[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 125 (Friday, September 29, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H7951-H7959]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    WAIVING REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO 
                  CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS

  Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on 
Rules, I call up House Resolution 1053 and ask for its immediate 
consideration.

[[Page H7952]]

  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1053

       Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII 
     for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee 
     on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is 
     waived with respect to any resolution reported on the 
     legislative day of September 29, 2006.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) is 
recognized for 1 hour.


                             General Leave

  Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 days to revise and extend their remarks and insert 
tabular and extraneous material into the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Oklahoma?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I 
yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the 
purpose of debate only.
  Mr. Speaker, on Thursday night the Rules Committee met and reported a 
rule for consideration of resolutions reported by the Rules Committee 
on the same day. The rule waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII and applies a 
special waiver to any resolutions reported this legislative day.
  Mr. Speaker, it is of the utmost importance for the House to pass 
this rule and move the debate along so that important legislation may 
be considered before the House adjourns. Legislation that may be 
considered under this same-day rule may include the fiscal year 2007 
National Defense Authorization Act and the Port Security Act and other 
measures brought to the floor through a special rule reported by the 
committee. This rule will provide the House the flexibility and ability 
to move the remaining legislation in a timely and efficient manner so 
that we can adjourn this legislative day.
  To that end, Mr. Speaker, I urge support of the rule and the 
underlying bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma for 
yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this martial law rule.
  It is not unusual for a rush of bills, especially conference reports, 
to come to the House floor in the final hours before a recess or a 
final adjournment no matter who holds the majority. We are used to 
seeing that. But the manner in which this House has conducted business 
over the past week should be a matter of grave concern to all Members 
no matter what side of the aisle they sit on.
  Closed rules have become a norm in this Chamber. Bills that have not 
gone through committee hearings, markup, or open debate or with a 
chance for Members to offer and debate thoughtful amendments, bills 
that magically appear out of thin air with the Republican leadership 
asking Members to vote ``yes'' on far-reaching legislation that nobody 
has actually read.
  Mr. Speaker, we cannot continue to operate the United States House of 
Representatives in such a fashion.

                              {time}  1315

  It demeans our democracy. It is bad enough that this House is passing 
bills that will be signed into law that undermine our system of justice 
and due process both here at home and internationally. But the very way 
in which this House has carried out legislative business this week is 
an affront to the Democratic process.
  I know that we all want to return home to our districts to meet with 
our constituents and prepare for the upcoming elections, but I 
genuinely worry about how we are living up to our oaths of office when 
I look at how the Republican leadership has shut down debate on some of 
the most significant issues facing our country.
  Mr. Speaker, there are only a few hours left before Congress adjourns 
to go home. After the most do-nothing Congress in the history of the 
country, Republican leadership continues to ignore critical issues that 
are absolutely important to the American people in a rush to get out of 
Washington.
  Some of us, Mr. Speaker, have spoken in the past about the culture of 
corruption that exists in this institution; and it is more than just 
about the antics of Mr. DeLay and Mr. Cunningham and Mr. Abramoff. This 
culture of corruption that we talk about is also about a corruption of 
the process that allows for this Congress to become a place where 
trivial issues get debated passionately and important ones not at all. 
It is a process where rank and file Members of both parties, not just 
Democrats but Republicans, routinely get locked out of the ability to 
offer amendments and to be heard on the floor of the people's House.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, when gas prices went sky high, President Bush and 
the Republican-controlled Congress gave tax breaks to the oil 
companies. They did not give us an opportunity to debate and to vote on 
a real energy bill that would provide funding for alternative sources 
of renewable energy. But that is how they responded to that crisis.
  When our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan needed body armor, we got 
``mission accomplished''. Mr. Speaker, the headlines of the last week 
alone should show not only how messed up things are in Iraq but how 
this administration has deceived the American people and deceived this 
Congress.
  And what has been the response of Congress over these many months? 
Has it been to hold the administration accountable? Has it been to 
conduct proper oversight?
  No. It has been a rubber stamp. Just let things go on as they are. 
Stay the course, which has become code for stay forever. With American 
workers crying out for an increase in the minimum wage, President Bush 
and the Republican-controlled Congress forced through an estate tax cut 
benefiting only the wealthiest people in this country.
  Mr. Speaker, the Federal minimum wage is at $5.15 an hour. $5.15 an 
hour. It has been frozen that way for 9 years. Now, during those same 9 
years, this Congress has given itself pay increases of $31,600. I mean, 
we have the time. We have the time to give ourselves a pay raise in 
this body, but we do not have the time to give the American workers a 
pay raise? $5.15 an hour is what the current Federal minimum wage is.
  And would you not think that there would be a sense of urgency in 
this House of Representatives to not adjourn until we have a clean up 
or down vote on the minimum wage? No, that is not part of why we are 
having a martial law rule here today. They are not doing this so they 
can bring up the Federal minimum wage, an increase in the Federal 
minimum wage. That is not what this is about.
  Mr. Speaker, with the cost of college tuition skyrocketing and 
student aid not meeting the need, President Bush and the Republican-
controlled Congress instead give us a bill congratulating Little League 
teams. We have done nothing in this Congress to address the real 
concern and the real need out there by so many American families to 
help pay for the cost of a college education.
  And as thousands of our senior citizens fall into the doughnut hole 
of the Medicare Prescription Drug Plan, President Bush and the 
Republican-controlled Congress answered their pleas for help by naming 
more post offices. We were not given the opportunity to fix the 
doughnut hole in that prescription drug bill.
  We have not been given the opportunity to do what Democrats have been 
demanding for a long time, and that is to give the Federal Government 
the ability to negotiate lower drug prices for our senior citizens. 
That is how the Veterans Administration does it. The VA negotiates on 
behalf of all of our veterans, thereby getting a better price so that 
our veterans do not have to pay as much for prescription drugs.
  Why cannot we do the same thing for Medicare beneficiaries? We are 
not doing it because the prescription drug industry and the 
pharmaceuticals do not want it, and they have contributed mightily to 
the majority party's campaign for reelection.
  Mr. Speaker, it is time for a new direction; and I hope that my 
colleagues will indicate their frustration with the

[[Page H7953]]

way this House has been run and demonstrate their dismay at the lack of 
accomplishment of this Congress by voting ``no'' on this martial law 
rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to just disagree with my good friend from 
Massachusetts on his characterization of the accomplishments of this 
Congress. As a matter of fact, if you start ticking off the record, it 
is pretty impressive: bankruptcy reform, class action lawsuit reform, a 
transportation bill that put more money into our infrastructure than 
any transportation bill in American history, significant energy 
legislation passed last year, dealing with the entitlement spending 
problem, an across-the-board budget cut.
  All of those are genuine accomplishments. Pension reform, bill after 
bill after bill. Some of them bipartisan, some of them, frankly, passed 
without the cooperation of our friends.
  And, frankly, to criticize us for minimum wage, when in this House we 
have voted on and passed the minimum wage increase and passed, along 
with it, a reform of the death tax and tax extender bills that are 
important, I think is somewhat disingenuous.
  That legislation passed with a majority vote on this floor; and, 
frankly, a majority of the other body favored that legislation. Our 
friends on the other side of the aisle used their friends on the other 
side of the rotunda to routinely block progress. Even when the majority 
of the United States Senate agrees with the will of this House, as was 
the case with the minimum wage, with ANWR, and another piece of 
legislation with the tax extenders, with reform of the death tax, an 
obstructionist minority of Democrats on the other side keep a 
bipartisan majority from actually reaching the magic 60 vote level that 
is required in moving legislation forward.
  We are not responsible for that. Frankly, I am proud of what we have 
moved through the floor here.
  I also want to disagree with my good friend on the Medicare measure 
that he discussed in his remarks. Quite frankly, it is something that I 
think our good friends on the other side of the aisle are embarrassed 
that they did not support. It was the largest expansion of spending for 
senior citizens and entitlement spending since 1965. Since 1965.
  Now the argument that the Democrats advanced that night, and I was 
here, was it is not enough. They were not willing to vote for something 
that was the largest increase in almost 40 years. It simply was not 
enough. And I think now that tens of thousands of seniors are getting 
health care that in the past they were not able to get, and that our 
friends on the other side had nothing to do with that accomplishment 
puts them in the position where they feel like they have to take away 
from the achievement that they could have been part of but rejected the 
opportunity to participate in.
  Finally, let me just conclude my observation that there are only two 
times when we get criticized from the other side of the aisle. That is 
when we do something and when we do not.
  Day after day, and particularly morning after morning this week, we 
have heard demands from the floor or from the well of this body on the 
floor that we have up or down votes on issue after issue after issue. 
Now when we are bringing important issues for up or down votes, issues 
that in many cases have been dealt with for months through the 
committee process, we are dealing with conference reports or providing 
an up or down opportunity, we are criticized for that. So I suspect we 
are going to be criticized regardless of what we do.
  What I am pleased with is the record of accomplishment that this 
Congress has to offer to the American people in issue after issue. My 
only regret is that, frankly, our friends on the other side of the 
aisle have so often chosen to obstruct rather than participate, in my 
opinion, constructively in this process.
  I hope that that changes ahead. Frankly, there have been times when 
it has been different on this floor. I would hold the pension reform 
bill out as an example of that. I would also point out on things like 
the PATRIOT Act, where we had 40 odd of our friends from the other side 
participating; tort reform, where 70 odd of our friends participated on 
the other side; there have been many instances of bipartisan reform 
cooperation. Unfortunately, in my opinion, it has diminished as we have 
moved forward in the Congress and moved closer to November.
  I hope on the other side of November that will change. But I, for 
one, am very proud of this Congress and what it has accomplished; and I 
look forward to working with our friends on the other side of the aisle 
so we can accomplish more in the months that remain in this Congress 
and, frankly, in the next one.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friend saying he looks forward to 
working with us. I look forward to the day that the majority decides to 
work with those of us in the minority in this Congress.
  You know, one of the frustrations that we have, and, again, we have 
not been given an answer to this question, is why on some of the most 
important pieces of legislation that have come before this Congress, 
issues involving wire tapping, issues involving torture, would these 
bills be brought to the floor under a closed process when there were 
Democrats and Republicans both coming before the Rules Committee who 
wanted to have input, who wanted to make their amendments in order, who 
had some good ideas.
  You may not agree with everything. You do not have a monopoly on good 
ideas. But the fact of the matter is, to shut people down, to just shut 
everybody out, that not only diminishes this institution, it diminishes 
this democracy. It is why we believe that there is a culture of 
corruption that exists in this Congress. You have corrupted this 
process.
  You know, my friend likes to say he is very proud of the record of 
the Republican Congress. Well, the fact of the matter is, he and a 
handful of others may be the only people who think that this Congress 
has done a good job. There is a reason why only 25 percent of the 
American people approve of the job that this Congress is doing. They 
are disgusted with the lack of accomplishment on issues that make a 
difference in their lives.
  I do not know about my colleague from Oklahoma, but when I go home, 
you know, I have a lot of seniors telling me that they have hit that 
doughnut hole in the prescription drug bill. They do not know what to 
do about it. I have a lot of my senior citizens say to me, why in the 
world will you not give the Federal Government the ability to negotiate 
lower drug prices for our senior citizens? What is so radical about 
that?
  I mean, that is one of those best-business type practices. Why cannot 
you allow our Government to negotiate lower drug prices for our senior 
citizens? The reason why is because the people who have funded the 
Republican National Committee and the campaigns, the pharmaceutical 
industries, do not want that.
  There are people asking me all of the time, you know, why has this 
Congress not implemented the 9/11 Commission recommendations to make 
our country safer? You know, a nonpartisan commission that has set 
forth an agenda that I think almost everybody agrees with, and yet we 
cannot implement those recommendations.
  On the minimum wage, you play politics with the minimum wage. If you 
cared about the workers of this country who are earning a minimum wage, 
then you would bring up a minimum wage that would pass. But, no, in 
order to help low-income workers, you have got to help the richest 
people in this country. You want to play politics with that issue.
  The minimum wage has been stuck at $5.15 an hour for 9 years. You do 
not have the time to give these workers an increase, but yet we can all 
give ourselves a pay increase. No wonder why the American people are so 
fed up with this Congress.
  On student aid, students returning to college continue to confront 
skyrocketing tuition costs; and yet the Republican Congress made it 
harder to pay for college by cutting $12 billion in student aid. 
Congress needs to pass and approve the Labor-HHS appropriations bill 
that restores the massive cuts in college tuition and expands the size 
and availability of Pell Grants.

[[Page H7954]]

  You know, why cannot we focus on that? Pass an energy plan that 
decreases our dependence on foreign oil. Your energy law, you know, 
written in secret by the Cheney task force and Big Oil and energy 
lobbyists, gives billions of special interest giveaways to oil and gas 
companies that are enjoying record profits.
  I mean, yeah, you passed some things but things that really do not 
make a difference to the average working person out there. So you can 
be proud of your record in this Congress. But I want to tell you, there 
is a reason why only 25 percent of the American people approve of the 
way that this Congress has handled its job.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Hunter) to file a conference report.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask to submit a conference 
report. I just wanted to say that this conference report is largely the 
product of Mr. Bob Cover, who after many, many years is leaving the 
Office of Legislative Counsel. We appreciate his great service to our 
country.

                              {time}  1330

  Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I want to take a moment to respond to my good friend from 
Massachusetts. We simply, I guess, see the world differently. The 
reality is most of the legislation that comes to this floor that passes 
is bipartisan, passes with at least a bipartisan vote. It is my friends 
on the other side who so often find themselves in lonely partisan 
isolation, less frequent on this side of the aisle.
  Again, I could go issue after issue, whether it is tort reform, the 
PATRIOT Act, bankruptcy reform, the transportation bill, defense bills, 
there are overwhelming bipartisan votes.
  Frankly, I think our friends at this point are more interested in 
problems than solutions. They simply do not want to run on them. They 
want to create the impression that the Congress has been neither 
productive and is overly partisan. That is something we are going to 
have to agree to disagree on.
  I also want to again remind my friend, on the Medicare bill, it is 
this side of the aisle that provided tens of millions of seniors with 
prescription drug coverage for the first time ever, and I think if my 
friend checked the polling reports or checked the rates of satisfaction 
he would find that it is very, very high. I personally think our 
friends are disappointed in themselves for not having participated, not 
having worked with us.
  Many times our friends want to negotiate, but they also tell us what 
is nonnegotiable before we sit down to negotiate. They certainly did 
that during the Medicare situation. They certainly did that when the 
administration wanted to discuss Social Security earlier last year: 
these are the things we will not talk about; now, let us sit down and 
talk. That is not a negotiation in my opinion.
  Finally, I want to remind my friends, when they move on education 
spending, I would be delighted to debate the record of this Congress 
and frankly this administration in the area of funding education. The 
largest increase in spending for education at all levels has occurred 
during the Bush administration, over 50 percent since 2001. It is this 
party that has delivered time and time and time again when it came to 
funding.
  Finally, last point, my friend made the point that the minimum wage 
would pass quote ``if.'' It did pass. This is the point. It came to 
this floor and passed. It went to the United States Senate. Over half, 
57 of our Senators out of a body of 100 of the other body, were in 
favor of that legislation. It was a minority that blocked the passage 
of the minimum wage and a minority in the United States Senate. I 
regret that. We still have time before the Congress is finished to deal 
with that, and I hope that we do after the election.
  I think there are some that would rather have election issues than 
have a solution. I think when you offer a compromise solution, we had 
many Members in this body who did not want to raise the minimum wage. 
We had many Members in this body that did want to raise it. We had also 
Members that wanted to reform the death tax, those that did not. Most 
of us on both sides of the aisle were in favor of the extenders. That 
was actually a very finely crafted compromise that had something for 
everybody. Our good friends wanted everything for themselves, but 
nothing for anybody else in terms of the compromise.
  I think we have put on this floor a fair bill, a bill we can be proud 
of. I am very proud to be able to go home and say I voted for a minimum 
wage increase; when it came to the floor of the House, I voted to 
reform the death tax; and I voted to extend some important economic tax 
incentives and a reduction. I wish more of the Congress could, but the 
majority of us actually can go home and say that.
  The majority in the United States Senate can say it. It is the 
obstructionist minority in the other body that chose not to participate 
in the compromise with us, but again, there is still time left in the 
Congress. We will be back here in all likelihood in November and 
December. I hope that opportunity on the other side of the election 
will lead us to be able to pass significant compromise legislation. 
Frankly, I trust that it will.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I would just again remind those who may be listening that the 
Republicans control the White House, they control the House of 
Representatives, and they control the United States Senate. So if they 
really wanted to increase the minimum wage, they would be able to do 
it, but they do not; and if anybody believes that it is in their heart 
to try to increase the minimum wage somehow after the elections are all 
over with, I think you are in for a rude awakening.
  For 9 years, Republicans in Congress proudly refused to raise the 
minimum wage for hardworking Americans, even as their own pay increased 
by $31,600. This year the Republicans are playing politics with a pay 
raise for millions of Americans, killing a minimum wage by attaching it 
to tax cuts for the wealthiest people in this country. This is how they 
chose to kill it this year, and they have been killing it every year 
for 9 years. I mean, that is their legacy and we need to change that, 
and hopefully come November that will change.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. 
Corrine Brown), a champion for increasing the minimum wage.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank you for 
your leadership on this matter.
  The people on the other side of the aisle, Republicans, always want 
to talk about the Bible, and you know, the Bible said the poor will 
always be with us. But our jobs as Members of Congress is to help raise 
the standard.
  A few months ago, I voted against raising the minimum wage. Well, why 
would I vote against raising the minimum wage? Because I do not think 
there is anybody in this body supports raising the minimum wage more 
than I do.
  Well, it was a poison pill. It was a kiss of death because what the 
Republicans did, they tied raising the minimum wage to passing an 
estate tax. I mean, that would have taken trillions of dollars out of 
the budget just to help what I call their rich friends.
  The Republicans have practiced over and over again what I call 
reverse Robin Hood, robbing from the poor and working people to give 
tax breaks to their friends.
  So now they put the minimum wage on the floor, but tied it to an 
estate tax that would have taken thousands and thousands of dollars out 
of the budget. Yes, we have not dealt with the agenda of the American 
people.
  In closing, the Bible says the poor will always be with us, but our 
job is to help raise the standard. Give us a clean bill on this floor 
on minimum wage, and let us vote to help the American people.
  Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I want to associate myself with the comments of the gentlewoman from 
Florida who just spoke. Again, the leadership in this Congress, the 
majority in this Congress, gave themselves a

[[Page H7955]]

pay raise, but they cannot bring themselves to giving hardworking 
American families a pay raise, those who earn the minimum wage. There 
is something wrong with that equation.
  The bottom line is we work for the people of this country, and the 
Federal minimum wage has been stuck at $5.15 for 9 years. It is 
disgraceful; and for 9 years this leadership, this majority has proudly 
stood to fight against increasing the minimum wage. They should be 
ashamed of themselves. We give ourselves a pay raise, but we cannot 
give hardworking American families a pay raise.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Berry).
  Mr. BERRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts, and 
I certainly appreciate his leadership in this matter.
  Mr. Speaker, as I hear this discussion today, it is a heartbreaking 
thing to see this body completely engaged in partisan politics because 
it does not matter to the American people when they cannot afford their 
medicine, when they cannot afford health insurance anymore.
  Health insurance, the cost has doubled under the Bush administration. 
They come and pretend and posture and try to give the impression that 
they care about what happens to the American people.
  When America fails, we all share in that failure. We all suffer. We 
all get part of the pain. When we cannot afford to fill our automobiles 
up with gasoline, we all suffer. When Social Security is threatened, we 
all suffer. When the minimum wage is not raised to a reasonable level, 
we all pay the price.
  It is very distressing to know that under the Bush administration and 
the majority Republican Party leadership in this Congress that we have 
failed on every count. Not only can we not afford our gasoline or our 
health care or to educate our children because they have raised the 
cost of student loans, we know what a mess we have in Iraq. We know 
what a failure our borders have been under the direction of the Bush 
administration and the Republican majority in this Congress.
  It makes me very distressed to know that we are going to leave here 
this week very likely without doing anything substantive on any of 
these issues.
  The good news is this: we can go in a new direction. We know how to 
provide health care to the American people. We know how to provide 
gasoline they can afford. Is it not a sad state of affairs when we 
think $2.15 gas is a good deal? We know how to provide prescription 
medicine to our people at a fair and reasonable price that they can 
afford and they will not need any government help to purchase it.
  One of the great Arkansas companies just came out with a new plan 
this week that demonstrates the power of massive buying. That is Wal-
Mart, and they have a new prescription drug plan that they are going to 
present to America.
  All of these are good things.
  We know how to get the job done, and the Democrats cannot wait to get 
started to see that our people do not have to go to bed wondering if 
they are going to be able to afford their medicine or their gasoline or 
their light bill, thinking that they are going to work tomorrow and 
still be working for $5.15 an hour, wondering if Social Security is 
going to be there for them. That should be something that there is no 
question about.
  As I said, the Democrats cannot wait to get started in the right 
direction. We know how to do these things. We are excited about being 
part of it, and to continue to play these political games on the floor 
of this great institution is a sad commentary on the corruption of 
absolute power.
  Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I want to just note for the record I am delighted to finally hear 
something good about Wal-Mart coming from the other side because 
generally that is not what we hear, but I agree with my good friend. It 
is a great company and not just a great Arkansas company, but a great 
American company.
  I also want to say, Mr. Speaker, that I am very proud when I had the 
opportunity to vote to give tens of millions of seniors drug coverage 
for the first time in the history, I did.
  I am very happy and very proud that when I had the opportunity on 
this floor to vote for an increase in the minimum wage, I did.
  I am very happy when I had the opportunity to vote for, first, the 
elimination and then the reform of the death tax so small business 
people and farmers can keep their properties, I did.
  I am very glad when the PATRIOT Act came up for reauthorization I had 
the opportunity to vote to make our country safer and stronger, and I 
did.
  I am very glad I had the opportunity to vote for liability reform for 
medical cases, and when the opportunity came to vote on the floor, I 
was pleased to do so.
  Finally, when I have had on a number of occasions the opportunity to 
vote for measures that would increase the energy independence of this 
country and hold down the escalation of gasoline prices, I have done 
that. I am very pleased that I had an opportunity to do so.
  I think what we are hearing today is unfortunately regret that so 
many of our friends on the other side of the aisle did not vote for 
those things when they had the opportunity; and rather than simply 
express their disagreement, they are simply trying to denigrate the 
work of the Congress, which has been productive and good for the 
American people.
  So I am pleased with the record of Congress and look forward to going 
home to talk about it and look forward, again, to the balance of the 
Congress after the election.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, could I inquire from the gentleman from 
Oklahoma how many more speakers he has on his side.
  Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. I am prepared to close when the gentleman is.
  Mr. McGOVERN. I thank my friend. Mr. Speaker, how much time do we 
have remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 10\1/2\ 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Oklahoma has 18 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I once again want to express my deep disappointment in 
the lack of accomplishment of this Congress. I mean, this really is a 
do-nothing Congress, and there are issues that one would have thought 
we could have come together in a bipartisan way on, for example, 
allowing the Federal Government to negotiate cheaper drug prices for 
our senior citizens that the majority in this House chose not to want 
to reach out and work with us.

                              {time}  1345

  There are issues of energy independence that we could have worked 
together on that they did not want to work with us on. In fact, as I 
said in the very beginning, every time we have an idea, every time we 
want to express a different opinion or want to present a different 
alternative, we go to the Rules Committee and we are told, no, you are 
not welcome; no, you are not allowed; no, we are going to shut you out.
  That has been the hallmark of this Congress. This is probably the 
most closed Congress in the history of the country. I don't remember a 
time when we have had more closed rules, more restrictive rules than we 
have in this Congress. I am going to tell you, that is something maybe 
my friend from Oklahoma wants to take some pride in, but I find that 
shameful. My expectation is that if the Democrats have the privilege of 
taking over this Congress, Leader Pelosi has already indicated we will 
have a whole different tone here, and all ideas, not just Democrat 
ideas but Republican ideas, will be welcome as well.
  That is what the American people expect. Every one of us represents 
the same amount of people in our congressional districts, yet you would 
never know that when you go to the Rules Committee and people routinely 
get shut out.
  We debated a bill on torture, we debated a bill on wiretaps dealing 
with people's civil liberties, dealing with the values of this country, 
and people had some strong opinions, not just Democrats but 
Republicans, and they were told no, no, no, no, no, you have no

[[Page H7956]]

right to come to the floor and offer your opinion.
  That is not a democracy. That is not the way this place is supposed 
to run. This is supposed to be a deliberative body, and we are 
routinely shut out. I think people are sick of that. People don't want 
politics as usual. People want a change. They want a new direction. And 
a new direction is not just in terms of policies but also in terms of 
tone.
  My friends on the other side of the aisle run everything. They run 
the White House, they run the House of Representatives, and they run 
the Senate. Yet they cannot get things done. They can't even work with 
their own Members in the other body. So I think it is time for a change 
to get people put in places of power who are going to actually be not 
only advocates for working families in this country but who will 
deliver and who are going to reach out a hand and try to work in a 
bipartisan way. That doesn't exist here. There is no bipartisanship 
here at all. There is none.
  So this talk about we want to work together in the future on this 
issue or that issue, it has not happened in the past, so why should it 
happen in the future?
  Mr. Speaker, before I talk about the previous question, I want to 
urge Members of this House to vote against this martial law rule. This 
rule allows the Republican leadership to bring up virtually any piece 
of legislation with only a few minutes notice to this House. That is 
just plain wrong. We have no idea what may be coming our way. I mean, 
they could bring anything up with a few minutes notice. I do not think 
that is the right way to do business here. I do not think that is the 
way we should conduct ourselves in the House.
  Mr. Speaker, before I get into my previous question speech, my good 
friend from Virginia (Mr. Moran) just came to the floor, and I want to 
yield him 3\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I thank my very good friend from 
Massachusetts, who has done such a fine job in succeeding Mr. Moakley 
on the Rules Committee.
  Mr. Speaker, we are about to adjourn, and yet we are going to leave 
the American people without the resources and the legislation they need 
to provide the kind of security that the bipartisan 9/11 Commission 
said was necessary. Five F's and 14 D's on the Commission's scorecard, 
yet we can't act on the 9/11 Commission's recommendations.
  Mr. Speaker, we have the greatest gap in compensation between the 
rich and the poor that we have ever had since the days of the Great 
Depression in this country, and yet we can't even see our way through 
to raising the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour. Shame on this 
Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, there are hundreds of thousands of senior citizens who 
are being dumped into the doughnut hole as we speak, who are going to 
have to pay 100 percent of the cost of their prescription drugs. And do 
you know that there are hundreds of thousands of additional senior 
citizens, Mr. Speaker, who are going to be stuck with a penalty of 
paying an extra 7 percent premium for the rest of their lives because 
we couldn't fix the Medicare prescription drug program to eliminate the 
monthly penalty and the prohibition on the government's ability to 
negotiate lower prices? It was written for and passed for the benefit 
of the drug companies, not the senior citizens of America.
  Mr. Speaker, the average college student is graduating from college 
with a $20,000 debt. They can't afford to go into public service 
because they have to go into a job that is going to give them the 
maximum compensation so that they can spend the first few years after 
graduation in order to pay back their debt.
  We have thousands of students who have worked so hard to become 
eligible for a college education, to become all that their parents want 
them to be, all that we need them to be, but they can't afford college. 
Yet we have seen massive cuts in college tuition assistance imposed by 
this Congress, a Congress that has refused to provide the kind of size 
and availability of Pell Grants that would have enabled these young 
people to get to college and to afford college.
  Mr. Speaker, not to provide the resources for our students when we 
will spend over $400 billion on a misguided mission in Iraq is 
unbelievable, and yet we are ready to recess.
  Mr. Speaker, I will conclude with this. I mentioned four reasons why 
this Congress shouldn't even think of recessing, but there is another 
one. There is billions of dollars that the large oil companies are 
getting in tax breaks. They have had more revenue than at any time, 
more than they could have ever imagined. In fact, in the last quarter, 
they showed $47 billion of profit, all coming out of the pockets of 
hard-working Americans, and yet we continue to give them tax breaks. 
Unbelievable.
  Mr. Speaker, this Congress has no business recessing, and this 
martial law rule certainly should be defeated.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, once again, I will be asking Members to 
vote ``no'' on the previous question so that I can amend this rule and 
allow for the immediate consideration of the five bills that we on this 
side of the aisle believe will really make a difference to our Nation's 
working families.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my 
amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the 
previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, these bills are the same ones I talked 
about yesterday; the same ones I have talked about today. Every Member 
of this House of Representatives should support the goal of these 
important legislative initiatives. My amendment would allow each of 
them to be considered immediately.
  The first bill will implement the long-overdue recommendations of the 
highly respected bipartisan 9/11 Commission. My friends on the other 
side like to talk about their great record on national security, yet 
the 9/11 Commission has given them D's and F's for the implementation 
of their recommendations to better protect our homeland. This would 
allow that bill to come up immediately.
  The second bill would allow us to bring the minimum wage up to $7.25 
per hour. It has been stuck at $5.15 an hour for 9 years. You have 
given yourselves pay raise after pay raise after pay raise. How about 
giving the American worker a pay raise?
  The third bill would let the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
negotiate for lower prescription drug prices for senior citizens and 
people with disabilities. Why not? What is wrong with free enterprise? 
What is wrong with doing what the Veterans Administration has done so 
effectively? Let us get those prices down lower and keep them low.
  The fourth bill would repeal the massive cuts in college tuition 
assistance opposed by the Congress, and it will expand the size and 
availability of Pell Grants. People can't afford to go to college any 
more, and you have made it more difficult. We say we want a 21st 
century workforce, that we need to make sure our young people get the 
education they need, and that means they have to be able to afford to 
go to college.
  And, lastly, the fifth bill will roll back the tax breaks for big oil 
and invest those savings in alternative fuels to achieve energy 
independence. We are tired of tax break after tax break after tax break 
and subsidy after subsidy after subsidy for big oil. It is time to be 
on the side of working families.
  Mr. Speaker, each of these bills has enormous potential to help the 
quality of life for tens of millions of deserving hard-working 
Americans and their families. We have one more day before we adjourn 
for more than a month. Let's use this opportunity not for suspension 
bills but for something that will really make a difference in people's 
lives, to provide people these opportunities by passing this important 
legislation that will truly help so many.
  So vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can bring up these 
measures.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I know we are not at Halloween 
yet, but we must be getting close, because we have to scare the 
American people on issue after issue after issue.

[[Page H7957]]

  Frankly, most of the measures that my good friend talked about, if 
they were brought up, would have to be brought up under the very same 
closed rules he so often voices his concern about.
  We are told this Congress somehow operates differently than the 
others. I simply want to provide for the information of our body some 
information provided to me by the Congressional Research Service. Same 
day rules during the last week of session during the final three 
Democratic Congresses, the Hundred First, the Hundred Second and the 
Hundred Third, totaled six. Same day rules under the last three 
Republican Congresses, the Hundred Seventh, the Hundred Eighth and the 
Hundred Ninth, totaled five. Basically, the body operates about the 
same way procedurally that it has operated throughout most of its 
history and certainly throughout its recent history.
  I also want to remind my friends who talk about the minimum wage that 
they had the opportunity to vote for a minimum wage increase. I voted 
for it. I certainly am happy that I did. I wish more of my friends had. 
A majority of this body did. Indeed, a bipartisan majority. A 
bipartisan majority of the United States Senate favored it.
  It was my friends' friends on the other side of the rotunda that 
decided not to enter in and allow that increase to take place because 
they wanted a perfect bill from their perspective. They didn't want to 
compromise. They didn't want to give and take. They didn't want to have 
some discussion. Frankly, what they wanted is what they got, or what 
they believe they got, which is a political issue for the November 
elections.
  I am hopeful that after the elections are over we can come back here 
and actually have a discussion and come to a compromise solution, such 
as was crafted on the floor in this body.
  Our friends talk to us a lot about education. I think they should. 
They probably ought to thank President Bush for being the best friend 
education ever had. It is President Bush who came up with No Child Left 
Behind, and it was President Bush who has recommended throughout his 
tenure over a 50 percent increase in Federal funding of education.
  My friends are concerned about the cost of tuition. So am I. I just 
had a son who graduated. I am very grateful. But, quite frankly, most 
of that problem is at the State level, where we have State government 
after State government running enormous surpluses, yet not passing some 
of that surplus on to higher education institutions and to their own 
students.
  The reality is that after coming in with a recession beginning in 
2001, followed by September 11, something that all of us on both sides 
of the aisle recognize as a dastardly and disastrous event, this 
administration and this Republican Congress has gotten the economy 
moving again and has accomplishment after accomplishment to run on. I 
am not surprised that our friends on the other side see it differently 
or want to obscure it, but I have profound faith in the good judgment 
of the American people to understand fiction and understand fact and 
know the difference between the two.
  Mr. Speaker, today, in closing, I want to reiterate the importance of 
passing this rule. This rule allows us to move forward, pass the 
necessary legislation, and to do the business of the American people. 
It is interesting how we have heard complaints by the other side of the 
aisle that this is a do-nothing Congress, yet at the same time the 
other side wants to slow down the process today to prevent important 
bipartisan legislation from being passed. It wants, in effect, to do 
less, not more.
  Mr. Speaker, I am sure it is no surprise that I intend to vote for 
the rule and the underlying legislation, and I would urge my colleagues 
to do the same.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:

 Previous Question for H. Res. 1053, Blanket Martial Law Rule Waiving 
                         Clause 6(a), Rule XIII

       At the end of the resolution add the following new 
     Sections:
       Sec. 3. Notwithstanding any other provisions in this 
     resolution and without intervention of any point of order it 
     shall be in order immediately upon adoption of this 
     resolution for the House to consider the bills listed in Sec. 
     4:
       Sec. 4. The bills referred to in Sec. 3. are as follows:
       (1) a bill to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 
     Commission.
       (2) a bill to increase the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour.
       (3) a bill to provide authority to the Secretary of Health 
     and Human Services to negotiate for lower prescription drug 
     prices for senior citizens and people with disabilities.
       (4) a bill to repeal the massive cuts in college tuition 
     assistance imposed by the Congress and to expand the size and 
     availability of Pell Grants.
       (5) a bill to roll back tax breaks for large petroleum 
     companies and to invest those savings in alternative fuels to 
     achieve energy independence.
                                  ____


        The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means

       This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous 
     question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. 
     A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote 
     against the Republican majority agenda and a vote to allow 
     the opposition, at least for the moment, to offer an 
     alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be 
     debating.
       Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of 
     Representatives, (VI, 308-311) describes the vote on the 
     previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or 
     control the consideration of the subject before the House 
     being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous 
     question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the 
     subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling 
     of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the 
     House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes 
     the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to 
     offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the 
     majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated 
     the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to 
     a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to 
     recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said: 
     ``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman 
     from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to 
     yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first 
     recognition.''
       Because the vote today may look bad for the Republican 
     majority they will say ``the vote on the previous question is 
     simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on 
     adopting the resolution * * * [and] has no substantive 
     legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' But that is 
     not what they have always said. Listen to the Republican 
     Leadership Manual on the Legislative Process in the United 
     States House of Representatives, (6th edition, page 135). 
     Here's how the Republicans describe the previous question 
     vote in their own manual: Although it is generally not 
     possible to amend the rule because the majority Member 
     controlling the time will not yield for the purpose of 
     offering an amendment, the same result may be achieved by 
     voting down the previous question on the rule * * * When the 
     motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the 
     time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering 
     the previous question. That Member, because he then controls 
     the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or yield for 
     the purpose of amendment.''
       Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of Representatives, 
     the subchapter titled ``Amending Special Rules'' states: ``a 
     refusal to order the previous question on such a rule [a 
     special rule reported from the Committee on Rules] opens the 
     resolution to amendment and further debate.'' (Chapter 21, 
     section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues: Upon rejection of the 
     motion for the previous question on a resolution reported 
     from the Committee on Rules, control shifts to the Member 
     leading the opposition to the previous question, who may 
     offer a proper amendment or motion and who controls the time 
     for debate thereon.''
       Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does 
     have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only 
     available tools for those who oppose the Republican 
     majority's agenda to offer an alternative plan.

  Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 
XX, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question will be 
followed by 5-minute votes on adoption of House Resolution 1053, if 
ordered; and passage of S. 3930.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 215, 
nays 197, not voting 20, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 506]

                               YEAS--215

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachus
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)

[[Page H7958]]


     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Boehlert
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Capito
     Carter
     Chabot
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Everett
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick (PA)
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Jindal
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pearce
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pombo
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Schmidt
     Schwarz (MI)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Sodrel
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NAYS--197

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Chandler
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Herseth
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kind
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lipinski
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz (PA)
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Shays
     Sherman
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                             NOT VOTING--20

     Blunt
     Boehner
     Burgess
     Cantor
     Case
     Castle
     Chocola
     Evans
     Fattah
     Foley
     Gallegly
     Hastings (FL)
     Lewis (GA)
     Meehan
     Ney
     Otter
     Pence
     Strickland
     Thompson (MS)
     Wilson (SC)

                              {time}  1424

  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 227, 
noes 193, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 507]

                               AYES--227

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachus
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Everett
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick (PA)
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Jindal
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marshall
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Otter
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pombo
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Schmidt
     Schwarz (MI)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Sodrel
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--193

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Chandler
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Herseth
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kind
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lipinski
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud

[[Page H7959]]


     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz (PA)
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Burgess
     Case
     Castle
     Evans
     Fattah
     Foley
     Lewis (GA)
     Meehan
     Ney
     Strickland
     Thompson (MS)
     Wilson (SC)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised 2 
minutes remain in this vote.

                              {time}  1432

  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________