrator,
Office of Diversion Control, DEA, Department of Justice,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Schedules of
Controlled Substances; Placement of Pregabalin Into Schedule
V [Docket No. DEA-267F] received September 2, 2005, pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
5271. A letter from the Senior Vice President, Policy &
Government Affairs, Verizon Wireless, transmitting a letter
from Denny Strigl, CEO of Verizon Wireless, provided to
Federal Comunications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin
regarding the company's efforts to serve customers impacted
by Hurricane Katrina; to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
5272. A letter from the Office of Independent Counsel,
transmitting the annual report on Audit and Investigative
Activities, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 595(a)(2); to the Committee
on Government Reform.
5273. A letter from the Executive Director, Federal
Reiterment Thrift Investment Board, transmitting a list of
the five audit reports issued during fiscal year 2005
regarding the Agency and the Thrift Savings Plan; to the
Committee on Government Reform.
5274. A letter from the General Counsel, Institute of
Museum and Library Services, transmitting a report pursuant
to the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998; to the Committee
on Government Reform.
5275. A letter from the Office of the District of Columbia
Auditor, transmitting a report entitled, ``Letter to Chairman
Cropp and Members of the Council of the District of Columbia
on the Auditor's Concerns Regarding Matters that May
Adversely Affect the Financial Operations of the Washington
Convention Center.''; to the Committee on Government Reform.
5276. A letter from the Office of the Special Counsel,
transmitting the fiscal year 2005 reports required by the
Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act and the Inspector
General Act, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3512(c)(3); to the
Committee on Government Reform.
5277. A letter from the Acting Deputy Secretary, Department
of Defense, transmitting the Department's Seventeenth Report
of the Federal Absentee Voting Act; to the Committee on House
Administration.
5278. A letter from the Acting Inspector General, House of
Representatives, transmitting the final report on the U.S.
House of Representatives Child Care Center; to the Committee
on House Administration.
5279. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety
Zone; Sabine-Neches Canal to Sabine River, Orange, TX [COTP
Port Arthur-05-001] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received September 8,
2005, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
5280. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety
Zone; Napa River, California [COTP San Francisco Bay 05-001]
(RIN: 1625-AA00) received September 8, 2005, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
5281. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Moving
Safety Zone -- Motor Vessel ZHEN HUA; San Francisco Bay,
California [COTP San Francisco Bay 05-002] (RIN: 1625-AA00)
received September 8, 2005, pursuant to 5
[[Page H10535]]
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
5282. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Security Zones for designated vessels; Savannah COTP Zone
[COTP Savannah 04-065] (RIN: 1625-AA87) received September 8,
2005, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
5283. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety
Zone; Savannah River, Savannah, GA [COTP Savannah-05-011]
(RIN: 1625-AA00) received September 8, 2005, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
5284. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety
Zone; Missouri River Mile Marker 731.5 to Mile Marker 731.9,
South Sioux City, 0NE [COTP St. Louis-04-047] (RIN: 1625-
AA00) received September 8, 2005, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
5285. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety
Zone; Upper Mississippi River Mile Marker 203.0 to Mile
Marker 205.0, Alton, IL [COTP St. Louis-05-002] (RIN: 1625-
AA00) received September 8, 2005, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
5286. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety
Zone; Pensacola Caucus Channel and Pensacola Bay Channel,
Pensacola, FL [COTP Mobile-04-060] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received
September 8, 2005, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
5287. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety
Zone; Bayou Casotte Ship Channel, Horn Island Ship Channel,
Pascagoula, MS [COTP Mobile-04-062] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received
September 8, 2005, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
5288. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Saftey
Zone; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway Mile 222 to Mile 225,
Destin, FL [COTP Mobile-04-063] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received
September 8, 2005, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
5289. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety
Zone; Lower Mississippi River, Mile Marker 122.0 to Mile
Marker 134.0, Above Head of Passes, Laplace, LA [COTP New
Orleans-05-011] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received September 8, 2005,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
5290. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety
Zone; Lower Mississippi River, Mile Marker 126.0 to Mile
Marker 134.0, Above Head of Passes, Laplace, LA [COTP New
Orleans-05-012] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received September 8, 2005,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
5291. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety
Zone; Lower Mississippi River, Below Head of Passes, Mile
Marker Minus 18.0 to Mile Marker Minus 20.0, in the vicinity
of the entrance to Southwest Pass, LA [COTP New Orlenas-05-
013] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received September 8, 2005, pursuant to
5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
5292. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety
Zone; Lower Mississippi River, Mile Marker 177.0 to Mile
Marker 180.0, Above Head of Passes, Geismar, LA [COTP New
Orleans-05-014] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received September 8, 2005,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
5293. A letter from the Acting Chief, Office of Regulations
and Administrative Law, USCG, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety
Zone; Lower Mississippi River, Mile Marker 148.0 to Mile
Marker 158.0, Above Head of Passes, Convent, LA [COTP New
Orleans-05-015] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received September 8, 2005,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
5294. A letter from the Administrator, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, transmitting the FY 2004 annual report on the Federal
participation in the development and use of voluntary
consensus standards, pursuant to Public Law 104-113, section
12(d)(3) (110 Stat. 783); to the Committee on Science.
5295. A letter from the Acting President & CEO, Overseas
Private Investment Corporation, transmitting the
Corporation's annual Management Report for FY 2004,
Performance Budget for FY 2006, Performance and
Accountability Report for FY 2004, and Report on Development
and U.S. Effects on OPIC's FY 2004 projects and Report on
Cooperation with Private Insurers, pursuant to 31 U.S.C.
9106; jointly to the Committees on Government Reform and
International Relations.