[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 86 (Wednesday, June 28, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H4701-H4724]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SCIENCE, STATE, JUSTICE, COMMERCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS
ACT, 2007
The Committee resumed its sitting.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
In addition, for necessary retired pay expenses under the
Retired Serviceman's Family Protection and Survivor Benefits
Plan, and for payments for the medical care of retired
personnel and their dependents under the Dependents Medical
Care Act (10 U.S.C. ch. 55), such sums as may be necessary.
procurement, acquisition and construction
For procurement, acquisition and construction of capital
assets, including alteration and modification costs, of the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
$996,703,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009:
Provided, That of the amounts provided for the National
Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System,
funds shall only be made available on a dollar for dollar
matching basis with funds provided for the same purpose by
the Department of Defense: Provided further, That except to
the extent expressly prohibited by any other law, the
Department of Defense may delegate procurement functions
related to the National Polar-orbiting Operational
Environmental Satellite System to officials of the Department
of Commerce pursuant to section 2311 of title 10, United
States Code: Provided further, That any deviation from the
amounts designated for specific activities in the report
accompanying this Act, or any use of deobligated balances of
funds provided under this heading in previous years, shall be
subject to the procedures set forth in section 605 of this
Act.
pacific coastal salmon recovery
For necessary expenses associated with the restoration of
Pacific salmon populations, $20,000,000: Provided, That this
amount shall be available to fund grants to the States of
Washington, Oregon, Idaho, California, and Alaska, and to the
Columbia River and Pacific Coastal Tribes for projects
necessary for restoration of salmon and steelhead populations
that are listed as threatened or endangered, or identified by
a State as at-risk to be so-listed, for maintaining
populations necessary for exercise of tribal treaty fishing
rights or native subsistence fishing, or for conservation of
Pacific coastal salmon and steelhead habitat: Provided
further, That funds disbursed to States shall be subject to a
matching requirement of funds or documented in-kind
contributions of at least thirty-three percent of the Federal
funds: Provided further, That non-Federal funds provided
pursuant to the second proviso be used in direct support of
this program.
coastal zone management fund
(including transfer of funds)
Of amounts collected pursuant to section 308 of the Coastal
Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1456a), not to exceed
$3,000,000 shall be transferred to the ``Operations,
Research, and Facilities'' account to offset the costs of
implementing such Act.
fisheries finance program account
For the costs of direct loans, $287,000, as authorized by
the Merchant Marine Act of 1936: Provided, That such costs,
including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as
defined in the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990: Provided
further, That these funds are only available to subsidize
gross obligations for the principal amount of direct loans
not to exceed $5,000,000 for Individual Fishing Quota loans,
and not to exceed $59,000,000 for traditional direct loans,
of which $19,000,000 may be used for direct loans to the
United States menhaden fishery: Provided further, That none
of the funds made available under this heading may be used
for direct loans for any new fishing vessel that will
increase the harvesting capacity in any United States
fishery.
Other
salaries and expenses, departmental management
For expenses necessary for the departmental management of
the Department of Commerce provided for by law, including not
to exceed $5,000 for official entertainment, $52,760,000, of
which $5,900,000 shall be for blast mitigation at the Herbert
C. Hoover Building and $990,000 shall be for necessary
expenses of the National Intellectual Property Law
Enforcement Coordination Council.
Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Pallone
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 17 offered by Mr. Pallone:
Page 50, line 21, insert ``(decreased by $1,000,000)
(increased by $1,000,000)'' after ``$52,760,000''.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday,
June 27, 2006, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) and a Member
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment would provide $1 million for the Secretary
of Commerce to contract with the National Academy of Sciences for the
purpose of preparing a study on which U.S. coastal population centers
are most at risk from the impacts of sea level rise due to global
warming. These impacts could include inundation, coastal flooding, more
intense storms, such as hurricanes, saline intrusion and a host of
other damaging effects.
Last November, scientists at Princeton University released a report
that found that under a worst case global warming scenario, more than 3
percent of my home State of New Jersey could be underwater by the end
of the century. A full 9 percent of the State would be subject to
constant coastal flooding, and so-called 100-year storms would occur
every 5 years.
But, of course, New Jersey is by no means the only area facing this
threat. More than half of the U.S. population lives within 50 miles of
an ocean, many in cities that are at or just above sea level. What
seems like a small rise in sea level, just a foot or two, could have
dramatic effects on the magnitude of storm surges or other flooding
events,
[[Page H4702]]
causing catastrophic and costly damage in some of our largest cities,
including New York, Los Angeles, Miami, Seattle and Boston.
I think a mere $1 million offset from the administrative expenses of
the Department of Commerce is but a small price to pay for us to get a
better idea of what coastal areas would be most affected by sea level
rise due to global warming.
And I would point out, Mr. Chairman, just look at what happened last
week in Washington, D.C. I heard on the radio this morning that we
actually faced here what is called a 300-year storm. So, in fact, what
needs to be done is that cities around the country need to be able to
prepare for this.
We had a forum on global warming in my district a few weeks ago. A
number of the mayors came there. They reacted to some of the
information that is out there and are already preparing plans. So this
is just really a preventative measure that I think would be really
crucial for a lot of our coastal districts around the country,
including the city of Washington, D.C.
I would ask my colleagues whose districts would be affected by sea
level rise and others from around the country, who will also see
impacts from global warming, to join me in voting to fund this small
but critical study.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's amendment
increases and decreases the amount for the Department of Commerce's
Departmental Management Account. There is no net effect on the funding
level of the account.
I have no objection to the gentleman's amendment. The committee
accepts the gentleman's amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the comments that were made
by my colleague, but I have two speakers who would like to speak.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Waxman).
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of Congressman
Pallone's amendment to provide funding to the National Academy of
Sciences to study the impacts of global warming on our coastal areas.
Coastal communities are at serious risk from global warming. We must
better understand the specific threats faced by each coastal community
to give ourselves a chance to prepare.
As the Earth warms, the sea level is rising. Scientists tell us that
global warming likely caused 4 to 8 inches of sea level rise in the
last century. Over the next 100 years, we may see up to 3 additional
feet of sea level rise.
Warmer water fuels more intense hurricanes and tropical storms. Coral
reefs are being damaged by both warmer water and increased ocean
acidity from carbon dioxide.
Coastal communities need to know what they are up against. The
effects of sea level rise include coastal erosion, land loss,
disappearing beaches, saltwater intrusion into underground drinking
water supplies, higher storm surges, damages to houses and roads, and
harm to fisheries. And we have already seen the devastation that
hurricanes and tropical storms could wreak on our coastal communities.
Coastal communities, such as Los Angeles, will be affected by changes
inland. One-third of our precious water supplies come from the Sierra
snowpack.
Of course, we must do much more than just try to adapt to massive
temperature rises. The costs of that are far too high. We must
dramatically cut our greenhouse gas emissions over the next few decades
to avoid highly dangerous and irreversible warming. That is why last
week, together with Congressman Pallone and other colleagues, I
introduced the Safe Climate Act. The Safe Climate Act reflects what
science says we need to do to protect our children and grandchildren
from disastrous climate changes.
While prompt action is necessary to avert the worst effects of
climate change, this administration and the Congress are refusing to
act. In the meantime, our coastal communities are at risk.
The Pallone amendment is a simple, commonsense measure to assess some
of these vulnerabilities. I urge my colleagues to support the
amendment.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Rhode Island, the Ocean State.
(Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman for
yielding and for drawing attention to the important issue of climate
change.
Last week, the National Academy of Sciences concluded that ``the last
few decades of the 20th century were warmer than any comparable period
in the last 400 years.''
We can no longer ignore the fact that human activities, particularly
the burning of fossil fuels, have increased carbon dioxide and other
greenhouse gases and contributed to changes in the Earth's climate.
The Pallone amendment recognizes that climate change threatens our
coastal communities. In States like Rhode Island, which has about 400
miles of coastline and a significant portion of the population lives
along the coast, the impact of rising sea levels would be downright
disastrous. Beach erosion would lead to greater flooding and endanger
our tourism-based economy, while the destruction of wetlands would
eradicate wildlife habitat and reduce the natural buffer against storm
surges.
Mr. Chairman, global warming threatens to have a devastating impact
on our Nation's environment and economy, and Congress must take swift
action. We can start by funding important research into climate change
impacts on our communities. And I urge my colleagues to support the
Pallone amendment.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Pallone
Amendment. This amendment directs the Department of Commerce to provide
$1 million for the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study of
U.S. coastal areas facing the greatest impacts from global warming. My
district of Guam, as an island in the Western Pacific, is in its
entirety a coastal community. Guam is one of the several American
communities directly facing the challenges associated with global
climate change.
The islands in Oceania, including Guam, are particularly vulnerable
to climate change, climate variability and sea level rise. Increased
scientific and public policy cooperation on this issue would stand to
benefit our island and coastal communities. The off-shore territories
should not be neglected in the national effort to identify and address
the challenges associated with this phenomenon.
We can identify and mitigate the effects of climate change by
studying its impacts on our islands and coastlines. This amendment
proposes a quality initial investment towards achieving this end. Our
country can save money in the future and work towards protecting our
lands and natural resources with this $1 million investment.
I support the Pallone Amendment. Its provisions are critical to
helping us understand what areas of our country are most at risk. The
study that would be funded by this amendment would yield the
information we need to make more informed public policy decisions for
the preservation of our country's coastlines.
I thank the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Pallone, and our colleague
from Washington, Mr. Inslee, for their leadership on this issue. I urge
support for their amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
office of inspector general
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General
in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act
of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), $22,531,000.
General Provisions--Department of Commerce
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 201. During the current fiscal year, applicable
appropriations and funds made available to the Department of
Commerce by this Act shall be available for the activities
specified in the Act of October 26, 1949 (15 U.S.C. 1514), to
the extent and in the manner prescribed by the Act, and,
notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3324, may be used for advanced
payments not otherwise authorized only upon the certification
of officials designated by the Secretary of Commerce that
such payments are in the public interest.
Sec. 202. During the current fiscal year, appropriations
made available to the Department of Commerce by this Act for
salaries and expenses shall be available for hire of
passenger motor vehicles as authorized by 31
[[Page H4703]]
U.S.C. 1343 and 1344; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C.
3109; and uniforms or allowances therefor, as authorized by
law (5 U.S.C. 5901-5902).
Sec. 203. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made
available for the current fiscal year for the Department of
Commerce in this Act may be transferred between such
appropriations, but no such appropriation shall be increased
by more than 10 percent by any such transfers: Provided, That
any transfer pursuant to this section shall be treated as a
reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this Act and
shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except
in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section:
Provided further, That the Secretary of Commerce shall notify
the Committees on Appropriations at least 15 days in advance
of the acquisition or disposal of any capital asset
(including land, structures, and equipment) not specifically
provided for in this or any other Appropriations Act.
Sec. 204. Any costs incurred by a department or agency
funded under this title resulting from personnel actions
taken in response to funding reductions included in this
title or from actions taken for the care and protection of
loan collateral or grant property shall be absorbed within
the total budgetary resources available to such department or
agency: Provided, That the authority to transfer funds
between appropriations accounts as may be necessary to carry
out this section is provided in addition to authorities
included elsewhere in this Act: Provided further, That use of
funds to carry out this section shall be treated as a
reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this Act and
shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except
in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section.
Sec. 205. Section 214 of division B of Public Law 108-447
(118 Stat. 2884-86) is amended by (1) inserting ``and subject
to subsection (f),'' following ``program,'' in section (a);
and (2) striking subsection (f) and inserting:
``(f) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated to
carry out the provisions of this section, up to $4,000,000
annually.''.
Sec. 206. (a) Section 318 of the National Marine
Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1445c), is amended by (1)
inserting ``and subject to subsection (e),'' following
``program,'' in subsection (a); and (2) striking subsection
(e) and inserting:
``(e) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated to
the Secretary of Commerce up to $500,000 annually, to carry
out the provisions of this section.''.
(b) Section 210 of the Department of Commerce and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 106-553) is
repealed.
Sec. 207. Any funds provided in this Act under ``Department
of Commerce'' used to implement E-Government Initiatives
shall be subject to the procedures set forth in section 605
of this Act.
This title may be cited as the ``Department of Commerce and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2007''.
TITLE III--SCIENCE
Office of Science and Technology Policy
For necessary expenses of the Office of Science and
Technology Policy, in carrying out the purposes of the
National Science and Technology Policy, Organization, and
Priorities Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6601-6671), hire of
passenger motor vehicles, and services as authorized by 5
U.S.C. 3109, not to exceed $2,500 for official reception and
representation expenses, and rental of conference rooms in
the District of Columbia, $5,369,000: Provided, That the
Office of Science and Technology Policy shall establish an
Ethics Advisory Group for the National Nanotechnology
Initiative focused on questions of human dignity: Provided
further, That the Office of Science and Technology Policy
shall report to the Committee on Appropriations of the House
of Representatives by March 31, 2007, on specific actions
planned and taken in response to the work of the National
Science and Technology Council and the Academic
Competitiveness Council with regard to improving science and
math education in the United States.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
science, aeronautics and exploration
For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, in the
conduct and support of science, aeronautics and exploration
research and development activities, including research,
development, operations, support and services; maintenance;
construction of facilities including repair, rehabilitation,
revitalization, and modification of facilities, construction
of new facilities and additions to existing facilities,
facility planning and design, and restoration, and
acquisition or condemnation of real property, as authorized
by law; environmental compliance and restoration; space
flight, spacecraft control and communications activities
including operations, production, and services; program
management; personnel and related costs, including uniforms
or allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902;
travel expenses; purchase and hire of passenger motor
vehicles; not to exceed $35,000 for official reception and
representation expenses; and purchase, lease, charter,
maintenance and operation of mission and administrative
aircraft, $10,482,000,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2008, of which $5,404,800,000 shall be for
science, $3,827,600,000 shall be for exploration systems,
$824,400,000 shall be for aeronautics research, and
$425,200,000 shall be for cross-agency support programs:
Provided, That any funds provided under this heading used to
implement E-Government Initiatives shall be subject to the
procedures set forth in section 605 of this Act.
exploration capabilities
For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, in the
conduct and support of exploration capabilities research and
development activities, including research, development,
operations, support and services; maintenance; construction
of facilities including repair, rehabilitation,
revitalization and modification of facilities, construction
of new facilities and additions to existing facilities,
facility planning and design, and acquisition or condemnation
of real property, as authorized by law; environmental
compliance and restoration; space flight, spacecraft control
and communications activities including operations,
production, and services; program management; personnel and
related costs, including uniforms or allowances therefor, as
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; travel expenses; purchase
and hire of passenger motor vehicles; not to exceed $35,000
for official reception and representation expenses; and
purchase, lease, charter, maintenance and operation of
mission and administrative aircraft, $6,193,500,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2008, of which
$1,777,900,000 shall be for the International Space Station,
$4,056,700,000 shall be for the Space Shuttle, and
$358,900,000 shall be for space and flight suport: Provided,
That any funds provided under this heading used to implement
E-Government Initiatives shall be subject to the procedures
set forth in section 605 of this Act.
office of inspector general
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General
in carrying out the Inspector General Act of 1978, as
amended, $33,500,000, to remain available until September 30,
2008.
Administrative Provisions
Notwithstanding the limitation on the availability of funds
appropriated for ``Science, Aeronautics and Exploration'', or
``Exploration Capabilities'' by this appropriations Act, when
any activity has been initiated by the incurrence of
obligations for construction of facilities or environmental
compliance and restoration activities as authorized by law,
such amount available for such activity shall remain
available until expended. This provision does not apply to
the amounts appropriated for institutional minor
revitalization and construction of facilities, and
institutional facility planning and design.
Notwithstanding the limitation on the availability of funds
appropriated for ``Science, Aeronautics and Exploration'', or
``Exploration Capabilities'' by this appropriations Act, the
amounts appropriated for construction of facilities shall
remain available until September 30, 2009.
{time} 1300
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California for a colloquy
with the chairman.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I have a colloquy with the chairman of the committee,
Mr. Wolf.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to see language in the SSJC appropriations
report giving directives to NOAA and the Secretary of Commerce
regarding the salmon in the Klamath River.
Though the river does not flow directly through my district, my
salmon fishermen and related industries are greatly impacted. The
National Marine Fisheries Service severely restricted the 2006 salmon
season, after significantly cutting the 2005 season. This has caused
undue financial hardships for local fishing communities, causing the
Governors of both California and Oregon to declare it a fishery
disaster.
There is definitely an immediate need to provide emergency funding to
those impacted. However, we need to start addressing long-term needs to
restore the habitat and rebuild the salmon population so that we do not
find ourselves with a crisis every year. It would take a relatively
small amount to curb much greater economic losses in the future.
Would the chairman be willing to work toward increasing the amount of
funding from the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund to be used for
the Klamath River restoration projects and salmon recovery? This
important granting fund has already been reduced by almost $47 million
below what the President requested in the fiscal year `06 enacted
levels, so I further ask the chairman to work to restore funding during
the conference committee.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would yield, I understand
your concerns, Mr. Farr. I agree there is a need to seek a long-term
solution to the problems in the Klamath Basin and
[[Page H4704]]
appreciate your leadership on this issue. I commit, as we have spoken,
to improve the levels of the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund in
conference for restoration and also for recovery.
Mr. FARR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank you for your cooperation
and for all the hard work on this important bill.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Funds for announced prizes otherwise authorized shall
remain available, without fiscal year limitation, until the
prize is claimed or the offer is withdrawn.
Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made available
for the current fiscal year for the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration in this Act may be transferred between
such appropriations, but no such appropriation, except as
otherwise specifically provided, shall be increased by more
than 10 percent by any such transfers. Any transfer pursuant
to this provision shall be treated as a reprogramming of
funds under section 605 of this Act and shall not be
available for obligation except in compliance with the
procedures set forth in that section.
National Science Foundation
research and related activities
For necessary expenses in carrying out the National Science
Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1861-1875), and
the Act to establish a National Medal of Science (42 U.S.C.
1880-1881); services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109;
maintenance and operation of aircraft and purchase of flight
services for research support; acquisition of aircraft; and
authorized travel; $4,665,950,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2008, of which not to exceed $485,000,000 shall
remain available until expended for Polar research and
operations support, and for reimbursement to other Federal
agencies for operational and science support and logistical
and other related activities for the United States Antarctic
program: Provided, That receipts for scientific support
services and materials furnished by the National Research
Centers and other National Science Foundation supported
research facilities may be credited to this appropriation:
Provided further, That funds under this heading may be
available for innovation inducement prizes: Provided further,
That section 11(f) of the National Science Foundation Act of
1950 (42 U.S.C. 1870(f)) is amended by inserting before the
semicolon at the end ``, except that funds may be donated for
specific prize competitions.''.
major research equipment and facilities construction
For necessary expenses for the acquisition, construction,
commissioning, and upgrading of major research equipment,
facilities, and other such capital assets pursuant to the
National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended,
including authorized travel, $237,250,000, to remain
available until expended.
education and human resources
For necessary expenses in carrying out science and
engineering education and human resources programs and
activities pursuant to the National Science Foundation Act of
1950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1861-1875), including services as
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, authorized travel, and rental of
conference rooms in the District of Columbia, $832,432,000,
to remain available until September 30, 2008.
salaries and expenses
For salaries and expenses necessary in carrying out the
National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42
U.S.C. 1861-1875); services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; hire
of passenger motor vehicles; not to exceed $9,000 for
official reception and representation expenses; uniforms or
allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902;
rental of conference rooms in the District of Columbia; and
reimbursement of the General Services Administration for
security guard services; $268,610,000: Provided, That
contracts may be entered into under ``Salaries and Expenses''
in fiscal year 2007 for maintenance and operation of
facilities, and for other services, to be provided during the
next fiscal year.
office of the national science board
For necessary expenses (including payment of salaries,
authorized travel, hire of passenger motor vehicles, the
rental of conference rooms in the District of Columbia, and
the employment of experts and consultants under section 3109
of title 5, United States Code) involved in carrying out
section 4 of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42
U.S.C. 1863) and Public Law 86-209 (42 U.S.C. 1880 et seq.),
$3,910,000: Provided, That not more than $9,000 shall be
available for official reception and representation expenses.
office of inspector general
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General
as authorized by the Inspector General Act of 1978, as
amended, $11,860,000, to remain available until September 30,
2008.
This title may be cited as the ``Science Appropriations
Act, 2007''.
TITLE IV--DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND RELATED AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Administration of Foreign Affairs
diplomatic and consular programs
For necessary expenses of the Department of State and the
Foreign Service not otherwise provided for, including
employment, without regard to civil service and
classification laws, of persons on a temporary basis (not to
exceed $700,000 of this appropriation), as authorized by
section 801 of the United States Information and Educational
Exchange Act of 1948; representation to certain international
organizations in which the United States participates
pursuant to treaties ratified pursuant to the advice and
consent of the Senate or specific Acts of Congress; arms
control, nonproliferation and disarmament activities as
authorized; acquisition by exchange or purchase of passenger
motor vehicles as authorized by law; and for expenses of
general administration, $3,709,914,000: Provided, That of the
amount made available under this heading, not to exceed
$4,000,000 may be transferred to, and merged with, funds in
the ``Emergencies in the Diplomatic and Consular Service''
appropriations account, to be available only for emergency
evacuations and terrorism rewards: Provided further, That of
the amount made available under this heading, not less than
$351,000,000 shall be available only for public diplomacy
international information programs: Provided further, That of
the amount made available under this heading, $3,000,000
shall be available only for the operations of the Office on
Right-Sizing the United States Government Overseas Presence:
Provided further, That funds available under this heading may
be available for a United States Government interagency task
force to examine, coordinate and oversee United States
participation in the United Nations headquarters renovation
project: Provided further, That no funds may be obligated or
expended for processing licenses for the export of satellites
of United States origin (including commercial satellites and
satellite components) to the People's Republic of China
unless, at least 15 days in advance, the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate
are notified of such proposed action: Provided further, That
funds appropriated under this heading are available, pursuant
to 31 U.S.C. 1108(g), for the field examination of programs
and activities in the United States funded from any account
contained in this title.
In addition, not to exceed $1,513,000 shall be derived from
fees collected from other executive agencies for lease or use
of facilities located at the International Center in
accordance with section 4 of the International Center Act; in
addition, as authorized by section 5 of such Act, $490,000,
to be derived from the reserve authorized by that section, to
be used for the purposes set out in that section; in
addition, as authorized by section 810 of the United States
Information and Educational Exchange Act, not to exceed
$6,000,000, to remain available until expended, may be
credited to this appropriation from fees or other payments
received from English teaching, library, motion pictures, and
publication programs and from fees from educational advising
and counseling and exchange visitor programs; and, in
addition, not to exceed $15,000, which shall be derived from
reimbursements, surcharges, and fees for use of Blair House
facilities.
In addition, for the costs of worldwide security upgrades,
$795,170,000, to remain available until expended.
capital investment fund
For necessary expenses of the Capital Investment Fund,
$58,143,000, to remain available until expended, as
authorized: Provided, That section 135(e) of Public Law 103-
236 shall not apply to funds available under this heading.
office of inspector general
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General,
$32,508,000, notwithstanding section 209(a)(1) of the Foreign
Service Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-465), as it relates to
post inspections.
educational and cultural exchange programs
For expenses of educational and cultural exchange programs,
as authorized, $436,275,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That not to exceed $2,000,000, to remain
available until expended, may be credited to this
appropriation from fees or other payments received from or in
connection with English teaching, educational advising and
counseling programs, and exchange visitor programs as
authorized.
representation allowances
For representation allowances as authorized, $8,175,000.
protection of foreign missions and officials
For expenses, not otherwise provided, to enable the
Secretary of State to provide for extraordinary protective
services, as authorized, $9,270,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2008.
embassy security, construction, and maintenance
For necessary expenses for carrying out the Foreign Service
Buildings Act of 1926 (22 U.S.C. 292-303), preserving,
maintaining, repairing, and planning for buildings that are
owned or directly leased by the Department of State,
renovating, in addition to funds otherwise available, the
Harry S Truman Building, and carrying out the Diplomatic
Security Construction Program as authorized, $605,652,000, to
remain available until expended as authorized, of which not
to exceed $25,000 may be used for domestic and
[[Page H4705]]
overseas representation as authorized: Provided, That none of
the funds appropriated in this paragraph shall be available
for acquisition of furniture, furnishings, or generators for
other departments and agencies.
In addition, for the costs of worldwide security upgrades,
acquisition, and construction as authorized, $899,368,000, to
remain available until expended.
emergencies in the diplomatic and consular service
For expenses necessary to enable the Secretary of State to
meet unforeseen emergencies arising in the Diplomatic and
Consular Service, $4,940,000, to remain available until
expended as authorized, of which not to exceed $1,000,000 may
be transferred to and merged with the ``Repatriation Loans
Program Account'', subject to the same terms and conditions.
repatriation loans program account
For the cost of direct loans, $695,000, as authorized:
Provided, That such costs, including the cost of modifying
such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry
out the direct loan program, $590,000, which may be
transferred to and merged with funds in the ``Diplomatic and
Consular Programs'' account.
payment to the american institute in taiwan
For necessary expenses to carry out the Taiwan Relations
Act (Public Law 96-8), $15,826,000.
payment to the foreign service retirement and disability fund
For payment to the Foreign Service Retirement and
Disability Fund, as authorized by law, $125,000,000.
International Organizations
contributions to international organizations
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary to meet
annual obligations of membership in international
multilateral organizations, pursuant to treaties ratified
pursuant to the advice and consent of the Senate, conventions
or specific Acts of Congress, $1,151,318,000: Provided, That
the Secretary of State shall, at the time of the submission
of the President's budget to Congress under section 1105(a)
of title 31, United States Code, transmit to the Committees
on Appropriations the most recent biennial budget prepared by
the United Nations for the operations of the United Nations:
Provided further, That the Secretary of State shall notify
the Committees on Appropriations at least 15 days in advance
(or in an emergency, as far in advance as is practicable) of
any United Nations action to increase funding for any United
Nations program without identifying an offsetting decrease
elsewhere in the United Nations budget and cause the United
Nations budget for the biennium 2006-2007 to exceed
$3,798,912,500: Provided further, That any payment of
arrearages under this title shall be directed toward special
activities that are mutually agreed upon by the United States
and the respective international organization: Provided
further, That none of the funds appropriated in this
paragraph shall be available for a United States contribution
to an international organization for the United States share
of interest costs made known to the United States Government
by such organization for loans incurred on or after October
1, 1984, through external borrowings.
contributions for international peacekeeping activities
For necessary expenses to pay assessed and other expenses
of international peacekeeping activities directed to the
maintenance or restoration of international peace and
security, $1,135,327,000, of which 15 percent shall remain
available until September 30, 2008: Provided, That none of
the funds made available under this Act shall be obligated or
expended for any new or expanded United Nations peacekeeping
mission unless, at least 15 days in advance of voting for the
new or expanded mission in the United Nations Security
Council (or in an emergency as far in advance as is
practicable): (1) the Committees on Appropriations and other
appropriate committees of the Congress are notified of the
estimated cost and length of the mission, the national
interest that will be served, and the planned exit strategy;
(2) the Committees on Appropriations and other appropriate
committees of the Congress are notified that the United
Nations has taken appropriate measures to prevent United
Nations employees, contractor personnel, and peacekeeping
forces serving in any United Nations peacekeeping mission
from trafficking in persons, exploiting victims of
trafficking, or committing acts of illegal sexual
exploitation, and to hold accountable individuals who engage
in such acts while participating in the peacekeeping mission;
and (3) a reprogramming of funds pursuant to section 605 of
this Act is submitted, and the procedures therein followed,
setting forth the source of funds that will be used to pay
for the cost of the new or expanded mission: Provided
further, That funds shall be available for peacekeeping
expenses only upon a certification by the Secretary of State
to the appropriate committees of the Congress that American
manufacturers and suppliers are being given opportunities to
provide equipment, services, and material for United Nations
peacekeeping activities equal to those being given to foreign
manufacturers and suppliers.
International Commissions
For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, to meet
obligations of the United States arising under treaties, or
specific Acts of Congress, as follows:
international boundary and water commission, united states and mexico
For necessary expenses for the United States Section of the
International Boundary and Water Commission, United States
and Mexico, and to comply with laws applicable to the United
States Section, including not to exceed $6,000 for
representation; as follows:
salaries and expenses
For salaries and expenses, not otherwise provided for,
$28,453,000.
construction
For detailed plan preparation and construction of
authorized projects, $9,237,000, to remain available until
expended, as authorized.
american sections, international commissions
For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided, for the
International Joint Commission and the International Boundary
Commission, United States and Canada, as authorized by
treaties between the United States and Canada or Great
Britain, and for the Border Environment Cooperation
Commission as authorized by Public Law 103-182, $9,587,000,
of which not to exceed $9,000 shall be available for
representation expenses incurred by the International Joint
Commission.
international fisheries commissions
For necessary expenses for international fisheries
commissions, not otherwise provided for, as authorized by
law, $20,651,000: Provided, That the United States' share of
such expenses may be advanced to the respective commissions
pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3324.
Other
payment to the asia foundation
For a grant to the Asia Foundation, as authorized by the
Asia Foundation Act (22 U.S.C. 4402), $13,821,000, to remain
available until expended, as authorized.
Center for Middle Eastern-Western Dialogue Trust Fund
For necessary expenses of the Center for Middle Eastern-
Western Dialogue Trust Fund, the total amount of the interest
and earnings accruing to such Fund on or before September 30,
2007, to remain available until expended.
eisenhower exchange fellowship program
For necessary expenses of Eisenhower Exchange Fellowships,
Incorporated, as authorized by sections 4 and 5 of the
Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship Act of 1990 (20 U.S.C. 5204-
5205), all interest and earnings accruing to the Eisenhower
Exchange Fellowship Program Trust Fund on or before September
30, 2007, to remain available until expended: Provided, That
none of the funds appropriated herein shall be used to pay
any salary or other compensation, or to enter into any
contract providing for the payment thereof, in excess of the
rate authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5376; or for purposes which are
not in accordance with OMB Circulars A-110 (Uniform
Administrative Requirements) and A-122 (Cost Principles for
Non-profit Organizations), including the restrictions on
compensation for personal services.
israeli arab scholarship program
For necessary expenses of the Israeli Arab Scholarship
Program as authorized by section 214 of the Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993 (22 U.S.C.
2452), all interest and earnings accruing to the Israeli Arab
Scholarship Fund on or before September 30, 2007, to remain
available until expended.
east-west center
To enable the Secretary of State to provide for carrying
out the provisions of the Center for Cultural and Technical
Interchange Between East and West Act of 1960, by grant to
the Center for Cultural and Technical Interchange Between
East and West in the State of Hawaii, $3,000,000: Provided,
That none of the funds appropriated herein shall be used to
pay any salary, or enter into any contract providing for the
payment thereof, in excess of the rate authorized by 5 U.S.C.
5376.
national endowment for democracy
For grants made by the Department of State to the National
Endowment for Democracy as authorized by the National
Endowment for Democracy Act, $50,000,000, to remain available
until expended.
RELATED AGENCY
Broadcasting Board of Governors
international broadcasting operations
For expenses necessary to enable the Broadcasting Board of
Governors, as authorized, to carry out international
communication activities, including the purchase, rent,
construction, and improvement of facilities for radio and
television transmission and reception and purchase, lease,
and installation of necessary equipment, including aircraft,
for radio and television transmission and reception to Cuba,
and to make and supervise grants for radio and television
broadcasting to the Middle East, $651,279,000, of which
$5,000,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2008:
Provided, That of the total amount in this heading, not to
exceed $16,000 may be used for official receptions within the
United States as authorized, not to exceed $35,000 may be
used for representation
[[Page H4706]]
abroad as authorized, and not to exceed $39,000 may be used
for official reception and representation expenses of Radio
Free Europe/Radio Liberty; and in addition, notwithstanding
any other provision of law, not to exceed $2,000,000 in
receipts from advertising and revenue from business ventures,
not to exceed $500,000 in receipts from cooperating
international organizations, and not to exceed $1,000,000 in
receipts from privatization efforts of the Voice of America
and the International Broadcasting Bureau, to remain
available until expended for carrying out authorized
purposes.
broadcasting capital improvements
For the purchase, rent, construction, and improvement of
facilities for radio and television transmission and
reception, and purchase and installation of necessary
equipment for radio and television transmission and reception
as authorized, $7,624,000, to remain available until
expended, as authorized.
General Provisions--Department of State and Related Agency
Sec. 401. Funds appropriated under this title shall be
available, except as otherwise provided, for allowances and
differentials as authorized by subchapter 59 of title 5,
United States Code; for services as authorized by 5 U.S.C.
3109; and for hire of passenger transportation pursuant to 31
U.S.C. 1343(b).
Sec. 402. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made
available for the current fiscal year for the Department of
State in this title may be transferred between such
appropriations, but no such appropriation, except as
otherwise specifically provided, shall be increased by more
than 10 percent by any such transfers: Provided, That not to
exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made available for the
current fiscal year for the Broadcasting Board of Governors
in this title may be transferred between such appropriations,
but no such appropriation, except as otherwise specifically
provided, shall be increased by more than 10 percent by any
such transfers: Provided further, That any transfer pursuant
to this section shall be treated as a reprogramming of funds
under section 605 of this Act and shall not be available for
obligation or expenditure except in compliance with the
procedures set forth in that section.
Sec. 403. None of the funds made available in this title
may be used by the Department of State or the Broadcasting
Board of Governors to provide equipment, technical support,
consulting services, or any other form of assistance to the
Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation.
Sec. 404. (a) The Senior Policy Operating Group on
Trafficking in Persons, established under section 105(f) of
the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of
2000 (22 U.S.C. 7103(f)) to coordinate agency activities
regarding policies (including grants and grant policies)
involving the international trafficking in persons, shall
coordinate all such policies related to the activities of
traffickers and victims of severe forms of trafficking.
(b) None of the funds provided in this or any other Act
shall be expended to perform functions that duplicate
coordinating responsibilities of the Operating Group.
(c) The Operating Group shall continue to report only to
the authorities that appointed them pursuant to section
105(f).
Sec. 405. None of the funds made available by this title
may be used for any United Nations undertaking when it is
made known to the Federal official having authority to
obligate or expend such funds that: (1) the United Nations
undertaking is a peacekeeping mission; (2) such undertaking
will involve United States Armed Forces under the command or
operational control of a foreign national; and (3) the
President's military advisors have not submitted to the
President a recommendation that such involvement is in the
national security interests of the United States and the
President has not submitted to the Congress such a
recommendation.
Sec. 406. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available under this title shall be expended for any
purpose for which appropriations are prohibited by section
609 of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the
Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999.
(b) The requirements in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of
section 609 of that Act shall continue to apply during fiscal
year 2007.
Sec. 407. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available under this title shall be expended for any
purpose for which appropriations are prohibited by section
616 of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the
Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999.
(b) The requirements in subsections (b) and (c) of section
616 of that Act shall continue to apply during fiscal year
2007.
Sec. 408. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), a
project to construct a diplomatic facility of the United
States may not include office space or other accommodations
for an employee of a Federal agency or department if the
Secretary of State determines that such department or agency
has not provided to the Department of State the full amount
of funding required by subsection (e) of section 604 of the
Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999
(as enacted into law by section 1000(a)(7) of Public Law 106-
113 and contained in appendix G of that Act; 113 Stat. 1501A-
453), as amended by section 629 of the Departments of
Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2005.
(b) Notwithstanding the prohibition in subsection (a), a
project to construct a diplomatic facility of the United
States may include office space or other accommodations for
members of the Marine Corps.
Sec. 409. Ceilings and earmarks contained in this title
shall not be applicable to funds or authorities appropriated
or otherwise made available by any subsequent Act unless such
Act specifically so directs. Earmarks or minimum funding
requirements contained in any other Act shall not be
applicable to funds appropriated by this title.
Sec. 410. Any funds provided in this Act under ``Department
of State'' used to implement E-Government Initiatives shall
be subject to the procedures set forth in section 605 of this
Act.
Sec. 411. (a) Subsection (f) of section 36 of the State
Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2708(f))
is amended--
(1) by striking ``(f) Ineligibility.--An officer'' and
inserting the following:
``(f) Ineligibility.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), an
officer''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) Exception in certain circumstances.--The Secretary
may pay a reward to an officer or employee of a foreign
government (or any entity thereof) who, while in the
performance of his or her official duties, furnishes
information described in such subsection, if the Secretary
determines that such payment satisfies the following
conditions:
``(A) Such payment is appropriate in light of the
exceptional or high-profile nature of the information
furnished pursuant to such subsection.
``(B) Such payment may aid in furnishing further
information described in such subsection.
``(C) Such payment is formally requested by such agency.''.
(b) Subsection (b) of such section (22 U.S.C. 2708(b)) is
amended in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by inserting
``or to an officer or employee of a foreign government in
accordance with subsection (f)(2)'' after ``individual''.
This title may be cited as the ``Department of State and
Related Agency Appropriations Act, 2007''.
TITLE V--RELATED AGENCIES
Antitrust Modernization Commission
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Antitrust Modernization
Commission, as authorized by Public Law 107-273, $462,000, to
remain available until expended.
Commission for the Preservation of America's Heritage Abroad
salaries and expenses
For expenses for the Commission for the Preservation of
America's Heritage Abroad, $493,000, as authorized by section
1303 of Public Law 99-83.
Commission on Civil Rights
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Commission on Civil Rights,
including hire of passenger motor vehicles, $8,933,000:
Provided, That none of the funds appropriated in this
paragraph shall be used to employ in excess of four full-time
individuals under Schedule C of the Excepted Service
exclusive of one special assistant for each Commissioner:
Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated in this
paragraph shall be used to reimburse Commissioners for more
than 75 billable days, with the exception of the chairperson,
who is permitted 125 billable days.
Commission on International Religious Freedom
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses for the United States Commission on
International Religious Freedom, as authorized by title II of
the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (Public Law
105-292), $3,000,000, to remain available until September 30,
2008.
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe, as authorized by Public Law 94-304,
$2,110,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
Congressional-Executive Commission on the People's Republic of China
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Congressional-Executive
Commission on the People's Republic of China, as authorized,
$2,000,000, including not more than $3,000 for the purpose of
official representation, to remain available until September
30, 2008.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission as authorized by title VII of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964 (29 U.S.C. 206(d) and 621-634), the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Civil Rights Act of 1991,
including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; hire of
passenger motor vehicles as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343(b);
non-monetary awards to private citizens; and not to exceed
$28,000,000 for payments to State and local enforcement
agencies for services to the Commission pursuant to title VII
of the Civil Rights Act of
[[Page H4707]]
1964, sections 6 and 14 of the Age Discrimination in
Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990,
and the Civil Rights Act of 1991, $322,807,000: Provided,
That the Commission is authorized to make available for
official reception and representation expenses not to exceed
$2,500 from available funds: Provided further, That the
Commission may take no action to implement any workforce
repositioning, restructuring, or reorganization until such
time as the Committees on Appropriations have been notified
of such proposals, in accordance with the reprogramming
provisions of section 605 of this Act.
Mr. WOLF (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent
that the remainder of the bill through page 83, line 7, be considered
as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Federal Communications Commission
salaries and expenses
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Federal Communications
Commission, as authorized by law, including uniforms and
allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; not
to exceed $4,000 for official reception and representation
expenses; purchase and hire of motor vehicles; special
counsel fees; and services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109,
$294,261,000: Provided, That offsetting collections shall be
assessed and collected pursuant to section 9 of title I of
the Communications Act of 1934, of which $293,261,000 shall
be retained and used for necessary expenses in this
appropriation, and shall remain available until expended:
Provided further, That the sum herein appropriated shall be
reduced as such offsetting collections are received during
fiscal year 2007 so as to result in a final fiscal year 2007
appropriation estimated at $1,000,000: Provided further, That
any offsetting collections received in excess of $293,261,000
in fiscal year 2007 shall remain available until expended,
but shall not be available for obligation until October 1,
2007: Provided further, That remaining offsetting collections
from prior years collected in excess of the amount specified
for collection in each such year and otherwise becoming
available on October 1, 2006, shall not be available for
obligation: Provided further, That notwithstanding 47 U.S.C.
309(j)(8)(B), proceeds from the use of a competitive bidding
system that may be retained and made available for obligation
shall not exceed $85,000,000 for fiscal year 2007: Provided
further, That, in addition, not to exceed $3,000,000 may be
transferred from the Universal Service Fund in fiscal year
2007, to remain available until expended, to monitor the
Universal Service Fund program to prevent and remedy waste,
fraud and abuse, and to conduct audits and investigations by
the Office of Inspector General.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Murphy
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Murphy:
Page 83, line 17, insert ``(increased by $50,000)
(decreased by $50,000)'' after the aggregate dollar amount.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday,
June 27, 2006, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murphy) and a
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Chairman, first, I thank the distinguished chairman,
Chairman Wolf, for his work on this bill.
This amendment is intended to highlight the dangerous practice of
caller ID fraud or ``call spoofing'' and hope the FCC moves quickly and
takes immediate action to protect the public from this. It is a
deceptive practice being used to defraud people of their money and
deceive citizens into releasing private information.
There are now several Web sites where anyone can change their
outgoing phone number to any number that they choose on a temporary
basis. This practice is not just for harmless pranks but has tremendous
identity theft and other security implications.
For example, the AARP bulletin recently reported that people received
false calls claiming they missed jury duty and were asked for their
Social Security numbers. The phone number of the local courthouse had
shown up on their caller ID.
Criminals have engaged in caller ID fraud to gather private consumer
information from businesses that rely on caller ID for authentication,
such as financial companies that perform wire transfers. Cell phone
voice mailboxes often only require verification that an incoming call
is from the user's cell phone number.
Lastly, in 2005, SWAT teams surrounded an empty building in New
Brunswick, New Jersey, after police received a call from a woman who
said she was being held hostage in an apartment. She was not in the
apartment, and the woman had intentionally used a false caller ID.
False caller ID information can be used to bypass safety systems made
to prevent domestic violence and harassment. Imagine what can happen
when predators use false caller ID numbers to prey upon children and
senior citizens. I might add that these phone spoofing Web sites also
offer to disguise the voice of the caller and to record the call.
The House has already expressed its will on this matter, unanimously
passing H.R. 5126 earlier this month; and I am pleased to be a
cosponsor of that bill. I have another bill, H.R. 5304, that would go a
step further by amending criminal law to protect Americans from this
practice.
We cannot keep waiting to deal with this insidious problem and must
ask the FCC to move forward quickly.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. I think
it is a good amendment. Hopefully, the FCC will take note of what Mr.
Murphy is doing. I would urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment.
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my colleague, Mr.
Murphy, and his amendment. It is appropriate for our colleague from
Pennsylvania to be offering this amendment because he is himself a
victim of this insidiousness.
I also want to thank Chairman Barton, who with me, introduced the
Truth in Caller ID Act that passed the House not long ago. I also want
to thank and recognize Mr. Upton, Mr. Dingell and Mr. Markey for their
significant contributions to that bill.
I commend our colleague from Pennsylvania for offering this
amendment. It will highlight to the FCC that the House of
Representatives takes this problem very seriously. We have swiftly
passed legislation that is now pending in the Senate. And so we expect
the FCC to do whatever it can now--and to move expeditiously once the
Truth in Caller ID Act is signed into law.
Not long ago, I was like most Americans--completely unaware that is
was so easy for someone to alter their caller ID. Caller ID spoofing is
not your grandfather's prank call.
This technology has limited uses that I find legitimate, such as for
law enforcement and protecting battered women.
This technology has unlimited uses that I find completely
unacceptable. This technology enables people to pretend to be a bank, a
doctor's office, a court house, or even a member of Congress. Nefarious
people are . . . I say are using this technology to get a hold of
private information and engage in identity theft.
The Telecommunications and Internet Subcommittee of Energy and
Commerce held a hearing on this matter. We heard stories of people
receiving phone calls from their local court houses saying they had
missed jury duty and that to confirm a make up the caller needed the
person's social security number. Well who wouldn't be flustered when
seeing a local court house phone number on the caller ID and being told
you had missed jury duty. So these innocent people gave out their
social security numbers.
We heard of people make fake calls to police departments claiming to
be victims of home intrusion and being held at gun point. The Newark
Star Ledger reported on July 12, 2005 that Mr. Wadu Jackson plead
guilty to placing ``a fake 911 call that drew dozens of police
sharpshooters to a New Brunswick home in March in a mistake belief that
a teenage girl was being held hostage.
I know of three of our colleagues in the House who have been victims
of caller ID spoofing. Not in the personal lives, but in their
professional lives as Members of Congress. They have had people call
and leave obnoxious messages that indicate the call is coming from the
member's district office.
I can only believe that this was an early effort at testing this
technology to interfere with the electoral process of our nation.
I think we do a service to our constituents today by highlighting and
alerting them to this problem. I urge the adoption of this amendment.
Mrs. SCHMIDT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Murphy/
Schmidt amendment to H.R. 5672, and I commend Mr. Murphy for his good
work on this important issue.
[[Page H4708]]
I introduced legislation on the issue of manipulation of caller
identification information, and I know first-hand there is a need to
end the practice of ``call spoofing.''
With the increasing frequency of identity theft, we must do all that
we can to end opportunities for falsification of this data.
I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murphy).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of
the bill through page 89, line 9, be considered as read, printed in the
Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
The text of the remainder of the bill through page 89, line 9, is as
follows:
Federal Trade Commission
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Federal Trade Commission,
including uniforms or allowances therefore, as authorized by
5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109;
hire of passenger motor vehicles; and not to exceed $300,000
shall be available for use to contract with a person or
persons for collection services in accordance with the terms
of 31 U.S.C. 3718: Provided further, That, notwithstanding
any other provision of law, not to exceed $129,000,000 of
offsetting collections derived from fees collected for
premerger notification filings under the Hart-Scott-Rodino
Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (15 U.S.C. 18a),
regardless of the year of collection, shall be retained and
used for necessary expenses in this appropriation: Provided
further, That, notwithstanding any other provision of law,
$23,000,000 in offsetting collections derived from fees
sufficient to implement and enforce the Telemarketing Sales
Rule, promulgated under the Telephone Consumer Fraud and
Abuse Prevention Act (15 U.S.C. 6101 et seq.), shall be
credited to this account, and be retained and used for
necessary expenses in this appropriation: Provided further,
That the sum herein appropriated from the general fund shall
be reduced as such offsetting collections are received during
fiscal year 2007, so as to result in a final fiscal year 2007
appropriation from the general fund estimated at not more
than $61,079,000: Provided further, That none of the funds
made available to the Federal Trade Commission may be used to
enforce subsection (e) of section 43 of the Federal Deposit
Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1831t) or section 151(b)(2) of the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991
(12 U.S.C. 1831t note).
HELP Commission
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the HELP Commission, $1,250,000,
to remain available until expended: Provided, That section
637(f)(1) of the HELP Commission Act (Public Law 108-199,
division B) is amended by inserting ``and 3 months'' after
``2 years''.
Legal Services Corporation
payment to the legal services corporation
For payment to the Legal Services Corporation to carry out
the purposes of the Legal Services Corporation Act of 1974,
$313,860,000, of which $296,990,000 is for basic field
programs and required independent audits; $2,970,000 is for
the Office of Inspector General, of which such amounts as may
be necessary may be used to conduct additional audits of
recipients; $12,661,000 is for management and administration;
and $1,239,000 is for client self-help and information
technology.
administrative provision--legal services corporation
None of the funds appropriated in this Act to the Legal
Services Corporation shall be expended for any purpose
prohibited or limited by, or contrary to any of the
provisions of, sections 501, 502, 503, 504, 505, and 506 of
Public Law 105-119, and all funds appropriated in this Act to
the Legal Services Corporation shall be subject to the same
terms and conditions set forth in such sections, except that
all references in sections 502 and 503 to 1997 and 1998 shall
be deemed to refer instead to 2006 and 2007, respectively.
Marine Mammal Commission
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Marine Mammal Commission as
authorized by title II of Public Law 92-522, $2,000,000.
Securities and Exchange Commission
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses for the Securities and Exchange
Commission, including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C.
3109, the rental of space (to include multiple year leases)
in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, and not to exceed
$3,000 for official reception and representation expenses,
$900,517,000, to remain available until expended; of which
not to exceed $10,000 may be used toward funding a permanent
secretariat for the International Organization of Securities
Commissions; and of which not to exceed $100,000 shall be
available for expenses for consultations and meetings hosted
by the Commission with foreign governmental and other
regulatory officials, members of their delegations,
appropriate representatives and staff to exchange views
concerning developments relating to securities matters,
development and implementation of cooperation agreements
concerning securities matters and provision of technical
assistance for the development of foreign securities markets,
such expenses to include necessary logistic and
administrative expenses and the expenses of Commission staff
and foreign invitees in attendance at such consultations and
meetings including: (1) such incidental expenses as meals
taken in the course of such attendance; (2) any travel and
transportation to or from such meetings; and (3) any other
related lodging or subsistence: Provided, That fees and
charges authorized by sections 6(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77f(b)), and 13(e), 14(g) and
31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(e),
78n(g), and 78ee), shall be credited to this account as
offsetting collections: Provided further, That not to exceed
$880,517,000 of such offsetting collections shall be
available until expended for necessary expenses of this
account: Provided further, That $20,000,000 shall be derived
from available balances of funds previously appropriated to
the Securities and Exchange Commission: Provided further,
That the total amount appropriated under this heading from
the general fund for fiscal year 2007 shall be reduced as
such offsetting fees are received so as to result in a final
total fiscal year 2007 appropriation from the general fund
estimated at not more than $0.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Small Business Administration
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, of the
Small Business Administration as authorized by Public Law
108-447, including hire of passenger motor vehicles as
authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343 and 1344, and not to exceed
$3,500 for official reception and representation expenses,
$303,550,000, of which $10,000,000 shall be available for
microloan technical assistance, and of which $1,000,000 shall
be transferred to and merged with appropriations for
``Business Loans Program Account'' and shall remain available
until expended for the cost of direct loans: Provided, That
the Administrator is authorized to charge fees to cover the
cost of publications developed by the Small Business
Administration, and certain loan program activities,
including fees authorized by section 5(b) of the Small
Business Act: Provided further, That, notwithstanding 31
U.S.C. 3302, revenues received from all such activities shall
be credited to this account, to remain available until
expended, for carrying out these purposes without further
appropriations: Provided further, That any funds provided
under this heading used to implement E-Government Initiatives
shall be subject to the procedures set forth in section 605
of this Act: Provided further, That, of the funds made
available under this heading, $500,000 shall be for the
National Veterans Business Development Corporation.
Amendment Offered by Mrs. Davis of California
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mrs. Davis of California:
Page 90, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert the
following: ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday,
June 27, 2006, the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis) and a
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment today
along with my colleagues, Mr. Evans of Illinois and Ms. Herseth of
South Dakota, on behalf of our veterans seeking to start and operate
their own businesses.
I have been interested in this issue for a number of years after
visiting with our servicemembers in Afghanistan. I recall one brave
servicemember who told me his dream was to learn about entrepreneurship
and start his own business after his tour of duty. So it is up to us to
make sure our veterans have access to the training, assistance and
capital to start a business.
Mr. Chairman, Congress passed legislation in 1999 establishing the
National Veterans Business Development Corporation to provide all of
these crucial aspects of entrepreneurship to veterans. As a result, the
Veterans Corporation has provided training to over 8,000 veterans and
has helped over 550 veterans start businesses during 2006 alone.
[[Page H4709]]
Charmaine Burnett is one of those thousands of success stories. She
is a service-disabled veteran of the Gulf War living in California, and
her construction services company has been awarded several contracts in
recent months. She attributes her success in part to the assistance she
received from the Veterans Corporation.
Unfortunately, at $500,000, H.R. 5672 does not provide sufficient
funding for the Veterans Corporation to train and continue its services
to veterans when they need it the most.
Mr. Chairman, why would we cut this funding to veterans when they
need it most? The corporation will have to cut back and reduce services
for veterans entrepreneurship when many of our servicemembers are
returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Our amendment increases funding for the Veterans Corporation by a
mere $1 million to match its level for fiscal year 2006. Our veterans
need this funding.
This amendment is completely budget neutral. It does not increase
spending and does not take away from other important programs within
the SBA.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and to support
business ownership for America's veterans.
{time} 1315
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I support the gentlewoman's amendment. I know
the Veterans Corporation is working to get itself revitalized, and I
hope we can have this thing authorized. I think the more effort that
can be done would help us, particularly as we move into the outyears.
Mr. Chairman, I accept the gentlewoman's amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that acceptance,
and I know that the veterans will as well.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from California has 3 minutes
remaining.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my
time to the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth).
Ms. HERSETH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me
time.
In light of the chairman's support, I will submit my comments for the
Record in support of the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my support for this important
amendment offered by the gentlelady Ms. Davis of CA to the Science,
State, Justice, and Commerce Appropriations bill to increase by $1
million the amount of funding in this bill to the National Veterans
Business Development Corporation--also known as The Veterans
Corporation.
Our amendment increases funding for The Veterans Corporation from
$500,000 to $1.5 million to match Fiscal Year 2006 levels. Without
level funding, The Veterans Corporation will be forced to cut back and
reduce entrepreneurship assistance to our veterans.
As the Ranking Member of the Veterans' Affairs Economic Opportunity
Subcommittee, which maintains jurisdiction over veterans' employment
and re-employment matters, I have been working to explore the
perceptions, activities, employment practices, and entrepreneurship
opportunities for former servicemembers.
In my view, which I know is shared by many of my colleagues, the men
and women serving in the military today are very professional, highly
trained, and extremely motivated. I am confident that many of these men
and women would add value to our economy if given the opportunity to
start their own businesses. In my district--the State of South Dakota--
more than 17,000 veteran owned small businesses are operating--
generating a combined income of more than $816 million.
Mr. Chairman, as the Administration has repeatedly stated, this is a
key transitional year for members of our Armed Forces serving overseas.
Increasing numbers of servicemen and women are expected to return home
from Iraq and Afghanistan--including thousands of National Guard and
Reservists. The men and women in uniform who defend this country and
make our economic and political systems possible, indeed, have earned
our best efforts and a fair opportunity to successfully transition from
military service to civilian life and employment.
The Veterans Corporation is working to help these veterans, who would
like to enter the world of entrepreneurship, have the opportunity to
successfully do so. I ask my colleagues to support these veterans by
supporting this amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
office of inspector general
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General
in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act
of 1978, $13,722,000.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-
Lee).
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished
gentleman. I likewise thank you for your leadership and the chairman's
leadership, and I would like to enter into a colloquy. It is, I think,
appropriate to do so as there is a pending launch going forward in the
Nation's space program, space shuttle program, to talk about the next
generation of scientists and astronauts.
Mr. Chairman, in 1992, Dr. Mae C. Jemison became the first woman of
color to travel into space. After retiring from NASA, she worked as an
active advocate of science education, especially for minorities and
economically disadvantaged students.
Dr. Jemison is a doctor by training, and she is a pioneer in
aeronautics. And through the creation of the Dr. Mae C. Jemison Grant
Program, we hope to provide other minorities and women in America with
the opportunity to succeed in science and engineering.
Frankly, what we want to do is to create the next generation of our
scientists and our astronauts. I would say to you that, unfortunately,
we are woefully noncompetitive. The Dr. Mae C. Jemison Grant Program is
intended to ensure equal access for minority and economically
disadvantaged students to NASA's education programs.
The program facilitates NASA's ability to work with institutions
serving minorities to bring more women of color into the field of space
and aeronautics. We must pursue this program to safeguard equal
opportunities in fields of study and professions that have far too low
of a minority ratio.
Mr. Chairman, I hope that as this particular program is authorized in
the NASA authorization bill, we will find it in our good graces to be
able to fund it. My question, as I yield to the gentleman, is, would
the gentleman agree with me to work with me to find a way to recognize
and to fund this particular program?
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman. She certainly has
raised a very important issue. I pledge to explore this issue further.
It is my understanding that NASA anticipates, because they have a
strong education program, building this program using the funding
appropriated to the agency for education programs. I do recognize that
the Dr. Mae C. Jemison Grant Program is a program charged to NASA, and
we look forward to the launch of the program and the benefits that will
result.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time. Let me
say that it is my hope, Mr. Chairman, that we do recognize this as a
grant program and that as you have indicated, that this program be
funded under the education programs in NASA, and to be specifically
funded, and as indicated in the Record, I had an amendment to offer.
At this time, I will not be offering the amendment. And therefore, I
hope to accept the assurances and be able to move forward on this
program so that it can be funded
Mr. WOLF. Thank you.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall).
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 1\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me time.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to enter into a colloquy with Chairman
Wolf, of the Science, State, Justice, Commerce Appropriations
Subcommittee.
Mr. Chairman, I had offered to introduce an amendment today to make a
[[Page H4710]]
modest increase of $2.2 million for the Space Environment Center,
returning its funding to the President's requested level of $7.2
million.
However, Mr. Chairman, after discussing this with your staff, I have
decided not to offer the amendment but would like to engage you in a
colloquy.
Mr. WOLF. Sure.
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, the Space Environment Center is
a part of NOAA's National Weather Service, and it is the only civil
provider of space weather warnings. These warnings enable government
and private sector operators to take actions to minimize disruptions in
service and damage to critical infrastructure.
Last year, the Space Environment Center received a $4 million cut, a
cut of about 44 percent from its $7 million budget. NOAA, in order to
prevent degradation of services reprogrammed funds from other programs
to continue the operations of the Space Environment Center.
But in this cycle, if the Center receives $5 million as proposed in
the bill, it will be forced to make substantial cuts in its staffing.
As a national critical system, should the capabilities of the center
go down, the Air Force currently provides data as a back-up. However,
with this proposed budget, the center will not be able to maintain a
liaison position with the Air Force, potentially harming its operations
and the continuity of its services.
So, in that spirit, with that background, Mr. Chairman, I have two
questions. Would you agree that the space weather warnings are a vital
service to many of our space-based assets and that more funding is
needed for the Space Environment Center? And if so, would you be
willing to work in conference to increase funding for the center?
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. WOLF. I agree with the gentleman that the warnings provided by
the Space Environment Center are important to protect their satellites
and other space-based industries. And I will be happy to work with the
gentleman as the bill moves forward through conference to try to find
increased funding for the Space Environment Center.
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the chairman's
response and willingness to work on this issue. I thank my colleague,
Mr. Mollohan, from the great State of West Virginia for yielding time
to me.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
surety bond guarantees revolving fund
For additional capital for the Surety Bond Guarantees
Revolving Fund, authorized by the Small Business Investment
Act, as amended, $2,824,000, to remain available until
expended.
business loans program account
Subject to section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, during fiscal year 2007 commitments to guarantee loans
under section 503 of the Small Business Investment Act of
1958, shall not exceed $7,500,000,000: Provided, That during
fiscal year 2007 commitments for general business loans
authorized under section 7(a) of the Small Business Act,
shall not exceed $17,500,000,000: Provided further, That
during fiscal year 2007 commitments to guarantee loans for
debentures under section 303(b) of the Small Business
Investment Act of 1958, shall not exceed $3,000,000,000:
Provided further, That during fiscal year 2007 guarantees of
trust certificates authorized by section 5(g) of the Small
Business Act shall not exceed a principal amount of
$12,000,000,000.
In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the
direct and guaranteed loan programs, $123,706,000, which may
be transferred to and merged with the appropriations for
Salaries and Expenses.
disaster loans program account
For the cost of direct loans authorized by section 7(b) of
the Small Business Act, $85,140,000, to remain available
until expended: Provided, That such costs, including the cost
of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502
of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the
direct loan program authorized by section 7(b) of the Small
Business Act, $113,850,000, of which $495,000 is for the
Office of Inspector General of the Small Business
Administration for audits and reviews of disaster loans and
the disaster loan program and shall be transferred to and
merged with appropriations for the Office of Inspector
General; of which $104,445,000 is for direct administrative
expenses of loan making and servicing to carry out the direct
loan program, to remain available until expended, and which
may be transferred to and merged with appropriations for
Salaries and Expenses; and of which $8,910,000 is for
indirect administrative expenses, which may be transferred to
and merged with appropriations for Salaries and Expenses:
Provided, That any amount in excess of $8,910,000 to be
transferred to and merged with appropriations for Salaries
and Expenses for indirect administrative expenses shall be
treated as a reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this
Act and shall not be available for obligation or expenditure
except in compliance with the procedures set forth in that
section.
administrative provision--small business administration
Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made available
for the current fiscal year for the Small Business
Administration in this Act may be transferred between such
appropriations, but no such appropriation shall be increased
by more than 10 percent by any such transfers: Provided, That
any transfer pursuant to this paragraph shall be treated as a
reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this Act and
shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except
in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section.
State Justice Institute
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the State Justice Institute, as
authorized by the State Justice Institute Authorization Act
of 1992 (Public Law 102-572), $2,000,000: Provided, That not
to exceed $2,500 shall be available for official reception
and representation expenses.
United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the United States-China Economic
and Security Review Commission, $4,000,000, including not
more than $5,000 for the purpose of official representation,
to remain available until September 30, 2008: Provided, That
for purposes of costs relating to printing and binding, the
Commission shall be deemed, effective on the date of its
establishment, to be a committee of Congress: Provided
further, That compensation for the executive director of the
Commission may not exceed the rate payable for level II of
the Executive Schedule under section 5314 of title 5, United
States Code: Provided further, That section 1238(c)(1) of the
Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2001, is amended by striking ``June'' and inserting
``November'': Provided further, That travel by members of the
Commission and its staff shall be arranged and conducted
under the rules and procedures applying to travel by members
of the House of Representatives and its staff: Provided
further, That section 635(b) of Public Law 109-108 is
repealed.
United States Institute of Peace
operating expenses
For necessary expenses of the United States Institute of
Peace as authorized in the United States Institute of Peace
Act, $26,979,000, to remain available until September 30,
2008.
TITLE VI--GENERAL PROVISIONS
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 601. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not
authorized by the Congress.
Sec. 602. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current
fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
Sec. 603. The expenditure of any appropriation under this
Act for any consulting service through procurement contract,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109, shall be limited to those
contracts where such expenditures are a matter of public
record and available for public inspection, except where
otherwise provided under existing law, or under existing
Executive order issued pursuant to existing law.
Sec. 604. If any provision of this Act or the application
of such provision to any person or circumstances shall be
held invalid, the remainder of the Act and the application of
each provision to persons or circumstances other than those
as to which it is held invalid shall not be affected thereby.
Sec. 605. (a) None of the funds provided under this Act, or
provided under previous appropriations Acts to the agencies
funded by this Act that remain available for obligation or
expenditure in fiscal year 2007, or provided from any
accounts in the Treasury of the United States derived by the
collection of fees available to the agencies funded by this
Act, shall be available for obligation or expenditure through
a reprogramming of funds that: (1) creates new programs; (2)
eliminates a program, project, or activity; (3) increases
funds or personnel by any means for any project or activity
for which funds have been denied or restricted; (4) relocates
an office or employees; (5) reorganizes or renames offices;
(6) reorganizes programs or activities; or (7) contracts out
or privatizes any functions or activities presently performed
by Federal employees; unless the Appropriations Committees of
both Houses of Congress are notified 15 days in advance of
such reprogramming of funds.
(b) None of the funds provided under this Act, or provided
under previous appropriations Acts to the agencies funded by
this Act that remain available for obligation or expenditure
in fiscal year 2007, or provided from any accounts in the
Treasury of the
[[Page H4711]]
United States derived by the collection of fees available to
the agencies funded by this Act, shall be available for
obligation or expenditure for activities, programs, or
projects through a reprogramming of funds in excess of
$750,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less, that: (1) augments
existing programs, projects, or activities; (2) reduces by 10
percent funding for any existing program, project, or
activity, or numbers of personnel by 10 percent as approved
by Congress; or (3) results from any general savings,
including savings from a reduction in personnel, which would
result in a change in existing programs, activities, or
projects as approved by Congress; unless the Appropriations
Committees of both Houses of Congress are notified 15 days in
advance of such reprogramming of funds.
Sec. 606. Hereafter, none of the funds made available in
this Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce any
guidelines of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
covering harassment based on religion, when it is made known
to the Federal entity or official to which such funds are
made available that such guidelines do not differ in any
respect from the proposed guidelines published by the
Commission on October 1, 1993 (58 Fed. Reg. 51266).
Sec. 607. If it has been finally determined by a court or
Federal agency that any person intentionally affixed a label
bearing a ``Made in America'' inscription, or any inscription
with the same meaning, to any product sold in or shipped to
the United States that is not made in the United States, the
person shall be ineligible to receive any contract or
subcontract made with funds made available in this Act,
pursuant to the debarment, suspension, and ineligibility
procedures described in sections 9.400 through 9.409 of title
48, Code of Federal Regulations.
Point of Order
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order
against section 607. This provision violates clause 2(b) of House rule
XXI. It proposes to change existing law and therefore constitutes
legislation on an appropriation bill in violation of House rules.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say, Mr. Davis has convinced
me of the merit of his argument. I would never object to him. Since it
makes a lot of sense, I concede.
The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is conceded and sustained, and the
section is stricken from the bill.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Sec. 608. The Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State,
the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the National Science
Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, the Federal Communications Commission, the
Securities and Exchange Commission and the Small Business
Administration shall provide to the Committees on
Appropriations of the Senate and of the House of
Representatives a quarterly accounting of the cumulative
balances of any unobligated funds that were received by such
agency during any previous fiscal year.
Sec. 609. Any costs incurred by a department or agency
funded under this Act resulting from personnel actions taken
in response to funding reductions included in this Act shall
be absorbed within the total budgetary resources available to
such department or agency: Provided, That the authority to
transfer funds between appropriations accounts as may be
necessary to carry out this section is provided in addition
to authorities included elsewhere in this Act: Provided
further, That use of funds to carry out this section shall be
treated as a reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this
Act and shall not be available for obligation or expenditure
except in compliance with the procedures set forth in that
section.
Sec. 610. None of the funds provided by this Act shall be
available to promote the sale or export of tobacco or tobacco
products, or to seek the reduction or removal by any foreign
country of restrictions on the marketing of tobacco or
tobacco products, except for restrictions which are not
applied equally to all tobacco or tobacco products of the
same type.
Sec. 611. None of the funds appropriated pursuant to this
Act or any other provision of law may be used for--
(1) the implementation of any tax or fee in connection with
the implementation of subsection 922(t) of title 18, United
States Code; and
(2) any system to implement subsection 922(t) of title 18,
United States Code, that does not require and result in the
destruction of any identifying information submitted by or on
behalf of any person who has been determined not to be
prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm no more
than 24 hours after the system advises a Federal firearms
licensee that possession or receipt of a firearm by the
prospective transferee would not violate subsection (g) or
(n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, or State
law.
Sec. 612. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to pay the salaries and expenses of personnel of the
Department of Justice to obligate more than $625,000,000
during fiscal year 2007 from the fund established by section
1402 of chapter XIV of title II of Public Law 98-473 (42
U.S.C. 10601).
Sec. 613. None of the funds made available to the
Department of Justice in this Act may be used to discriminate
against or denigrate the religious or moral beliefs of
students who participate in programs for which financial
assistance is provided from those funds, or of the parents or
legal guardians of such students.
Sec. 614. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality
of the United States Government, except pursuant to a
transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act
or any other appropriations Act.
Sec. 615. The Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State,
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the
National Science Foundation, the Securities and Exchange
Commission and the Small Business Administration shall, not
later than two months after the date of the enactment of this
Act, certify that telecommuting opportunities have increased
over levels certified to the Committees on Appropriations for
fiscal year 2006: Provided, That, of the total amounts
appropriated to the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and
State, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the
National Science Foundation, the Securities and Exchange
Commission and the Small Business Administration, $5,000,000
shall be available to each only upon such certification:
Provided further, That each Department or agency shall
provide quarterly reports to the Committees on Appropriations
on the status of telecommuting programs, including the number
and percentage of Federal employees eligible for, and
participating in, such programs: Provided further, That each
Department or agency shall maintain a ``Telework
Coordinator'' to be responsible for overseeing the
implementation and operations of telecommuting programs, and
serve as a point of contact on such programs for the
Committees on Appropriations.
Sec. 616. Any funds provided in this Act under ``National
Science Foundation'' used to implement E-Government
Initiatives shall be subject to the procedures set forth in
section 605 of this Act.
Sec. 617. (a) Tracing studies conducted by the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives are released
without adequate disclaimers regarding the limitations of the
data.
(b) The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
shall include in all such data releases, language similar to
the following that would make clear that trace data cannot be
used to draw broad conclusions about firearms-related crime:
(1) Firearm traces are designed to assist law enforcement
authorities in conducting investigations by tracking the sale
and possession of specific firearms. Law enforcement agencies
may request firearms traces for any reason, and those reasons
are not necessarily reported to the Federal Government. Not
all firearms used in crime are traced and not all firearms
traced are used in crime.
(2) Firearms selected for tracing are not chosen for
purposes of determining which types, makes or models of
firearms are used for illicit purposes. The firearms selected
do not constitute a random sample and should not be
considered representative of the larger universe of all
firearms used by criminals, or any subset of that universe.
Firearms are normally traced to the first retail seller, and
sources reported for firearms traced do not necessarily
represent the sources or methods by which firearms in general
are acquired for use in crime.
Sec. 618. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available under this Act may be used to issue patents on
claims directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Sec. 619. None of the funds made available in this Act
shall be used in any way whatsoever to support or justify the
use of torture by any official or contract employee of the
United States Government.
Sec. 620. For an additional amount under the heading
``Small Business Administration, Salaries and Expenses'',
$20,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008,
shall be for initiatives related to small business
development and entrepreneurship, including programmatic and
construction activities: Provided, That amounts made
available under this section shall be provided in accordance
with the terms and conditions specified in the statement of
managers accompanying this Act.
Sec. 621. Of the amounts made available in this Act,
$674,155,851 from ``Department of State''; $45,635,505 from
``Department of Justice''; $20,678,269 from ``Department of
Commerce''; $771,279 from ``United States Trade
Representative''; $1,238,808 from ``Broadcasting Board of
Governors''; $377,722 from ``National Aeronautics and Space
Administration''; and $120,173 from ``National Science
Foundation'' shall be available for the purposes of
implementing the Capital Security Cost Sharing program.
Sec. 622. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law or
treaty, none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available under this Act or any other Act may be expended or
obligated by a department, agency, or instrumentality of the
United States to pay administrative expenses or to compensate
an officer or employee of the United States in connection
with requiring an export license for the export to Canada of
components, parts, accessories or attachments for firearms
listed in Category I, section 121.1 of title 22, Code of
Federal Regulations
[[Page H4712]]
(International Trafficking in Arms Regulations (ITAR), part
121, as it existed on April 1, 2005) with a total value not
exceeding $500 wholesale in any transaction, provided that
the conditions of subsection (b) of this section are met by
the exporting party for such articles.
(b) The foregoing exemption from obtaining an export
license--
(1) does not exempt an exporter from filing any Shipper's
Export Declaration or notification letter required by law, or
from being otherwise eligible under the laws of the United
States to possess, ship, transport, or export the articles
enumerated in subsection (a); and
(2) does not permit the export without a license of--
(A) fully automatic firearms and components and parts for
such firearms, other than for end use by the Federal
Government, or a Provincial or Municipal Government of
Canada;
(B) barrels, cylinders, receivers (frames) or complete
breech mechanisms for any firearm listed in Category I, other
than for end use by the Federal Government, or a Provincial
or Municipal Government of Canada; or
(C) articles for export from Canada to another foreign
destination.
(c) In accordance with this section, the District Directors
of Customs and postmasters shall permit the permanent or
temporary export without a license of any unclassified
articles specified in subsection (a) to Canada for end use in
Canada or return to the United States, or temporary import of
Canadian-origin items from Canada for end use in the United
States or return to Canada for a Canadian citizen.
(d) The President may require export licenses under this
section on a temporary basis if the President determines,
upon publication first in the Federal Register, that the
Government of Canada has implemented or maintained inadequate
import controls for the articles specified in subsection (a),
such that a significant diversion of such articles has and
continues to take place for use in international terrorism or
in the escalation of a conflict in another nation. The
President shall terminate the requirements of a license when
reasons for the temporary requirements have ceased.
Sec. 623. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States
receiving appropriated funds under this Act or any other Act
shall obligate or expend in any way such funds to pay
administrative expenses or the compensation of any officer or
employee of the United States to deny any application
submitted pursuant to 22 U.S.C. 2778(b)(1)(B) and qualified
pursuant to 27 CFR Sec. 478.112 or .113, for a permit to
import United States origin ``curios or relics'' firearms,
parts, or ammunition.
Sec. 624. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to include in any new bilateral or multilateral trade
agreement the text of--
(1) paragraph 2 of article 16.7 of the United States-
Singapore Free Trade Agreement;
(2) paragraph 4 of article 17.9 of the United States-
Australia Free Trade Agreement; or
(3) paragraph 4 of article 15.9 of the United States-
Morocco Free Trade Agreement.
Sec. 625. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to pay expenses for any United States delegation to
any specialized agency, body, or commission of the United
Nations if such commission is chaired or presided over by a
country, the government of which the Secretary of State has
determined, for purposes of section 6(j)(1) of the Export
Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2405(j)(1)), has
provided support for acts of international terrorism.
Sec. 626. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to carry out any diplomatic operations in Libya or
accept the credentials of any representative of the
Government of Libya until such time as the President
certifies to Congress that Libya has taken irrevocable steps
to pay, in its entirety, the total amount of the settlement
commitment of $10,000,000 to the surviving families of each
decedent of Pan Am Flight 103 and certifies to Congress that
Libya will continue to work in good faith to resolve the
outstanding cases of United States victims of terrorism
sponsored or supported by Libya, including the settlement of
the La Belle Discotheque bombing.
Sec. 627. None of the funds made available by this Act
shall be used in contravention of the Federal buildings
performance and reporting requirements of Executive Order
13123, part 3 of title V of the National Energy Conservation
Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 8251 et seq.), or subtitle A of title I
of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (including the amendments
made thereby).
Sec. 628. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used by the Government of the United States to enter into
a basing rights agreement between the United States and Iraq.
{time} 1330
Amendment Offered by Mr. Obey
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Obey:
At the end of title VI, insert the following:
Sec. __. (a) Minimum Wage.--Section 6(a)(1) of the Fair
Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206(a)(1)) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``and not less than $5.15 an hour'' and
inserting ``not less than $5.15 an hour''; and
(2) by inserting before the semicolon at the end the
following: ``, not less than $5.85 an hour beginning on
January 1, 2007, not less than $6.55 an hour beginning on
January 1, 2008, and not less than $7.25 an hour beginning on
January 1, 2009''.
(b) Applicability of Minimum Wage to the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands.--(1) Section 6 of the Fair
Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206) shall apply to
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the minimum wage
applicable to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands under section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act
of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206(a)(1))--
(A) shall be $3.55 an hour, beginning on the 60th day after
the date of enactment of this Act; and
(B) shall be increased by $0.50 an hour (or such lesser
amount as may be necessary to equal the minimum wage under
section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938),
beginning 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act
and every 6 months thereafter until the minimum wage
applicable to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands under this subsection is equal to the minimum wage
set forth in such section.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman reserves a point of order.
Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday, June 27, 2006, the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, it has been 9 years since this country has adjusted the
minimum wage. During that time, the food prices have gone up almost 25
percent. Health care costs overall have gone up over 40 percent.
Insurance has almost doubled. Gasoline prices have doubled. Energy
prices have gone out of sight, and yet people are still struggling
along on the same minimum wage that they were paid 9 years ago.
To try to do something about that, we offered an amendment to the
Labor-Health-Education-Social Services bill in the full committee.
Every Democrat voted for that amendment, and so did seven Republicans.
But after that happened and the amendment had passed, the Labor-Health-
Education appropriations bill was blocked from consideration by the
leadership of this House and by the Rules Committee.
Therefore, when this bill came before the full committee, we
attempted once again to adjust the minimum wage in three increments of
70 cents each, because we believe that no one who works 40 hours a week
ought to go home in poverty. We, this time, did not receive the support
of those same seven Republicans. Five of them voted against us. The
other two missed the vote, and so that amendment was lost.
We, therefore, asked the Rules Committee to make in order an
amendment on this bill which would adjust that minimum wage, and that
is what I am trying to do today.
I recognize that if the point of order is lodged against this
amendment, that we will once again be blocked from our effort to
provide an increase in the minimum wage, but I just want to say to
those who say this is not the proper vehicle and we should try to do it
on some other bill, that for 9 years we have been waiting for the
majority party to find the right vehicle to accomplish this. And for 9
years, nothing has happened.
The issue comes down to this: Whose side are you on? Are you willing
to help adjust that minimum wage upward or are you not? This is one
effort to find out.
For those who think this is just a political or an academic exercise,
I told the House on the debate on the rule that I recall, after my
parents were divorced and my mother was trying to get along on the
minimum wage, and I remember how it was to run out of money before you
ran out of days on the calendar each month. So she would find some
household item that she could take down to Etzkin's Pawn Shop and pawn
to get the family through the week.
The outrage is that today that minimum wage has far less purchasing
power than it did when she was earning
[[Page H4713]]
it years ago. I think that is an absolute disgrace.
The wealthiest 1 percent of people in this country have 33 percent of
the Nation's wealth. The poorest 40 percent of the people in this
country are struggling to hang on to 3 percent of the Nation's wealth.
That kind of gap is wrong.
This is one of the few things the Congress can do to directly impact
the size of that gap. I think we have an economic obligation. I think
we have a moral obligation to make this happen, and I am not interested
in playing jurisdictional dunghill niceties about which committee is
supposed to handle this bill. This bill ought to be out on the floor.
This amendment ought to pass.
I would ask that the majority party not offer a point of order
against the amendment so that we can finally bring some justice to
people who are struggling in the shadows of life, who are struggling on
life's underside. We can make their lives just a little bit more
pleasant by passing this amendment, and I would think that, given the
fact that the Congress has just in this House determined to accept a
COLA for itself, I would think that we would have significantly less
embarrassment if we would recognize that it takes 4 months for someone
working at the minimum wage to make the same amount of money that
Congress will gain by way of a COLA. It is outrageous to adjust
congressional COLAs and not adjust the minimum wage. So I would urge
that no one lodge a point of order against this amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Wisconsin has expired.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I believe it is an appropriate issue to debate, but the appropriate
forum for debate is with the authorizing committees and with an
opportunity for both sides on the issue to present their cases.
Today's pending legislation is not a place for the debate, and I
would hope that the authorizing committee would schedule hearings and
bring forward a bill and let the House work its will. That is the way
we do it. Authorizers hold hearings, look at the impact, come back,
report out a bill, and let the committee and the House work its will.
Point of Order
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I do make a point of order against the
amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes
legislation in an appropriation bill. Therefore, it violates clause 2
of rule XXI.
The rule states in pertinent part, an amendment to a general
appropriation bill shall not be in order if it changes existing law.
The amendment directly amends the existing law, and I ask for a ruling
from the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I understand that the rules of the House
normally indicate that this legislation would be handled by the
authorizing committee, but I would note that on the appropriation
conference report just several months ago, the majority leader in the
Senate added 40 pages of authorizing language to the Defense bill,
language which protected the pharmaceutical industry in this country
from suit.
And it would seem to me that if it is legitimate for the majority
leader of the Senate to do that, in order to protect a privileged
industry in this country, that we could find a way in the House rules
to protect the interests of the lowest-income wage earners in the
country, but I must reluctantly concede the point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is conceded and sustained. The
amendment is out of order.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I
yield to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) for a
colloquy with the chairman.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding.
I rise today to engage in a colloquy with the chairman of the
subcommittee, Mr. Wolf. I understand and know quite frankly that the
chairman has been a long-time advocate of public diplomacy and
democracy through educational and cultural exchanges, and I would like
to express my very strong support of his work. I truly appreciate his
willingness to highlight these issues today of mutual concern.
So, Mr. Chairman, I come to the floor today to raise an issue that is
important for our hemispheric foreign policy. For quite a few years,
many in this body have stressed the importance of improving relations
with Latin America and the Caribbean by strengthening educational
exchange initiatives.
Many American students who spend time studying abroad are among our
Nation's greatest assets, and this is especially true with regards to
our hemispheric neighbors.
Many elected leaders in Latin America and the Caribbean spent some
time studying here in the United States. They applied the skills and
the values that they learned in the United States upon returning to
their home countries.
For instance, in the wake of recent natural disasters, many Caribbean
leaders who studied here were able to draw on their experience and
networks of contacts when facing challenges.
The need for strengthening the human capital and democratic values is
ever pressing as natural disasters, perhaps among the most severe
destabilizing force, constantly wreak havoc on the region.
Hurricanes, floods, landslides, earthquakes are becoming more
frequent. It takes years and sometimes decades to recover, and I know
that we can all personally attest to how a natural disaster shakes a
nation's foundation to its very core.
Educational exchange opportunities are an investment with the
greatest return. By developing human capital, we are securing our
hemisphere by planting the seeds of democracy and success.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MOLLOHAN. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I want to assure the gentlewoman from
California that I agree that educational exchange initiatives are an
important component of our hemispheric foreign policy.
The fact is, as you were speaking, I thought of my daughter Rebecca
who was in an exchange program and actually taught down in Honduras,
Tegucigalpa, for 2 years. The relationships, the friendships, and the
opportunities she made were life changing. I think you make a very
powerful point.
I appreciate the gentlewoman's intention in raising this issue, and I
want to assure her that I will be mindful of this issue as this bill
moves forward.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will further yield, I want to
thank the gentleman for his attention to this issue and so many issues
that are important to our country. I look forward to working together
in standing up for democracy and improving relations with our
hemispheric neighbors.
I want to thank you again, and I want to thank you for yielding me
the time.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from California.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I yield
to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) and the other Members for
a colloquy.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I do rise for
purposes of engaging in a colloquy with you.
Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to thank you and the ranking
member, Mr. Mollohan, for restoring funding for several critical Voice
of America language services that were slated for reductions, including
the Greek and Turkish services.
As cochair of the Hellenic Caucus and a strong supporter of resolving
the Cyprus issue, I believe finding innovative ways to bring the two
sides closer are necessary. The Greek and Turkish VOA services have
proposed a new joint program initiative promoting the end of the
division in Cyprus by engaging both Greek-Cypriot and Turkish-Cypriot
communities in a revised process using radio and television. This
program would entail reporting on bicommunal developments, conducting
[[Page H4714]]
interviews with prominent figures and airing them as part of radio and
TV dialogues, or bridges, if you will, between the two communities. As
H.R. 5672 moves through the appropriations process, I hope, Mr.
Chairman, you will work with members of the Hellenic and Turkish
Caucuses to find the funding needed to initiate this new joint program.
Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, I, too, want to join my colleagues in
expressing gratitude to Chairman Wolf for agreeing to enter into the
colloquy.
I also want to thank the chairman and the ranking member, Mr.
Mollohan, for restoring full funding for Voice of America services,
including funding for Turkey and Greece. I strongly believe this
programming, which reaches millions, remains critical to peace,
stability and democracy in the Middle East, Eastern Mediterranean and
Balkans regions.
Mr. Chairman, for the first time, the Turkey Caucus and the Hellenic
Caucus have joined forces to foster reconciliation on the island of
Cyprus. Creating a distinct and separate VOA program for Cyprus
provides advocates for reunification a unique opportunity to bring both
sides back to the negotiating table.
We believe that the United States must play an active role in
resolving differences between Greek and Turkish Cypriots, and the Voice
of America Cyprus would be a positive step forward.
Thank you very much.
{time} 1345
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. MALONEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I would like to
add my support to what has already been said about the importance of
developing a joint program initiative by the Greek and Turkish language
services at the Voice of America to promote an end to the division of
Cyprus and to help engage the Greek-Cypriot and Turkish-Cypriot
communities in a revived process aimed at their reunification.
Cyprus has been divided since 1974, way too long, and we all want
this division to come to an end. I believe that this type of initiative
would go a long way in making that happen by keeping the lines of
communication between the two communities open.
I am especially pleased to join my fellow cochair and cofounder of
the Hellenic Caucus, Representative Bilirakis, as well as the cochairs
of the Turkish Caucus, Representatives Wexler and Whitfield, in showing
our collective support for this effort.
I would also like to thank Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Mollohan
for restoring the cuts to valuable programs at the Voice of America,
including the Greek and Turkey services, and I look forward to working
with them on this new and exciting project for Cyprus.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield once again?
Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman.
This is really a pretty special thing when you come to think about
it. This is the first time that we are working together with the
Turkish Caucus on an issue which we all agree has enormous potential to
benefit the relations and close the gap between the two communities;
and I hope, sir, that you will work with us to find, along with Mr.
Mollohan, to find funding for this critical Cyprus reconciliation joint
initiative.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank both you, Mr. Bilirakis, as
well as Mr. Wexler and Mrs. Maloney of New York. It really does offer
an opportunity. It is kind of an historic moment, in some respects, for
this reconciliation opportunity.
So I support the efforts aimed at bringing a solution to the Cyprus
issue and agree that new avenues should be explored. I really commend
you for doing this. I share your concerns and really will be pleased to
work with my colleagues to explore what might be done to gain support
for this new joint initiative to someday bring peace and reconciliation
to the area.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I thank Chairman Wolf and Mr. Mollohan
for their consideration and for yielding us the time, and I look
forward to working with both of you in the future.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
TITLE VII--RESCISSIONS
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund
(Rescission)
Of the unobligated balances available under this heading,
$8,000,000 are rescinded.
General Administration
telecommunications carrier compliance fund
(rescission)
Of the unobligated balances available under this heading,
$39,000,000 are rescinded.
Legal Activities
assets forfeiture fund
(rescission)
Of the unobligated balances available under this heading,
$152,787,000 are rescinded.
Office of Justice Programs
state and local law enforcement assistance
(rescission)
Of the unobligated balances available under this heading
from prior year appropriations, $127,500,000 are rescinded.
community oriented policing services
(rescission)
Of the unobligated balances available under this heading
from prior year appropriations, $127,500,000 are rescinded.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Departmental Management
Emergency Steel Guaranteed Loan Program Account
(rescission)
Of the unobligated balances available under this heading
from prior year appropriations, $38,607,000 are rescinded.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
center for middle eastern-western dialogue trust fund
(rescission)
Of the funds available under this heading, $10,000,000 are
rescinded.
RELATED AGENCIES
Small Business Administration
salaries and expenses
(rescission)
Of the unobligated balances available under this heading,
$6,100,000 are rescinded.
business loans program account
(rescission)
Of the unobligated balances available under this heading,
$5,000,000 are rescinded.
disaster loans program account
(rescission)
Of the unobligated balances available under this heading,
$3,700,000 are rescinded.
Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mr. Tancredo
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 25 offered by Mr. Tancredo:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 801. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to enforce any of the provisions in the Memorandum to
all Department and Agency Executive Secretaries dated,
February 2, 2001, and entitled ``Guidelines on Relations With
Taiwan''.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday, June 27,
2006, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) and a Member opposed
each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
This bipartisan amendment would prevent the State Department from
expending any funds to enforce several arbitrary and archaic
``guidelines'' that inhibit or altogether prevent United States
officials from communicating with their counterparts in Taiwan.
These restrictions range from just silly to downright absurd.
These so-called guidelines, among other things, do not permit
meetings with Taiwanese diplomats or elected officials in Department of
State buildings, the White House, or the Old Executive Office Building.
They prevent executive branch personnel from the foreign affairs
agencies and those above the rank of GS-14 from attending Taiwan's
annual holiday reception in Washington.
[[Page H4715]]
They prevent executive branch personnel from attending meetings at
Twin Oaks, which is the former residence of Taiwan's ambassador here in
Washington.
They prevent travel to Taiwan by any officials above a certain rank
from the Defense Department and the State Department.
They explicitly prohibit executive branch personnel from
corresponding directly with Taiwanese officials. Instead, the
guidelines mandate that communications be sent through a third party.
The guidelines even stipulate that ``indirect'' communications not be
printed on official letterhead, and they prohibit U.S. personnel from
using the official title of the Taiwanese official to whom the letter
is being sent.
Executive branch officials are even directed ``not to refer to
Taiwan's democratically elected government as a `government.'''
Instead, they are directed to use the strange term ``Taiwan
authorities.''
Mr. Chairman, these guidelines needlessly complicate our ability to
effectively communicate with our friends in Taiwan. As a result, Taipei
and Washington often find themselves talking past each other through
the international media instead of communicating face-to-face. It makes
absolutely no sense and helps no one.
Mr. Chairman, these self-imposed guidelines raise serious questions
about who is really in charge and calling the shots when it comes to
the U.S. policy in Taiwan. Is it the Congress or is it the Communist
governments in Beijing?
I ask for an ``aye'' vote on the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
and I will accept the amendment, but I just wanted to highlight how
ludicrous it is, and I think the gentleman has pointed it out, but to
have those requirements on Taiwan when China is spying against us. In
this bill is funding for the FBI to keep the Chinese from spying
against us.
There is no persecution in Taiwan. On Monday, we had a meeting with
the Cardinal Kung Foundation, and they pointed out that there are now
40, 40 Catholic bishops and priests in jail in China. There are zero in
jail in Taiwan. This is serious, and I am glad the gentleman offered
this.
There are 4,000 to 6,000 evangelicals, house church leaders, men and
women, in prison in China today. The latest figure as of Monday. There
are zero in Taiwan. There are Buddhist monks and nuns in Tibet being
persecuted, and President Hu was the one who put the policy together.
It is against the law to have a picture of the Dalai Lama. But there
are no Tibetan monks or nuns being persecuted in Taiwan.
Maybe we should have the Taiwan regulations apply to the embassy in
Beijing and reverse it.
Lastly, just so people know this, there is great persecution against
the Uighers, the Muslims in China. And to show you how close this comes
to home, Mr. Lantos and my office worked to have Reba Kadeer released,
she was in prison for 5 years, by agreeing to meet with a congressional
delegation. She went through a difficult time. Five years in solitary
confinement. She got out. Now there was a staff codel to meet with her
kids 3 weeks ago, and they have now arrested her three children and
they are in jail. One was beaten and pummeled.
The Chinese security police sent out agents to northern Virginia to
spy on her, and they took the license plates down of their cars and
their public security police.
So I think the only difference I have with the gentleman's amendment
is that these restrictions that are on Taiwan should have been on the
American embassy in Beijing. It is just the opposite. It is like that
Simon and Garfunkel song, The Boxer: Man hears what he wants to hear
and disregards the rest.
There is tremendous growing persecution in China of the Catholic
church. Some of these bishops are in their 80s. One, Bishop Su, has not
been seen since 8 years ago. He gave Holy Communion to Congressman
Chris Smith. I repeat: 4,000 to 6,000 evangelicals, Buddhist monks and
nuns, and now the Uighers.
So I am glad the gentleman offered this amendment, and I urge it to
be strongly passed.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, I do not see Mr. Andrews, who was
coauthor. Therefore, I will simply say that I would hope that we
invalidate these nonsensical guidelines, allow our government to
communicate directly with Taiwan's democratically elected government
the same way we communicate with other friendly governments.
I ask for an ``aye'' vote.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Tancredo-Andrews-
Chabot-Brown amendment.
As my colleagues know, Taiwan is one of our strongest and most loyal
allies. It is also a democracy that has a multi-party political system
that recognizes individual liberty and respects human rights.
Just across the Taiwan Strait is the People's Republic of China. It
is not a democracy. It has an abysmal human rights record. It does not
recognize the rule of law. It practices religious persecution. It
warehouses political prisoners. It carries out a coercive abortion
policy. And it has more than 800 missiles pointed at Taiwan.
Our government treats the PRC and Taiwan differently. Now, in a
logical world, we would work closely with our democratic ally. We would
treat our friend with the respect it deserves. We would welcome the
leaders of Taiwan with open arms and conduct frequent high-level
exchanges. But we don't do that.
What we do, under the umbrella of our so-called One China policy, is
just the opposite. We invite high level military officials from the
People's Liberation Army to visit the Pentagon. We welcome the
communist dictator to the White House with a twenty-one gun salute.
We treat our democratic friends from Taiwan quite a bit differently.
In fact, the democratically elected President of Taiwan is not
permitted to come to Washington, D.C. Nor is the Vice-President, the
Defense Minister, or the Foreign Minister.
Just a few weeks ago, only two weeks after Communist China's
dictator, Hu Jintao, was welcomed to the White House, Taiwan's
democratically-elected leader, President Chen Shui-bian was told he
could not make transit stops in the United States on his way to
Paraguay and Costa Rica. Instead, he was told that he could refuel his
aircraft in Alaska and be on his way. Some way to treat a friend.
What kind of message are we sending here?
The Tancredo-Andrews-Chabot-Brown amendment would not change our
``One China'' policy . . . although I would not be averse to that. It
simply lifts a number of tired, old guidelines that deter or prevent
high level U.S. officials from communicating with their counterparts
from Taiwan. We should treat Taiwan like we treat our other allies. It
is dangerous to do otherwise.
Mr. Chairman, let's do the right thing. Let's scrap these
counterproductive guidelines. Adopt the Tancredo-Andrews-Chabot-Brown
amendment.
Mr. TANCREDO. I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I
yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Bean) for a colloquy with
the chairman.
Ms. BEAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for agreeing to engage in a
colloquy on Internet safety.
Mr. Chairman, many of our constituents enjoy access to the valuable
resources available on the Internet, and yet many are growingly feeling
under siege from the increasing dangers lurking on the Internet. Cyber
criminals use spyware, phishing schemes, sales schemes, and on-line
identity theft, wreaking havoc on American lives each year. These
threats include a growing number of predators exploiting popular
networking Web sites in search of young victims. Unfortunately, despite
intense media attention, many parents and children are unaware of these
risks or how best to protect themselves.
The FTC estimates that its Bureau of Consumer Protection devotes at
least 10 percent and likely more of its resources to these Internet
safety and security initiatives. As the role of the Internet continues
to grow even more in the daily lives of Americans, more crimes are
moving to the net. The FTC expects that, as these trends continue,
[[Page H4716]]
it will need to devote a growing share of its resources to preventing
and pursuing cyber crimes under its jurisdiction.
I respectfully request of the chairman that the committee continue to
work with the FTC to ensure that these efforts receive the resources
they need to vigorously promote Internet safety public awareness and
make prevention of cyber crimes a national priority.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. MOLLOHAN. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from Illinois for her
hard work to promote Internet safety.
Just recently, Congressman Kirk, who has been a leader on this, has
raised this in our hearings a number of times.
Congressman Kirk and I urged the FTC to issue a national consumer
alert to parents and children about the risk of sites like MySpace. I
would say if any mother or father is listening, to have your children
involved in MySpace is a mistake. So what I think you are trying to do
and what Mr. Kirk is doing is very good.
I share the gentlewoman's concerns and commit to continue looking
into the matter to ensure the FTC is devoting sufficient resources to
fight Internet predators and protect children.
Ms. BEAN. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman from West Virginia will
continue to yield, I want to offer my sincere thanks to the chairman
for his leadership on the issue of Internet safety and look forward to
working with him in the future in our efforts to protect American
families.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be
read.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will report the amendment.
There was no objection.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Flake:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 801. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to fund the Tooling and Machining Association in
Rochester, New York.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday, June 27,
2006, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
{time} 1400
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, yesterday we had quite a discussion on this
bill. There were efforts to move money from paying for the census, for
example, to other areas of the bill or other priorities. There was a
lot of talk about limited resources and the limited amount of money in
this bill and the need to take money from one area to put into another.
I would submit that one area that we can take some money from that is
overfunded, grossly overfunded, in this bill is in some of these
earmarks. Now, I will maybe highlight 10 of them today, but there are
literally hundreds in the bill that we could take the money from to
fund our constitutional obligation, for example, to conduct the census
every 10 years.
But I will start today with 250,000 for the Rochester, New York,
Tooling and Machining Association for a workforce development program;
that is an earmark. This amendment would strip that funding. The
Rochester Tool and Machining Association is one chapter of a larger
international tooling and machining association, which is the national
representative of the custom precision manufacturing industry in the
United States.
They maintain a legislative alert center on their Web site so their
members can lobby Congress on issues that matter to them. They also
retain a lobbying firm to advance their interests with the Federal
Government. It would seem that they are doing yeoman's work for their
members, as is their Rochester chapter. Their Rochester chapter offers
technical training and education to its members.
They assert on their Web site that manufacturing job opportunities
are not declining and that manufacturing accounts for 24 percent of the
private sector jobs in New York State. They go on to claim that the
size of the workforce is declining and that there are insufficient
skilled workers to fill these available jobs, which I can only assume
is what this earmark is for.
What we have here is simple supply and demand, not enough skilled
workers for too many jobs, an equation that is normally balanced by the
free market, until this earmark. For those who buy into the idea that
it is the Federal Government's responsibility to plan and shape the
supply and demands of our workforce, my objection to this earmark will
not resonate with you.
But for those who have witnessed the profound failures of central
planning in countries around the world during the 1970s and the 1980s,
I hope that you will understand that this earmark is a mini-economic
boost by a Federal, centralized government, to increase the supply of
one industry's workers over another industry.
I would submit that if there is such a demand for skilled
manufacturers, as the association claims, then wages will increase, and
the workforce will adapt, and they will learn ways and skills necessary
to earn those wages. Let the market decide which industries succeed or
fail, not politicians in Washington.
I would like to hear the justification for the Federal function in
this case, but then I ask, why are we picking winners and losers
through the earmarking process? Why is this industry, this sector,
these workers, more deserving than others? I don't think Congress
should be picking favorites like this.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds).
Mr. REYNOLDS. I thank the distinguished gentleman from Virginia for
yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Arizona. It is the responsibility of all
Members of this distinguished body to faithfully represent the
interests and well being of their constituents.
I come to this Chamber again today to once again support the needs of
my home district, where job creation continues to be the number one
priority of western New York. The Federal investment included by the
Appropriations Committee for the Rochester Tooling and Machining
Association is welcome news for western New York.
I appreciate that the chairman of the committee recognizes, as I do,
that this project is worthy of Federal involvement through the Small
Business Administration and will be used to meet the ultimate objective
of creating and retaining good high-paying jobs for the hardworking
Americans I represent.
The Rochester Tooling and Machining Association is a nonprofit
organization whose mission is to promote the development and
improvement of tooling, machining and contract manufacturing industries
in Monroe County and western New York. They have been the region's
leading association for the tooling and machining cluster for over 60
years.
With more than 500 tooling and machine companies in Buffalo,
Rochester, Syracuse communities, employing approximately 16,000 people,
these companies clearly have a significant economic impact in my
region. The goal in this project is to assist these firms with
necessary training in advanced manufacturing methods which will enhance
their competitive position by reducing costs and maximizing
efficiencies.
The association plans to implement programs in lean manufacturing and
Six Sigma training, which will streamline business manufacturing and
business practices and cut down on unnecessary expenses. By
implementing proven business training techniques, we can ensure our
manufacturers increase their competitiveness in today's global
marketplace.
This project will be a big boost to the marketability of our
manufacturing sector and help with new business activity for the
region, which will lead to
[[Page H4717]]
job retention and, hopefully, job creation. The stated goal of the
Small Business Administration is to ``maintain and strengthen the
Nation's economy by aiding, counseling and assisting and protecting the
interests of small businesses.'' This funding is completely in line
with those principles.
I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I would simply say, again, we all say it is
our job to represent our constituents, and it certainly is. But we are
in a deficit situation. We have a massive deficit and a massive Federal
debt.
What if every Member of Congress said, I am going to represent my
constituents by getting every Federal dollar that I can back into my
district, regardless of the deficit, regardless of the debt.
That is pretty much where we are at right now. When you had, I think
last year was $27 billion in earmarks, where does it end? When do we
say enough is enough? When do we say, I am not going to pick this
industry over that one?
That workforce may be worthy of this kind of help, but what makes it
more worthy than another one? Why do we just continue with the spoils
system where if you happen to get with this group and they happen to be
lucky enough to get your earmark, they get funded, but nobody else
does? We simply can't continue this.
I urge support of the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona.
The amendment was rejected.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will report the amendment.
There was no objection.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Flake:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 801. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to fund the Arthur Avenue Retail Market.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday, June 27,
2006, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I am a big fan of Italian food. My district
is home to a great Italian restaurant, Anzio's Landing. You can order
many of your favorite dishes, good Italian bread, and there are many
former New Yorkers in my district, and they know it well. But if the
owner of this restaurant, whom I know well, if he approached me to get
a Federal earmark to modernize his restaurant, I would have to tell him
``fuhgetaboudit.''
Today I am bringing this amendment to learn whether the rest of the
House will agree with me on that premise. The bill before us today asks
us to spend $150,000 in Federal taxpayer dollars to the Arthur Avenue
Retail Market, an Italian grocery market in a neighborhood labeled
Bronx's Little Italy. Over a dozen merchants currently reside in the
market, including Joe Liberatore's Garden of Plenty, Peter's Meat
Market and Mike's Deli, a two-generation family-owned business that
sells antipasti, breads, meats, pasta, and imported cheeses. The market
is also home to the La Casa Grande Tobacco Company, which offers hand-
rolled cigars.
In 2004, the market received $300,000 in earmarked Federal dollars
for renovations. The market received another $400,000 in Federal
transportation appropriation dollars for a new parking facility in
2005. We are back.
In 1940, Mayor LaGuardia built an indoor Arthur Avenue Market to take
street vendors out of the cold. This is where this originated.
In the 1980s, the merchants of the market formed a co-op and paid for
renovations to that market. Now, there are long lines at the market on
weekends to get great Italian bread, cheese and salami.
I would ask the sponsor of this amendment why close to $700,000 has
been spent on this Italian grocery market and why another $150,000 in
taxpayer funds is needed.
There is a lot of Federal prosciutto to bring back to the District,
or that is, a lot of Federal prosciutto to bring back to the District
for a private Italian grocery market. I think we need to slice off some
of this appropriations bill. If there is a place to slice, this is
certainly it.
What possible Federal purpose does this earmark serve? Does the
taxpayer even get a free Italian cookie assortment? If we allow our tax
money to go to this grocery market, what benefit is there for the
Federal taxpayer? There are certainly plenty of private benefits, but
what Federal benefit? How do we justify this?
I would argue that this is one cannoli the taxpayer doesn't want to
take a bite out of.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano).
Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Arizona's use of
certain ethnic words like ``cannoli'' and ``prosciutto'' indicate that
he takes this more lightly than he should. This is a serious thing that
he is trying to do here. I know he is on this mission to destroy every
bit of dollar that is sent by Members of Congress.
Let me start off by saying that I am a firm believer that Members
know the needs of their districts best, and I am proud to be on the
floor today to talk about this project so important to the Bronx.
The Arthur Avenue Retail Market is one of the most prominent, well
frequented and historic business locations in my district. It
represents a little bit of Italy in the midst of the Bronx. This space
serves as an incubator for food-related businesses.
It is, however, not a grocery store, but, instead, a building owned
by the City of New York. I think that is important to note. These
dollars don't go into these businessmen's pockets or businesses for
that matter; it goes into a building owned by the City of New York.
In 1940, during the time of Mayor LaGuardia, Arthur Avenue Market,
the first enclosed retail market in the Bronx, was built to house
street vendors who were crowding the sidewalks of the borough's Belmont
community. Today, it is a local landmark.
So let me be perfectly clear. This is not a privately owned real
estate venture but a public market which gives many new merchants a
starting point as they work towards full economic participation in the
country. This is a place where merchants running their own small
businesses sell specialty products to people from the surrounding areas
to visitors from throughout the tristate area and to local restaurants.
As you know, I represent the poorest congressional district in our
country, which is located in the middle of the richest city on Earth.
However, this market is a bright spot, and it is vital to the
economic success of the Bronx. It is a place where vendors and other
small business owners can fully participate in our economy. This small
amount of funding that is being highlighted today is for continued
facility improvements and maintenance to keep this historic market
running.
Specifically, this funding, which will be used for refurbishments of
the market, will include electrical and plumbing upgrades. The Arthur
Avenue Retail Market owned by the City of New York is responsible for
the maintenance.
The purpose of the Small Business Administration is to assist our
small businesses. This is exactly what this market does, help small
businesses in the Bronx to flourish and grow.
So I would ask my colleague, Mr. Flake, where his outrage was when
lending institutions and insurance companies were taking billions of
dollars from the borough of the Bronx in the 1970s and early 1980s
through redlining and other forms of disinvestment. Where was he when
one of the few commercial locations remained viable in spite of that?
I would also like to take the occasion to personally invite the
gentleman
[[Page H4718]]
from Arizona to come to the 16th District. You said you had one Italian
restaurant in your district. I feel sorry for you. You should have more
than one. I can take you all over the Bronx where you could see people
hard at work.
Lastly, on a more serious note, I wish you would be as outraged about
other things as you are about this one. You voted to rebuild areas of
Iraq with markets, schools and everything else you can think of, and
yet you would pick on something like this, which helps a small group of
businessmen stay vital in the Bronx.
Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentleman for the invitation. I likely will
take him up on it. Maybe I will learn to say ``prosciutto'' properly.
But we simply get back to the point, where does it end? Where do we
stop favoring one group, one industry over another? It is mentioned
that this is a city-owned facility. Those who are residing there, who
have their markets there, already received that kind of subsidy
apparently from the city.
{time} 1415
Now we are going in addition and giving them further subsidy.
$400,000 last year for a parking garage, $300,000 in 2004 for similar
upgrades, $150,000 more today. My guess is that there are Italian
eateries or restaurants or markets elsewhere in the city that are
getting no subsidy at all. How is it fair to them? How is it fair to
them to favor one?
And I would say the same if it were in my district. It is not fair to
subsidize one and not the other, and that is where we are with this
earmarking process.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will be
postponed.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will report the amendment.
There was no objection.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Flake:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 801. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to fund the Oil Region Alliance of Business,
Industry, and Tourism.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday, June 27,
2006, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, this earmark limitation amendment would
prohibit $200,000 in Federal funds from being provided to the Oil
Region Alliance of Business, Industry and Tourism.
Now, the mission of the Oil Region Alliance of Business, Industry and
Tourism is to ``increase the prosperity and population of the Oil
Region'' of Pennsylvania. The point of the alliance is to ``entice
people to live, work, learn and play in the valley that changed the
world.''
I am certain this is an important organization to the oil region.
These folks are working to ensure that the region's future is important
as was its past. I have no problem with that. I don't think anyone
does. Being the site of the world's first successful oil well in 1859,
this area has played a crucial role in the country's history.
My only question is, why should the Federal Government pay to develop
this area's business and tourism? Why this area and not other areas?
In April of this year, Governor Rendell congratulated the
Pennsylvania tourism industry for having a record-breaking year last
year.
The $25 billion tourism industry sold more hotel rooms than ever
before and attracted more than 130 million visitors in 2005, making
Pennsylvania the fifth most visited State in the Nation. Statewide,
tourism accounts for more than 400,000 jobs and is the Commonwealth's
second largest industry.
I have said it before, and I will continue to say it: when the
Federal Government hands out earmarks like this, we are picking winners
and losers. We are encouraging people to visit and to provide tourism
to this area. They have to come from somewhere else. Why aren't we
subsidizing those whom they choose not to go to? Where does it end?
Where do we stop? Why do we simply have a spoils system where one
Member of Congress can say, I am going to benefit them but not others?
In this case, the oil region of Pennsylvania receives funding to
attract businesses to locate in the region, to try to get families to
move there and to stay, and to try to attract tourist dollars.
As I mentioned, there are businesses and families and tourist dollars
that won't be heading to other areas of Pennsylvania or surrounding
States or anywhere else in the country. Many other localities
throughout the country would like to receive as many tourism dollars as
possible, but we are favoring one with this earmark.
Simply put, we shouldn't be doing this. The Federal Government
shouldn't be picking winners and losers like this.
Mr. Chairman, with that, I will reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Peterson).
Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I would begin by stating
that if the gentleman from Arizona represented the Fifth District in
Pennsylvania and the oil region alliance area, he wouldn't be offering
this amendment. He represents an area where the average income is 40-
some-thousand a year, where the region I represent that we are talking
about today is 20-some-thousand, half, an area that used to be the home
of Quaker State, just a decade ago, the home of Pennzoil, the home of
Wolf's Head, Universal Cyclops. One of the finest steel mills in this
country was in that region. I could list you the ex-corporations that
used to employ my citizens.
He represents a district that has grown 40 percent in population in
the last decade, where I have lost close to 20 percent in this region
of population because of the loss of these industries.
Now, you can ignore them. You can let those areas, like he said, let
the market work. When you lose the number of jobs that this region has
lost, that is not a normal marketplace. And when you reach out and
invest a few Federal or State dollars to help communities pull their
way back up and build an economic base that will pay taxes into the
State treasury, taxes in the Federal Treasury, now, if you let the
marketplace work, you will fund unemployment benefits, you will fund
welfare benefits and all the social programs, LIHEAP and all of those
things to help people who don't have a decent job.
Folks, when we don't invest in areas that have lost major employers
to restabilize their base, we are making a mistake as a country. We are
making a mistake.
This marketplace is not exactly as he describes it. Let's see what
his district is asking for. The Mesa area, on their Web page, they want
$42 million for bus fleets this year, $54 million for light rail, $10
million for an airport, $18.6 for another airport, and $1 million for a
community college, which we don't have, $30 million for a river
restoration project, and $3.5 million for planning new projects.
A measly $200,000 investment in the area that had the greatest
economic decline in Pennsylvania in the last decade and is struggling
from the loss of not only oil but steel and glass and all other types
of manufacturing. This little grant helps an organization not only in
one county but four counties, helps local government leaders deal with
these losses, help them better manage, train people to write for
Federal and State grants, because little governments don't have grant
writers.
I want to tell you, folks. This hard, calloused approach of not
helping those who have been destroyed by corporate mergers and
companies moving away is a mistake when we don't invest. This is
[[Page H4719]]
not pork. This is food for survival so people can regrow their
economies and pay taxes back into this Treasury. It is about
reinvesting in America and a part of America that was the stalwart of
this country.
That area furnished us with the transportation system that we have
today. When they discovered every oil company in the world has roots in
the Oil City, Titusville, Franklin region, that is where they all
started.
Folks, to abandon that area is not what America should be about. This
is not pork. This is food to help an area survive and fend for
themselves and grow and pay taxes into the Treasury.
It is easy for those who represent affluence, growing areas with
great prosperity, who really don't need us. But those who are
struggling need us, and we should be there to help them.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I would simply submit that every Member of
Congress in 435 districts around the country can point to at least
pockets in his or her district that need help, where there is high
jobless rates or where there is high crime.
But where does it end? Where do we say, all right, we simply can't
pass out earmarks like this and circumvent the normal authorization,
appropriation, and oversight process? When does it become our job to
say, all right, we are not going to go through that process and
authorize these programs, appropriate and then have oversight. Instead,
we are just going to slip an earmark in that we don't even know who
sponsored until we offer it on the floor today. And if nobody was
standing up here, we still wouldn't know.
There are hundreds and hundreds of earmarks in this bill that we
wouldn't even know who is offering them or what they are for because
the descriptions are often so vague as to what the earmark is supposed
to fund.
So where does it end? Why can't every Member stand up and say, I have
pockets in my district, if not my entire district, that need workforce
development, that need facilities?
He mentioned my district has grown 40 percent in the past couple of
years. It has. It has tremendous infrastructure needs. But if I were to
come and say we need all the lists that he rattled off there, then the
Treasury simply couldn't handle it.
We are put in this position to make decisions and to have priorities;
and I would submit that when you have an earmarking process like that,
we aren't going through it properly.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
The amendment was rejected.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will report the amendment.
There was no objection.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Flake:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 801. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to fund the Fairplex Trade and Conference Center.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday, June 27,
2006, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prevent any funding
from going to the Fairplex Trade and Conference Center.
Fairplex is home to the Los Angeles County Fair, the largest county
fair in the world. The fair is a great asset to California,
contributing a major portion of the $11.6 million in State sales tax
revenue generated by Fairplex and $176 million in spending.
The L.A. County Fair Association describes itself as self-supporting
and boasts that it does not fall under the auspices of any county or
State governmental body.
Surplus revenues that are generated by the fair and other activities
are reinvested into the maintenance and development of the facility.
The association also states that Fairplex receives no government
funding for the operation or maintenance of its facilities. However,
Fairplex received $1 million in Federal funding for fiscal year 2006.
If the money is not used for the operation or maintenance of this
thriving independent facility, what is it used for?
Maybe the funding is intended for some other activities at the
Fairplex, such as the Wally Parks NHRA Motor Sports Museum or the Frank
Hawley Drag Racing School. Maybe these funds are for Fairplex Park, a
major horse racing facility with a grandstand and air-conditioned
clubhouse for satellite gambling.
There is no question that Fairplex delivers major economic benefits
for L.A. County and the rest of California. But I do question, however,
why the Federal Government is throwing money at an independent facility
that generates over $334 million in economic activity nationwide.
Fairplex does so well, in fact, that it donates more than $400,000 in
cash and in kind to local organizations each year.
So why are we giving this earmark? That is the question.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier).
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Chairman, I want to express my appreciation to my
friend from Arizona for raising one of the issues that he and I have
worked closely on over the years.
As the Reading Clerk stated and as my friend from Arizona stated,
this is the Fairplex Trade and Conference Center.
Mr. Chairman, 43 percent of the goods coming to and from the
consumers and workers of the United States of America come through the
ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. One of the most important centers
for trade, planning and strategic meetings has been held at the
Fairplex.
It doesn't fall in my district. It is not in my district. It is in
the district of my very distinguished colleague, Mrs. Napolitano. But I
will tell you, as we look at our quest of trying to open up new markets
for U.S. goods and services all around the world and as we look at
ensuring that American consumers can have access to the best quality
product at the lowest possible price, the utilization of this trade and
convention center is critically important.
But, Mr. Chairman, I have got to tell you that, as important as the
issue of global trade is, I was really struck when last December I had
the opportunity to listen to a friend of mine who happened to be at the
Fairplex Trade and Convention Center, where it had taken place 2 weeks
before that, unfortunately, of the eight planned voting sites for the
Iraqi people who are here in the United States of America, looking
forward, on December 15, to having the access to a voting station, one
of those had, unfortunately, closed down.
{time} 1430
And what happened? The people at the Fairplex Trade and Convention
Center came forward, and literally at the drop of a hat, they were able
to provide the chance for Iraqis who were in this country on December
15 of last year to exercise that right to vote. Their ability to be on
the frontline to participate in the global war on terror is something
that I think is vitally important.
I was listening on the phone as applause went up every single time
that a ballot was placed into that voting box, and it was a great
moment for us. And as, in the last 2 weeks, we have gotten word of the
establishment of the completion of that cabinet with the defense and
interior ministers there, it reminded me again of those votes that were
cast at the Fairplex Trade and Convention Center that falls not in my
district but in the district of Mrs. Napolitano. This particular
earmark is there helping us in the global war on terror and helping us
remain competitive globally.
I thank my friend for yielding.
Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.
Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The gentleman from Arizona and I have had some conversation over this
particular issue earlier today, and I did try to impress upon him that
this is not just an earmark. This isn't pork.
[[Page H4720]]
This is, in fact, funding that would come from the Small Business
Administration account for construction of the $25 million trade center
that is going to be located at the Pomona State Fairgrounds, which, by
the way, is also a proposed staging area for the Los Angeles County
emergency staging for terrorism. And this is vital to the city of
Pomona and the whole surrounding community not only east of the Los
Angeles area but the Inland Empire, as was mentioned by my colleague,
Congressman Dreier.
This would create jobs and assist businesses in an economically
depressed as well as disadvantaged community and, of course, as many of
us already know, the number one crime city in the State of California.
The unemployment rates are exceedingly high.
Now, this new addition to the fairgrounds, the Trade and Conference
Center, will generate 1,700 full-time jobs, provide a large economic
stimulus in the community where now a lot of people are out of work;
businesses are moving partly because of NAFTA and others, let me tell
you. But 90 small businesses are already signed and registered to work
at this new facility or to be able to be exposed there. The Fairplex is
a very well respected, nonprofit event center hosting yearly over 300
activities, including the Los Angeles County Fair, and attracts
hundreds of thousands of people. It is used for Federal events and, as
you just recently heard, for the Iraqi elections. And last but not
least, it is also used for naturalization ceremonies.
I wish to thank my colleague, Chairman Dreier, for his support of the
project that affects the many surrounding communities of southern Los
Angeles. And as the Representative for Pomona, I am proud to support
this bid of $750,000, which will benefit jobs and the economy in this
area. And in helping this project move forward, I certainly thank you
and look forward to the support for defeating the amendment.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I have great respect for the gentlewoman and
for the gentleman who spoke, and I appreciate their efforts on behalf
of this initiative. But, again, I have to say, where does it end? Where
does it end when we say, this group, this organization, this facility
is worthy of Federal dollars, and another is not? It simply isn't fair
to continue to give earmarks like this in this manner.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
The amendment was rejected.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will report the amendment.
There was no objection.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Flake:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 801. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to fund the Bronx Council on the Arts.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday, June 27,
2006, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would ask Members of this body, how would you define irony?
I define it as providing a Federal earmark money to the Bronx Council
on the Arts, which is an entity that is advertising an event on its Web
site called, Pay to Play.
Pay to Play, according to the Bronx Council's Web site is ``a
multimedia exhibition ala Abramoff, Scanlon, Cunningham, Halliburton
and on and on and on.'' The Web site states that ``artists are asked to
offer a bribe to participate in the show that will be on display
alongside selected work. Please note that special consideration will be
given to work that addresses corruption, greed, scandal, cover-ups,
failures of democracy, the transparent veneer of public interest that
masks rampant self-interest, and such other things.''
I am not saying the earmark for Bronx Council of the Arts fits any of
these categories, but I am saying that it is sadly ironic that we are
funding artistic parodies of congressional earmarking with earmarks.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment would strike funding for the Bronx Council
for marketing local arts initiatives. My staff and I were befuddled as
to what the Bronx Council originally was. It appears that a Bronx
Council got money last year in the same section of the bill, but the
earmark was called, ``$150,000 for the Bronx Council for the Arts for
its Arts Cultural Corridor Project to promote local arts initiatives.''
So we went from Bronx Council on the Arts to just the Bronx Council.
We dropped the ``Arts Cultural Corridor Project,'' and we are no longer
promoting local arts, but we are marketing them. I call this the
Earmark Protection Program, changing the names of earmarks to make them
so vague that no one can recognize them and no amendment can be drafted
to strike them.
We often have trouble when we are offering these earmarks. We are
told by the Parliamentarian that it has to refer to a specific facility
or a specific initiative, and these earmarks this year, many of the
names have been changed to be more vague, and it is difficult to know
what they actually fund. As mentioned a few weeks ago, we had earmarks
to simply fund a facility without reference to what that facility was.
It is difficult to have amendments that are actually ruled in order to
challenge them because, as the Parliamentarians will tell you, to
successfully challenge an earmark, it requires an assumption that the
agency that funds the earmark is familiar with the project. Otherwise,
we might be legislating on an appropriation bill, which is a violation
of our rules. The incentive, therefore, for Members looking to protect
earmarks is to become more vague or silent about the project's goals
and the project's oversight.
I would submit that we should get used to more earmarks entering this
protection program in the near future to prevent them from being
stripped from appropriation bills. I would welcome an explanation as to
what this earmark actually does.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise reluctantly in opposition
to the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield to the
distinguished gentleman from New York to speak on this issue.
Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I am sorry Dr. Weldon is reluctantly
rising.
But, first of all, I notice that three of the gentleman's 10
amendments are directed at New York. I do not know what you are angry
about; the Diamondbacks beat the Yankees in the World Series, so you
shouldn't be that upset. But the fact of life is that the more you get
up on these, sir, the more I realize that you do not know what you are
talking about because you seem to spend so much time on either the
wording or how it appears when, in fact, you do very little to
understand what it is.
The Bronx Council on the Arts is a private, nonprofit membership
organization that has been in existence for over 40 years and is the
official cultural agency of Bronx County. It is recognized nationally
as a leading art services organization, serving a multicultural
constituency of more than 1.2 million residents.
Now, I know that the big problem the gentleman from Arizona has is
the word ``arts'' because there seems to be some belief by a lot of
Members of Congress, or some, that we should not in any way be involved
in promoting the arts, and if the arts express themselves in a way that
we do not like, then we shouldn't even go close to them. So I wish that
I could just always not call it something like the arts, but I do
because that is what it is.
In this case the word ``arts'' is used in conjunction with the words
``small business.'' This funding belongs in the small business account
because it will be used to grow our small businesses that have arts-
related portfolios. It will specifically promote an Artisans Initiative
which will facilitate business
[[Page H4721]]
development among local Bronx artisans, especially newly arrived
immigrants, and help them establish their own small business. It will
help with their skills development and assist their product marketing.
It will also be used to train Bronx artists to market their skills and
to develop business plans.
Small businesses devoted to the arts have an important role to play.
For example, the Bronx Council on the Arts has had success in training
the unemployed and underemployed residents of New York City as
professional art handlers. Some have gone on to start their own small
business as independent contractors.
Let me conclude by saying that I represent, as you know, the poorest
congressional district in the Nation. I make no excuses about getting
the Federal Government to earmark dollars into that district. Let me
repeat that again: I make no excuses about the fact that I earmark
dollars to go into the poorest congressional district in the Nation,
which is situated in the richest city on Earth.
If the gentleman from Arizona wants to have an impact on our deficit,
an impact on how we spend dollars, then let him stand up there the next
time we are paying for the war in Iraq, a waste of money that is going
to build all kinds of facilities in Iraq, a war based on lies told to
this Congress. Then you stand up there and you cut at least 1 billion
from the over $400 billion that we are spending in Iraq already. But I
never saw you get up and complain about the fact that we are building
arts facilities in Iraq, that we are building supermarkets in Iraq,
that we are promoting basketball in Iraq, that we are promoting
baseball in Iraq. You haven't said a word. But a couple hundred
thousand dollars to one group of American citizens, that is a problem
for you.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume
for a question, and I would like to yield to the gentleman to answer.
Is this the same council that received the earmark last year, just
for my clarification?
Mr. SERRANO. Yes. And I told you it was and I used the name that is
appropriate for it. Call it a typographical error.
Mr. FLAKE. I will do that. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will be
postponed.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will report the amendment.
There was no objection.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Flake:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 801. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to fund the Johnstown Area Regional Industries
organization.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday, June 27,
2006, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
In last year's conference report on the SSJC appropriations bill,
there was a $250,000 earmark for the JARI, which stands for Johnstown
Area Regional Industries, Workforce Development Program. There was a
separate $250,000 earmark for the JARI Small Business Technology
Center. This year, there is a $500,000 earmark for the JARI Workforce
Development Program and the Small Business Technology Center. We also
found a separate $800,000 earmark for JARI for a Regional Business
Incubator.
Aside from all other arguments that can be made against this kind of
earmarking, I want to point out what appears to be a trend toward
obfuscation in the language of earmarks. In drafting a limitation
amendment to prevent funding to the JARI Regional Business Incubator,
we used the earmark language exactly as it appears in the bill.
{time} 1445
We then asked the Parliamentarians to review it to make sure it would
be in order. We were informed that the ``region business incubator''
verbiage was too vague to be considered in order. So in drafting this
amendment, we had no choice but to limit funding to JARI, period. The
effect of this amendment would be to prohibit any funding from the bill
going to the organization, whereas our initial intention was to limit
the funding to the business incubator.
That is part of the problem we have here. All we have is the language
in a report that is so vague or confusing that it is even difficult to
draft an amendment to cover it.
Now I have no problem limiting any funding to the organization, let
me tell you, but I also want to be clear that I have nothing against
JARI. I wish the organization well in its efforts. I do, however, have
a problem with the increasingly opaque process by which Congress hands
out earmarks.
For the first half of this year, we debated ways to bring
transparency to what we do here. When it comes to the earmarking
process, Members have proposed a longer notice period before
consideration of bills, making bills and reports more accessible,
attaching Members' names to earmarks, compiling earmarks in tables,
including earmarks in the text of legislation, and on and on and on. I
think all these ideas are fine, and I have introduced my own proposal.
After a good deal of compromise, this House approved the Lobbying
Accountability and Transparency Act last month. Yet here we are, just a
few weeks later, and there has been no apparent effort to comply with
the proposals that we made in the House and the entire House approved.
How can we explain this to our constituents? Was the lobbying and
transparency legislation just for show? I certainly don't think it was,
but it is starting to look that way to most Americans.
We need to demonstrate how serious we are about establishing
transparency in Congress. We have made a strong effort, and there is
nothing preventing us from making good on what we said. Waiting until
this bill becomes law before we act would appear as though we are under
compulsion to comply with the public demand for transparency. I think
we need transparency now.
A small handful of our colleagues contend that we should not change
the process until the other Chamber changes its process, that if we
enact unilateral reforms in the House, we would shortchange ourselves.
Who is this about? Are we here to serve our country, the best
interests of our country, or simply to look out for the interests of
the House?
What are we waiting for? We are almost done with the appropriation
process for the year, yet nothing has changed. Where are the names next
to earmarks? Where is the transparency that we say that we want?
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I would be very happy to yield
to the distinguished gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan).
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I would simply point out that this
organization operates in a part of the country that has suffered
probably the most from government policies, particularly our trade
policies, but also our environmental laws; and whatever arguments you
could make for our, our free trade policies, they are in large part
insensitive to the disproportionate negative impact they have on
certain segments of our economy and certain geographical areas of our
country.
The basic industry areas of the country where this organization
operates
[[Page H4722]]
have suffered. It is one of those areas that has suffered
disproportionately. The steel industry was a thriving industry there
20, 30 years ago. The Mon Valley, which is close to our area, is
devastated and was practically the first steel industry to suffer.
There is no steel industry in that area now.
In addition, environmental laws had negative impacts on the burning
of fossil fuels. This general region was very prosperous producing the
Nation's energy and has suffered greatly because of the impacts of
environmental laws. I am not arguing the environmental law issue at all
but just simply talking about the economic impact.
Well, these earmarks are contained in the Small Business
Administration account, and that is the purpose of the Small Business
Administration account, is to help small business. So the purpose of
this funding is to look at workforce development, where there is
tremendous unemployment as a result of trade laws, environmental laws,
and government policy that have had a negative impact
This is self-help. This organization looks at workforce development,
assisting in training needs for displaced workers, pursuing funding for
mechanisms for training, assisting displaced workers, and working with
the training facilities and the colleges and the universities to
address those very difficult, midlife retraining challenges that the
Trade Adjustment Assistance Program speaks to and that an organization
like this can be very helpful in implementing.
The Incubator Project, is the other side of the coin. That is the
development and diversification of small business. It is really pay me
now or pay me later. As the previous gentleman from Pennsylvania said,
you are either going to address the unemployment condition and try to
retrain and try to get people back into the community, into the
workforce through retraining, and at the same time promoting new
industries, new small businesses for those people to work in, or you
are going to be paying unemployment and you are going to be dealing
with the issues of a deteriorating community.
This funding, which goes to all of those purposes, certainly is in
keeping of the mission of the Small Business Administration.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I simply would like to point out that unless the
gentleman who defended the earmark is the author of the earmark, and I
don't believe that he is, this is an earmark in Pennsylvania. We still
don't know who authored the earmark. There is nothing in the conference
report that tells us, and we still don't know. Here we are about to
vote on it, and we still don't know and we haven't had a defense of
that earmark from the author of it, from the Member who authored it.
There is something wrong with the process when this is what we are
reduced to.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will be
postponed.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will report the amendment.
There was no objection.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Flake:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 801. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to fund the Wisconsin Procurement Initiative.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday, June 27,
2006, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, the committee report for this bill contains an earmark
for the Wisconsin Procurement Initiative, and my amendment would limit
funding for this item.
The committee report for last year's SSJC appropriations bill did not
contain a similar earmark, but the conference report on this bill did
include an earmark for the Wisconsin Procurement Institute for the same
amount.
Though it is impossible to know by reading the report, it appears
that this earmark is destined for the same institution. Again, we
simply don't know. We have insufficient information, yet we are going
to provide the funding without even knowing, without anybody even
asking the question, is it the same thing to give money to the
initiative or the institute?
It appears that this is one of several earmarks that have been funded
in multiple years with similar but increasingly vague verbiage in the
committee report.
The Wisconsin Procurement Institute was founded in 1987 by Les Aspin,
a former Congressman and Secretary of Defense. The institute says its
purpose is to ``bridge the gap for Wisconsin companies interested in
supplying their products and services to Federal, State and local
agencies and prime contractors.'' The institute ``guides, trains and
provides hands-on assistance to firms in developing government business
and improving process and technical capabilities to access and compete
in the government workplace.''
When I saw this earmark, it reminded me of the late-night commercials
that you see from a fellow by the name of Matthew Lesko. He will stand
up and run to the camera, and he has a suit with question marks all
over it, and he has a car decorated the same way, and he will wave a
book and say, ``There is millions and millions of government dollars
just for you, and if you pay me $19.95, I will tell you how can get
these contracts, how you can get this money, how you can get these
scholarships, how you can get these grants, how you can get these
loans.''
This seems to be a process similar to Matthew Lesko. You have an
organization here whose job it is to secure projects from the Federal
Government, and we are paying money to that organization to help them
procure contracts from us. It just seems like a little double-dipping
in that way. We are funding an organization whose purpose it is to help
other organizations obtain Federal assistance, grants, contracts, et
cetera.
According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the 2003 budget for the
Wisconsin Procurement Institute was $340,000. This year's and last
year's earmarks were for $400,000 each. It seems that we have doubled
their budget, or their entire budget comes from the Federal Government.
I am not sure which.
I am sure the Wisconsin Procurement Institute's budget is higher now
than it was 3 years ago, but a significant portion must be funded by
this earmark.
I certainly support the outsourcing of Federal functions that can be
better performed by private companies, but there is something
inherently wrong with funding an organization whose purpose it is to
help others secure government funding. Just thinking about it makes
your head spin.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, we have done it again. We have come here to talk about
an earmark that I am sure will be approved by voice vote and then
probably by roll call, and we still don't even know who sponsored it.
We don't know if the institute is the same as the initiative. We don't
know why the organization claims on its own Web site to have a budget
of $340,000, yet has received earmarks in each of the past 2 years for
$400,000 each.
It simply doesn't make sense. Are we exercising the proper oversight
that we ought to? We said before, both sides
[[Page H4723]]
have said, the gentleman and ranking minority member have said we
simply don't have the staff to police the kind of earmarking we are
doing here. I readily agree. Yet we are continuing to do this. I don't
know where we stop. I simply don't.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, let me be very clear. The Wisconsin Procurement
Institute was indeed organized originally by Les Aspin when he was
chairman of the Armed Services Committee in this House. It is an
organization that helps many new companies who are new to the
procurement process figure out how the Federal procurement process
works.
Instead of providing money to individual companies, this money is
used to create an institute to educate all kinds of companies so that
they can compete for Federal business, especially in the procurement
area and most especially in the defense area.
I would make one simple point: Right now, large corporations have the
resources and they have the experience to seek Federal business, but
many quality companies do not because they are unfamiliar with how the
Federal procurement process works.
There are a number of organizations who rank States in terms of how
much Federal money they get each year. Wisconsin, Minnesota and
Michigan always rank near the bottom. Ninety percent of the difference
between them and the number one State in the Union in terms of Federal
money occurs because of a difference in the number of Federal employees
and because of differences in defense contracts.
The gentleman comes from the State which is the number six State in
the Union in terms of getting money out of procurement. You have large
companies, such as Raytheon, which produce huge numbers of missiles, so
that gives you a lot of Federal procurement dollars.
{time} 1500
You also have many talented electronic companies like General
Dynamics, a huge company that also gets a large amount of Federal
dollars. You have large military installations such as Fort Hauchuca,
which contains the Army intelligence operation.
In Federal procurement, unfortunately, the way it usually works is
``Them what has gets more!'' This initiative, the Wisconsin Procurement
Institute, which I fully confess that I and the other Members of the
Wisconsin Delegation support, this initiative is to help other
corporations who are not experienced in the ins and outs of Federal
procurement policy, so that we can end the insider advantage that the
gentleman's constituents have.
What we are trying to do is to open up the process so that you can
enable a large number of companies to come in and compete. I make no
apology whatsoever for that. Wisconsin has a right to expect that its
corporations should be able to compete, and so does every other State
in the Union.
I would simply ask the gentleman, do not begrudge the efforts of
Wisconsin to close the gap between our State and yours. Your State gets
$7 billion more in Federal procurement than mine does.
This operation is a small operation to try to enhance the ability of
companies in our State to close that gap somewhat. We have chosen not
to provide money directly to companies but instead to provide an
ability for companies to learn how the procurement process works.
We also, under this process, have created a Web site which will
enable Federal agencies to review the talents and the qualities of many
of the companies in Wisconsin so that if they are looking for
particular projects or products they know where to go to find them.
I think that what that will do in the end is help enhance
competition, and it will help save taxpayers money by cutting some new
companies in on the deal that so many large companies in the
gentleman's State enjoy.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
The amendment was rejected.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will report the amendment.
There was no objection.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Flake:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 801. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to fund Fairmont State University.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday, June 27,
2006, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prohibit $900,000 in Federal funds
from being used by Fairmont State University in West Virginia for a
small business initiative.
Fairmont State University is located in Fairmont, the county seat of
Marion County, which has a population of 20,000 and is located in north
central West Virginia. Similar to other earmarks I have challenged in
this appropriations season, this earmark is vague in its description,
offering no more than a general sketch of the purpose of the funding
and making true oversight nearly impossible.
In addition, this is not the first earmark to benefit the school. In
recent years, Fairmont State University and its partners have regularly
benefited from earmarks in this appropriation bill.
For example, the 2005 Justice Department budget included a grant for
nearly half a million dollars for the Fairmont State partner program
looking at decoding criminal digital documents. Similarly, the 2006
SSJC appropriation bill included over $2 million in earmarks assisting
the school's aviation program and aerospace curriculum.
And I guess the third time is the charm. We are likely to continue
this trend in 2007 with an earmark for $900,000 for a small business
development initiative.
In fact, according to some estimates, northern West Virginia has
received more than $480 million in earmarks in various appropriation
bills over the last 10 years.
This earmark illustrates the problem with earmarks. Year after year,
we approve these vaguely described projects by the thousands. Not only
do taxpayers not know how the money is being spent, the current earmark
process makes those types of patterns, the same area benefiting time
and time again at the taxpayers' expense, difficult if not impossible
to detect.
My question is, where does it end? Where does Congress start to say
enough is enough and add accountability and transparency to this
runaway train that earmarks have become? If not with earmarks like
this, then I do not know when.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, and I
yield to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan).
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
time. I appreciate the opportunity to speak in opposition to this
amendment.
You know, it should be understood that a lot of those earmarks go to
help those who are in the greatest need of help.
I am struck by the good fortune of the gentleman and his
congressional district and his State, as recounted by the ranking
member just a few moments ago. You are indeed very fortunate to have
these large defense contractors, Raytheon and General Dynamics, and
these large Federal installations like Fort Wachuka in your State. That
is a real blessing.
It is particularly a blessing in an economy that marginalizes and
that is not nurturing to certain sectors. But certainly I think the
gentleman can understand that in the last 20, 25, 30 years, our
economy, because of the increased internationalization of it, has been
extremely harsh on certain segments and certain geographical areas, as
I mentioned earlier.
[[Page H4724]]
Those areas that were steel manufacturing areas, those areas that
were coal producing areas, those areas that were basically
manufacturing, microcosms if you will, for rust belt America were
particularly hard hit during this period; and the need in these areas
is for economic diversification. And the gentleman may not have been
engaged in that much, but this is a very difficult, hard thing to do.
Federal Government assistance, this appropriation, these earmarks, if
you will, in the Small Business Administration go directly to help
rejuvenate economies, creating a broader, a more flexible, a more
dynamic economy through diversification.
It is not an easy process; and if you have not been involved with it,
the gentleman probably is not sensitive to that as he might be. But
current economic trends in these areas, in these kinds of areas
indicate that the sectors that do have potential growth are the
heritage, tourism, regional travel; and this program works with the
West Virginia Department of Education Travel and Tourism to promote
what is the fastest-growing segment of the economic base.
So that is the purpose of the earmark, and I strenuously oppose the
gentleman's amendment.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, all of the descriptions of Arizona make it
sound like Shangri-La, that everything is going so well in Arizona that
we have no need for any help with the economy or any sector of the
economy. That is simply not the case. We are experiencing rapid growth.
There are a lot of infrastructure needs that come with that. We are
experiencing transition.
I grew up in northeastern Arizona. There are tremendous problems
there with drought and other issues.
But I would defy any Member of Congress to say that his district is
not in need of something. But if we all said, all right, we are just
going to get it all, get it all for our districts, circumvent the
authorization appropriation oversight function that Congress has always
had and simply say we are going to earmark it and use kind of a spoil
system as to who gets the earmarks, then it is simply going to drain
the Treasury, and it is not fair to anyone.
I have universities in my district. Many of them compete for
educational grants, for research grants, for other grants that are
typically available in this appropriation bill and others that are
being depleted. Those accounts for research funds are being depleted by
earmarks.
Later today I believe we will be voting on an amendment or some
clarification of the TEA-LU bill to replenish a research account or
some kind of research account on roads whose account was depleted
because of earmarks. So people in Arizona or elsewhere are not going to
receive the funding that would come by formula back to them, because of
the gas taxes they paid in, because of all of the earmarking that is
going on.
So this is a problem. It is not a fair system. It is not a
transparent system. If it were a transparent system, we would have
names next to the earmarks when they come to the floor. We would have
the ability to challenge it at any step. You would have language that
is such that a limitation amendment could not be ruled out of order.
This is not a fair process. We need to change it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will be
postponed.
____________________