[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.