[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 119 (Tuesday, July 24, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H8318-H8359]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 558 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, 
H.R. 3074.

                              {time}  1240


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 3074) making appropriations for the Departments of 
Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, 
with Mr. Weiner (Acting Chairman) in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier 
today, amendment No. 2 by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner) had been 
disposed of and the bill had been read through page 82, line 13.
  Pursuant to the order of the House of today, no further amendment to 
the bill may be offered except those specified in the previous order of 
the House today, which is at the desk.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder 
of the bill through page 94, 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 Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  The text of that portion of the bill is as follows:


        self-help and assisted homeownership opportunity program

       For the Self-Help and Assisted Homeownership Opportunity 
     Program, $59,700,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2010: Provided, That of the total amount provided in this 
     heading $27,710,000 shall be made available to the Self Help 
     Homeownership Opportunity Program as authorized under section 
     11 of the Housing Opportunity Program Extension Act of 1996 
     (42 U.S.C. 12805 note), of which up to $990,000 is for 
     technical assistance, and: Provided further, That $31,000,000 
     shall be made available for capacity building, for Community 
     Development and affordable Housing for the Local Initiatives 
     Support Corporation and the Enterprise Foundation for 
     activities authorized by section 4 of the HUD Demonstration 
     Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 9816 note), as in effect immediately 
     before June 12, 1997.


                       Homeless Assistance Grants

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the emergency shelter grants program as authorized 
     under subtitle B of title IV of the McKinney-Vento Homeless 
     Assistance Act; the supportive housing program as authorized 
     under subtitle C of title IV of such Act; the section 8 
     moderate rehabilitation single room occupancy program as 
     authorized under the United States Housing Act of 1937, to 
     assist homeless individuals pursuant to section 441 of the 
     McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act; and the shelter plus 
     care program as authorized under subtitle F of title IV of 
     such Act, $1,560,990,000, of which $1,540,990,000 shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2010, and of which 
     $20,000,000 shall remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That not less than 30 percent of funds made available, 
     excluding amounts provided for renewals under the shelter 
     plus care program, shall be used for permanent housing: 
     Provided further, That all funds awarded for services shall 
     be matched by 25 percent in funding by each grantee: Provided 
     further, That the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall renew on an annual basis expiring contracts or 
     amendments to contracts funded under the shelter plus care 
     program if the program is determined to be needed under the 
     applicable continuum of care and meets appropriate program 
     requirements and financial standards, as determined by the 
     Secretary: Provided further, That all awards of assistance 
     under this heading shall be required to coordinate and 
     integrate homeless programs with other mainstream health, 
     social services, and employment programs for which homeless 
     populations may be eligible, including Medicaid, State 
     Children's Health Insurance Program, Temporary Assistance for 
     Needy Families, Food Stamps, and services funding through the 
     Mental Health and Substance Abuse Block Grant, Workforce 
     Investment Act, and the Welfare-to-Work grant program: 
     Provided further, That up to $8,000,000 of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading shall be available for the 
     national homeless data analysis project and technical 
     assistance: Provided further, That $2,475,000 of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading shall be transferred to the 
     Working Capital Fund: Provided further, That all balances for 
     Shelter Plus Care renewals previously funded from the Shelter 
     Plus Care Renewal account and transferred to this account 
     shall be available, if recaptured, for Shelter Plus Care 
     renewals in fiscal year 2008.

                            Housing Programs


                        Housing for the Elderly

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For capital advances, including amendments to capital 
     advance contracts, for housing for the elderly, as authorized 
     by section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 
     1701(q)), and for project rental assistance for the elderly 
     under section 202(c)(2) of such Act, including amendments to 
     contracts for such assistance and renewal of expiring 
     contracts for such assistance for up to a 1-year term, and 
     for supportive services associated with the housing, 
     $734,580,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011, 
     of which up to $603,900,000 shall be for capital advance and 
     project-based rental assistance awards: Provided, That, of 
     the amount provided under this heading, up to $59,400,000 
     shall be for service coordinators and the continuation of 
     existing congregate service grants for residents of assisted 
     housing projects, and of which up to $24,750,000 shall be for 
     grants under section 202b of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 
     U.S.C. 1701q-2) for conversion of eligible projects under 
     such section to assisted living or related use and for 
     emergency capital repairs as determined by the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development: Provided further, That of the 
     amount made available under this heading, $20,000,000 shall 
     be available to the Secretary only for making competitive 
     grants to private nonprofit organizations and consumer 
     cooperatives for covering costs of architectural and 
     engineering work, site control, and other planning relating 
     to the development of supportive housing for the elderly that 
     is eligible for assistance under section 202 of the Housing 
     Act of 1959: Provided further, That amounts under this 
     heading shall be available for Real Estate Assessment Center 
     inspections and inspection-related activities associated with 
     section 202 capital advance projects: Provided further, That 
     $1,980,000 of the total amount made available under this 
     heading shall be transferred to the Working Capital Fund: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary may waive the provisions 
     of section 202 governing the terms and conditions of project 
     rental assistance, except that the initial contract term for 
     such assistance shall not exceed 5 years in duration.


                 Housing for Persons With Disabilities

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For capital advance contracts, including amendments to 
     capital advance contracts, for supportive housing for persons 
     with disabilities, as authorized by section 811 of the 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 
     8013), for project rental assistance for supportive housing 
     for persons with disabilities under section 811(d)(2) of such 
     Act, including amendments to contracts for such assistance 
     and renewal of expiring contracts for such assistance for up 
     to a 1-year term, and for supportive services associated with 
     the housing for persons with disabilities as authorized by 
     section 811(b)(1) of such Act, and for tenant-based rental 
     assistance contracts entered into pursuant to section 811 of 
     such Act, $236,610,000 to remain available until September 
     30, 2011: Provided, That $990,000 shall be transferred to the 
     Working Capital Fund: Provided further, That, of the amount 
     provided under this heading $74,745,000 shall be for 
     amendments or renewal of tenant-based assistance contracts 
     entered into prior to fiscal year 2005 (only one amendment 
     authorized for any such contract): Provided further, That all 
     tenant-based assistance made available under this heading 
     shall continue to remain available only to persons with 
     disabilities: Provided further, That the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development may waive the provisions of section 811 
     governing the terms and conditions of project rental 
     assistance and tenant-based assistance, except that the 
     initial contract term for such assistance shall not exceed 5 
     years in duration: Provided further, That amounts made 
     available under this heading shall be available for Real 
     Estate Assessment Center Inspections and inspection-related 
     activities associated with section 811 Capital Advance 
     Projects.


                    other assisted housing programs

                       rental housing assistance

       For amendments to contracts under section 101 of the 
     Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s) 
     and section 236(f)(2) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 
     1715z-1(f)(2)) in State-aided, non-insured rental housing 
     projects, $27,600,000, to remain available until expended.

[[Page H8319]]

                            rent supplement

                              (rescission)

       Of the amounts made available under the heading ``Rent 
     Supplement'' in Public Law 98-63 for amendments to contracts 
     under section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 
     1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s) and section 236(f)(2) of the National 
     Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1) in State-aided, non-insured 
     rental housing projects, $27,600,000 is rescinded.


                         Flexible Subsidy Fund

                          (transfer of funds)

       From the Rental Housing Assistance Fund, all uncommitted 
     balances of excess rental charges as of September 30, 2007, 
     and any collections made during fiscal year 2008 and all 
     subsequent fiscal years, shall be transferred to the Flexible 
     Subsidy Fund, as authorized by section 236(g) of the National 
     Housing Act.


                  Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund

       For necessary expenses as authorized by the National 
     Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 
     1974 (42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.), up to $16,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended, to be derived from the Manufactured 
     Housing Fees Trust Fund: Provided, That not to exceed the 
     total amount appropriated under this heading shall be 
     available from the general fund of the Treasury to the extent 
     necessary to incur obligations and make expenditures pending 
     the receipt of collections to the Fund pursuant to section 
     620 of such Act: Provided further, That the amount made 
     available under this heading from the general fund shall be 
     reduced as such collections are received during fiscal year 
     2008 so as to result in a final fiscal year 2008 
     appropriation from the general fund estimated at not more 
     than $0 and fees pursuant to such section 620 shall be 
     modified as necessary to ensure such a final fiscal year 2008 
     appropriation: Provided further, That for the dispute 
     resolution and installation programs, the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development may assess and collect fees 
     from any program participant: Provided further, That such 
     collections shall be deposited into the Fund, and the 
     Secretary, as provided herein, may use such collections, as 
     well as fees collected under section 620, for necessary 
     expenses of such Act: Provided further, That notwithstanding 
     the requirements of section 620 of such Act, the Secretary 
     may carry out responsibilities of the Secretary under such 
     Act through the use of approved service providers that are 
     paid directly by the recipients of their services.

                     Federal Housing Administration


               mutual mortgage insurance program account

                     (including transfers of funds)

       During fiscal year 2008, commitments to guarantee loans to 
     carry out the purposes of section 203(b) of the National 
     Housing Act, as amended, shall not exceed a loan principal of 
     $185,000,000,000.
       During fiscal year 2008, obligations to make direct loans 
     to carry out the purposes of section 204(g) of the National 
     Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1709), shall not exceed $50,000,000: 
     Provided, That the foregoing amount shall be for loans to 
     nonprofit and governmental entities in connection with sales 
     of single family real properties owned by the Secretary and 
     formerly insured under the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund.
       For administrative expenses necessary to carry out the 
     guaranteed and direct loan program, $351,450,000, of which 
     not to exceed $347,490,000 shall be transferred to the 
     appropriation for ``Salaries and Expenses''; and not to 
     exceed $3,960,000 shall be transferred to the appropriation 
     for ``Office of Inspector General''. In addition, for 
     administrative contract expenses, $77,400,000, of which 
     $25,550,000 shall be transferred to the Working Capital Fund, 
     and of which up to $5,000,000 shall be for education and 
     outreach of FHA single family loan products: Provided, That 
     to the extent guaranteed loan commitments exceed 
     $65,500,000,000 on or before April 1, 2008, an additional 
     $1,400 for administrative contract expenses shall be 
     available for each $1,000,000 in additional guaranteed loan 
     commitments (including a pro rata amount for any amount below 
     $1,000,000), but in no case shall funds made available by 
     this proviso exceed $30,000,000.


                General and Special Risk Program Account

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For the cost of guaranteed loans, as authorized by sections 
     238 and 519 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-3 
     and 1735c), including the cost of loan guarantee 
     modifications, as that term is defined in section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, $8,712,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That commitments to 
     guarantee loans shall not exceed $45,000,000,000 in total 
     loan principal, any part of which is to be guaranteed.
       Gross obligations for the principal amount of direct loans, 
     as authorized by sections 204(g), 207(l), 238, and 519(a) of 
     the National Housing Act, shall not exceed $50,000,000, of 
     which not to exceed $30,000,000 shall be for bridge financing 
     in connection with the sale of multifamily real properties 
     owned by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and 
     formerly insured under such Act; and of which not to exceed 
     $20,000,000 shall be for loans to nonprofit and governmental 
     entities in connection with the sale of single-family real 
     properties owned by the Secretary and formerly insured under 
     such Act.
       In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry 
     out the guaranteed and direct loan programs, $229,086,000, of 
     which $209,286,000 shall be transferred to the appropriation 
     for ``Salaries and Expenses''; and of which $19,800,000 shall 
     be transferred to the appropriation for ``Office of Inspector 
     General''.
       In addition, for administrative contract expenses necessary 
     to carry out the guaranteed and direct loan programs, 
     $78,111,000, of which $15,692,000 shall be transferred to the 
     Working Capital Fund: Provided, That to the extent guaranteed 
     loan commitments exceed $8,426,000,000 on or before April 1, 
     2008, an additional $1,980 for administrative contract 
     expenses shall be available for each $1,000,000 in additional 
     guaranteed loan commitments over $8,426,000,000 (including a 
     pro rata amount for any increment below $1,000,000), but in 
     no case shall funds made available by this proviso exceed 
     $14,400,000.

                Government National Mortgage Association


Guarantees of Mortgage-Backed Securities Loan Guarantee Program Account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       New commitments to issue guarantees to carry out the 
     purposes of section 306 of the National Housing Act, as 
     amended (12 U.S.C. 1721(g)), shall not exceed 
     $200,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2009.
       For administrative expenses necessary to carry out the 
     guaranteed mortgage-backed securities program, $10,700,000, 
     to be derived from the GNMA guarantees of mortgage-backed 
     securities guaranteed loan receipt account, of which not to 
     exceed $10,700,000, shall be transferred to the appropriation 
     for ``Salaries and Expenses''.

                    Policy Development and Research


                        Research and Technology

       For contracts, grants, and necessary expenses of programs 
     of research and studies relating to housing and urban 
     problems, not otherwise provided for, as authorized by title 
     V of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 
     1701z-1 et seq.), including carrying out the functions of the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under section 
     1(a)(1)(i) of Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1968, $58,087,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2009: Provided, That 
     of the total amount provided under this heading, $5,000,000 
     shall be for the Partnership for Advancing Technology in 
     Housing Initiative: Provided further, That of the funds made 
     available under this heading, $22,394,000 is for grants 
     pursuant to section 107 of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5307): Provided further, 
     That activities for the Partnership for Advancing Technology 
     in Housing Initiative shall be administered by the Office of 
     Policy Development and Research.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                   Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity


                        Fair Housing Activities

       For contracts, grants, and other assistance, not otherwise 
     provided for, as authorized by title VIII of the Civil Rights 
     Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 
     1988, and section 561 of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1987, $45,540,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2009, of which $20,180,000 shall be to 
     carry out activities pursuant to such section 561: Provided, 
     That notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development may assess and collect fees to cover 
     the costs of the Fair Housing Training Academy, and may use 
     such funds to provide such training: Provided further, That 
     no funds made available under this heading shall be used to 
     lobby the executive or legislative branches of the Federal 
     Government in connection with a specific contract, grant or 
     loan.


            Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Al Green of Texas

  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. 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. 6 offered by Mr. Al Green of Texas:
       Page 94, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,820,000)''.
       Page 94, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,820,000).
       Page 99, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $5,820,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman 
Obey, Subcommittee Chairman Olver, and Ranking Members Lewis and 
Knollenberg. I also would like to thank them especially for their 
leadership.
  Mr. Chairman, we understand that budgetary constraints are necessary 
and that budget challenges are a reality, just as invidious 
discrimination in housing is a reality. This is why Congress passed the 
Fair Housing Act of 1968.

[[Page H8320]]

  The Fair Housing Act prohibits housing discrimination not just on 
race, color and national origin, but also on religious, sexual status, 
disability and familial status. However, nearly 40 years after the 
passage of this act, 4 million fair housing violations occur annually, 
tens of thousands of complaints are filed, and most violations aren't 
investigated.
  Violations occur in the rental market when qualified renters are 
denied housing based upon invidious discrimination. Violations occur in 
the purchase market when qualified buyers are denied loans, pay more 
for loans, or are steered to the subprime market when they qualify for 
prime loans.
  This is why we need to fund the Fair Housing Initiative Program to 
the level authorized of $26 million. The Fair Housing Initiative 
Program allows for testing. This will allow us to have persons who are 
equally qualified, perhaps one is disabled and one is not, to go out 
and seek a loan or a rental property. If the disabled person is denied, 
and the person that follows who is not disabled receives the loan or 
the property, then we are gathering the empirical data necessary to 
show that the discrimination exists.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment would add $5.82 million to the bill to 
bring it to the $26 million authorized level.
  Mr. Chairman, the need is there, the authorization exists, and the 
time to act is here. Let us keep the American dream alive for all 
persons who are qualified. Let's do our part on our watch to prevent 
invidious discrimination in housing.
  I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. OLVER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I understand that the gentleman is going to withdraw 
this amendment. Is that the gentleman's intention?
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, it is. My hope is that the 
gentleman and I would be able to work together to see if there is some 
means by which it can be accommodated.

                              {time}  1245

  Mr. OLVER. If the gentleman will continue to yield, I thank the 
gentleman for that willingness to withdraw his amendment and for 
highlighting the issue that we have before us.
  We simply could not increase this amount this year because of the 
budget constraints. The budget proposal here is the same as the 2007 
enacted budget and slightly above the budget request by the 
administration. And the offset, the offset is in a place where there 
really isn't money to take from the offset to do this.
  I appreciate the gentleman's willingness to withdraw the amendment 
and will be happy to work with him to try to find money in conference.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I thank the chairman, and I look forward to 
working with the chairman so that we may seek an accommodation in 
conference.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                     Office of Lead Hazard Control


                         Lead Hazard Reduction

       For the Lead Hazard Reduction Program, as authorized by 
     section 1011 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard 
     Reduction Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 4852), $130,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2009, of which 
     $8,712,000 shall be for the Healthy Homes Initiative, 
     pursuant to sections 501 and 502 of the Housing and Urban 
     Development Act of 1970 that shall include research, studies, 
     testing, and demonstration efforts, including education and 
     outreach concerning lead-based paint poisoning and other 
     housing-related diseases and hazards: Provided, That for 
     purposes of environmental review, pursuant to the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and 
     other provisions of law that further the purposes of such 
     Act, a grant under the Healthy Homes Initiative, Operation 
     Lead Elimination Action Plan, or the Lead Technical Studies 
     program under this heading or under prior appropriations Acts 
     for such purposes under this heading, shall be considered to 
     be funds for a special project for purposes of section 305(c) 
     of the Multifamily Housing Property Disposition Reform Act of 
     1994 (42 U.S.C. 3547): Provided further, That of the total 
     amount made available under this heading, $48,000,000 shall 
     be made available on a competitive basis for areas with the 
     highest lead paint abatement needs, as identified by the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development as having: (1) the 
     highest number of occupied pre-1940 units of rental housing; 
     and (2) a disproportionately high number of documented cases 
     of lead-poisoned children: Provided further, That each 
     grantee receiving funds under the previous proviso shall 
     target those privately owned units and multifamily buildings 
     that are occupied by low-income families as defined under 
     section 3(b)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937: 
     Provided further, That not less than 90 percent of the funds 
     made available under this paragraph shall be used exclusively 
     for abatement, inspections, risk assessments, temporary 
     relocations and interim control of lead-based hazards as 
     defined by 42 U.S.C. 4851: Provided further, That each 
     recipient of funds provided under the first proviso shall 
     make a matching contribution in an amount not less than 25 
     percent: Provided further, That each applicant shall submit a 
     detailed plan and strategy that demonstrates adequate 
     capacity that is acceptable to the Secretary to carry out the 
     proposed use of funds pursuant to a notice of funding 
     availability.


                   Amendment Offered by Ms. Slaughter

  Ms. SLAUGHTER. 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 Ms. Slaughter:
       Page 95, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 95, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 97, line 11, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, first I want to give my thanks to 
Chairman Olver and to Mr. Knollenberg for doing a wonderful job on this 
bill.
  I intend to withdraw this amendment, but if I can just take a moment 
or two to discuss the importance of HUD's Office of Lead Hazard 
Control, I would like to do that.
  The funding is crucial in reaching our goal of eliminating childhood 
lead poisoning nationwide by 2010. The grants provided by HUD's Office 
of Lead Hazard Control allow cities and States to correct serious lead 
hazard in low-income and high-risk homes.
  Make no mistake, Mr. Chairman, this is not just an isolated problem. 
Lead poisoning affects over 250,000 American children under the age of 
5 each and every year. High levels of lead in the blood have been 
linked to childhood asthma, brain damage, hearing loss, hyperactivity, 
developmental delays, and in extreme cases, exposure to lead has caused 
seizures, comas, and even death.
  Mr. Chairman, this is simply unacceptable.
  In my district alone, over 2,000 children fall victim to lead 
poisoning every year. Over half of all the homes in Niagara and Erie 
counties were built before 1950 and are therefore very likely to 
contain lead. And just in Erie County, 1,000 children have unsafe lead 
levels in their blood.
  The city of Rochester is among the top 10 cities in the United States 
with the worst lead paint problems. In 2004, 900 children in Monroe 
County were reported to have high blood lead levels. We have a city 
ordinance in effect to try to deal with that, but we have not enough 
money obviously to take action.
  The grants are so important. They are targeted to help the most 
vulnerable of our citizens, children under 5 years of age. But in order 
to be more effective, they have to have adequate funding. Since the 
bill before us only funds the Office of Lead Hazard Control at $130 
million, we wanted to put in this amendment.
  But I commend the chairman for putting together this thoughtful and 
solid bill, and I hope we can work together in conference to try to do 
more.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.


                  Announcement by the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of clause 18, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were 
postponed, in the following order:
  An amendment by Mr. Mica of Florida.

[[Page H8321]]

  An amendment by Mrs. Bachmann of Minnesota.
  An amendment by Mr. Flake of Arizona.
  An amendment by Mr. Flake of Arizona.
  An amendment by Mr. Chabot of Ohio.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Mica

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Mica) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Mica:
       Page 18, beginning on line 9, strike the colon and all that 
     follows through line 21 and insert a period.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 201, 
noes 217, not voting 18, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 691]

                               AYES--201

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachmann
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Coble
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Everett
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moore (KS)
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Paul
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sali
     Saxton
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--217

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Faleomavaega
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Klein (FL)
     Kucinich
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Wexler
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--18

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Brown (SC)
     Clarke
     Cole (OK)
     Cubin
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Gilchrest
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Melancon
     Myrick
     Pearce
     Pence
     Space
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1314

  Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California, Mr. GRIJALVA, Ms. 
WATERS, and Messrs. HODES, GUTIERREZ and PERLMUTTER changed their vote 
from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. EVERETT changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                   Amendment Offered by Mrs. Bachmann

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
Minnesota (Mrs. Bachmann) on which further proceedings were postponed 
and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mrs. Bachmann:
       Page 38, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $106,000,000)''.
       Page 83, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $106,000,000)''.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Chair reminds Members this is a 2-minute 
vote and will be followed by 2-minute votes. Please remain in the 
Chamber.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 110, 
noes 308, not voting 18, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 692]

                               AYES--110

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Bachmann
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Carter
     Conaway
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Deal (GA)
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Everett
     Feeney
     Flake
     Fortuno
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hulshof
     Issa
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Paul
     Pearce
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Ramstad
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Tancredo
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Walden (OR)
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)

[[Page H8322]]



                               NOES--308

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castle
     Castor
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Faleomavaega
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayes
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Price (NC)
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rohrabacher
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (OH)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--18

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Boyd (FL)
     Brown (SC)
     Cardoza
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Gilchrest
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Space
     Young (AK)


                  Announcement by the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised there is 1 
minute remaining.

                              {time}  1320

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Flake) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Flake:
       Page 38, strike line 5 and all that follows through page 
     41, line 18.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 94, 
noes 328, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 693]

                                AYES--94

     Akin
     Bachmann
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Carter
     Chabot
     Conaway
     Culberson
     Davis, David
     Deal (GA)
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Everett
     Feeney
     Flake
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gingrey
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Issa
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Keller
     Kingston
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Paul
     Pearce
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Poe
     Price (GA)
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Reichert
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Smith (TX)
     Tancredo
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)

                               NOES--328

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castle
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Faleomavaega
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayes
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton

[[Page H8323]]


     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Brown (SC)
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Gilchrest
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Pence
     Space
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1325

  Mr. SMITH of Nebraska changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Flake) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Flake:
       Page 41, line 26, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $425,000,000)''.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 104, 
noes 312, not voting 20, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 694]

                               AYES--104

     Akin
     Bachmann
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Carter
     Chabot
     Coble
     Conaway
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Deal (GA)
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Everett
     Feeney
     Flake
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Gingrey
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Paul
     Pearce
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Poe
     Price (GA)
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Reichert
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)

                               NOES--312

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castle
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Faleomavaega
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayes
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--20

     Abercrombie
     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Brown (SC)
     Clarke
     Cleaver
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Ellison
     Gilchrest
     Hare
     Higgins
     Honda
     Kaptur
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Pence
     Space
     Waxman
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1328

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Chabot

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Chabot) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Chabot:
       Page 61, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $330,000,000)''.
       Page 61, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $330,000,000)''.
       Page 61, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $330,000,000)''.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 121, 
noes 300, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 695]

                               AYES--121

     Akin
     Bachmann
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bilbray
     Blackburn
     Boehner
     Boozman
     Brady (TX)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Chabot
     Coble
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis, David
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Everett
     Feeney
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hunter
     Issa
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Latham
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McHenry
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Paul
     Pearce
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Poe
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Reynolds
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Walberg
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)

[[Page H8324]]


     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Wicker
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--300

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Bonner
     Bono
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Lincoln
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Faleomavaega
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayes
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Platts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Brown (SC)
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Gilchrest
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Pence
     Rangel
     Space
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1333

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder 
of the bill through page 120, line 5, be considered as read, printed in 
the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Ross). Is there objection to the request of 
the gentleman from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  The text of that portion of the bill is as follows:

                     Management and Administration


                         Salaries and Expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary administrative and non-administrative 
     expenses of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
     not otherwise provided for, including purchase of uniforms, 
     or allowances therefore, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles; services as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 3109; and not to exceed $25,000 for official reception 
     and representation expenses, $1,211,379,650, of which 
     $556,776,000 shall be provided from the various funds of the 
     Federal Housing Administration, $10,700,000 shall be provided 
     from funds of the Government National Mortgage Association, 
     $743,000 shall be from the ``Community Development Loan 
     Guarantee Program'' account, $148,500 shall be provided by 
     transfer from the ``Native American Housing Block Grants'' 
     account, $247,500 shall be provided by transfer from the 
     ``Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program'' account, and 
     $34,650 shall be transferred from the ``Native Hawaiian 
     housing loan guarantee fund'' account: Provided, That no 
     official or employee of the Department shall be designated as 
     an allotment holder unless the Office of the Chief Financial 
     Officer has determined that such allotment holder has 
     implemented an adequate system of funds control and has 
     received training in funds control procedures and directives: 
     Provided further, That the Chief Financial Officer shall 
     establish positive control of and maintain adequate systems 
     of accounting for appropriations and other available funds as 
     required by 31 U.S.C. 1514: Provided further, That for 
     purposes of funds control and determining whether a violation 
     exists under the Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S.C. 1341 et 
     seq.), the point of obligation shall be the executed 
     agreement or contract, except with respect to insurance and 
     guarantee programs, certain types of salaries and expenses 
     funding, and incremental funding that is authorized under an 
     executed agreement or contract, and shall be designated in 
     the approved funds control plan: Provided further, That the 
     Chief Financial Officer shall: (1) appoint qualified 
     personnel to conduct investigations of potential or actual 
     violations; (2) establish minimum training requirements and 
     other qualifications for personnel that may be appointed to 
     conduct investigations; (3) establish guidelines and 
     timeframes for the conduct and completion of investigations; 
     (4) prescribe the content, format and other requirements for 
     the submission of final reports on violations; and (5) 
     prescribe such additional policies and procedures as may be 
     required for conducting investigations of, and administering, 
     processing, and reporting on, potential and actual violations 
     of the Anti-Deficiency Act and all other statutes and 
     regulations governing the obligation and expenditure of funds 
     made available in this or any other Act: Provided further, 
     That up to $15,000,000 may be transferred to the Working 
     Capital Fund: Provided further, That the Secretary shall fill 
     7 out of 10 vacancies at the GS-14 and GS-15 levels until the 
     total number of GS-14 and GS-15 positions in the Department 
     has been reduced from the number of GS-14 and GS-15 positions 
     on the date of enactment of Public Law 106-377 by 2\1/2\ 
     percent.


                          Working Capital Fund

       For additional capital for the Working Capital Fund (42 
     U.S.C. 3535) for the development of, modifications to, and 
     infrastructure for Department-wide information technology 
     systems, for the continuing operation and maintenance of both 
     Department-wide and program-specific information systems, and 
     for program-related development activities, $125,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2009: Provided, That any 
     amounts transferred to this Fund under this Act shall remain 
     available until expended: Provided further, That any amounts 
     transferred to this Fund from amounts appropriated by 
     previously enacted appropriations Acts or from within this 
     Act may be used only for the purposes specified under this 
     Fund, in addition to the purposes for which such amounts were 
     appropriated.


                      Office of Inspector General

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the Inspector General Act of 1978, 
     $113,760,000, of which $23,760,000 shall be provided from the 
     various funds of the Federal Housing Administration: 
     Provided, That the Inspector General shall have independent 
     authority over all personnel issues within this office.

             Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight


                         Salaries and Expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For carrying out the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial 
     Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, including not to exceed 
     $500 for official reception and representation expenses, 
     $66,000,000, to remain available until expended, to be 
     derived from the Federal Housing Enterprises Oversight Fund: 
     Provided, That the Director shall submit a spending plan for 
     the amounts provided under this heading no later than January 
     15, 2008: Provided further, That not less than 80 percent of 
     the total amount made available under this heading shall be 
     used only for examination, supervision, and capital oversight 
     of the enterprises (as such term is defined in section 1303 
     of the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and 
     Soundness Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4502)) to ensure that the 
     enterprises are operating in a financially safe and sound 
     manner and complying with the capital requirements under 
     subtitle B of such Act: Provided further, That not to exceed 
     the amount provided herein shall be available from the 
     general fund of the Treasury to the extent necessary to incur 
     obligations and make expenditures pending the receipt of 
     collections to the Fund: Provided further, That the general 
     fund amount shall be reduced as collections are received 
     during

[[Page H8325]]

     the fiscal year so as to result in a final appropriation from 
     the general fund estimated at not more than $0.

    General Provisions--Department of Housing and Urban Development

       Sec. 201. Fifty percent of the amounts of budget authority, 
     or in lieu thereof 50 percent of the cash amounts associated 
     with such budget authority, that are recaptured from projects 
     described in section 1012(a) of the Stewart B. McKinney 
     Homeless Assistance Amendments Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 1437 
     note) shall be rescinded or in the case of cash, shall be 
     remitted to the Treasury, and such amounts of budget 
     authority or cash recaptured and not rescinded or remitted to 
     the Treasury shall be used by State housing finance agencies 
     or local governments or local housing agencies with projects 
     approved by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     for which settlement occurred after January 1, 1992, in 
     accordance with such section. Notwithstanding the previous 
     sentence, the Secretary may award up to 15 percent of the 
     budget authority or cash recaptured and not rescinded or 
     remitted to the Treasury to provide project owners with 
     incentives to refinance their project at a lower interest 
     rate.
       Sec. 202. None of the amounts made available under this Act 
     may be used during fiscal year 2008 to investigate or 
     prosecute under the Fair Housing Act any otherwise lawful 
     activity engaged in by one or more persons, including the 
     filing or maintaining of a non-frivolous legal action, that 
     is engaged in solely for the purpose of achieving or 
     preventing action by a Government official or entity, or a 
     court of competent jurisdiction.
       Sec. 203. (a) Notwithstanding section 854(c)(1)(A) of the 
     AIDS Housing Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. 12903(c)(1)(A)), from 
     any amounts made available under this title for fiscal year 
     2008 that are allocated under such section, the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development shall allocate and make a 
     grant, in the amount determined under subsection (b), for any 
     State that--
       (1) received an allocation in a prior fiscal year under 
     clause (ii) of such section; and
       (2) is not otherwise eligible for an allocation for fiscal 
     year 2008 under such clause (ii) because the areas in the 
     State outside of the metropolitan statistical areas that 
     qualify under clause (i) in fiscal year 2008 do not have the 
     number of cases of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) 
     required under such clause.
       (b) The amount of the allocation and grant for any State 
     described in subsection (a) shall be an amount based on the 
     cumulative number of AIDS cases in the areas of that State 
     that are outside of metropolitan statistical areas that 
     qualify under clause (i) of such section 854(c)(1)(A) in 
     fiscal year 2008, in proportion to AIDS cases among cities 
     and States that qualify under clauses (i) and (ii) of such 
     section and States deemed eligible under subsection (a).
       (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the amount 
     allocated for fiscal year 2008 under section 854(c) of the 
     AIDS Housing Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. 12903(c)), to the 
     City of New York, New York, on behalf of the New York-Wayne-
     White Plains, New York-New Jersey Metropolitan Division 
     (hereafter ``metropolitan division'') of the New York-Newark-
     Edison, NY-NJ-PA Metropolitan Statistical Area, shall be 
     adjusted by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     by: (1) allocating to the City of Jersey City, New Jersey, 
     the proportion of the metropolitan area's or division's 
     amount that is based on the number of cases of AIDS reported 
     in the portion of the metropolitan area or division that is 
     located in Hudson County, New Jersey, and adjusting for the 
     proportion of the metropolitan division's high incidence 
     bonus if this area in New Jersey also has a higher than 
     average per capita incidence of AIDS; and (2) allocating to 
     the City of Paterson, New Jersey, the proportion of the 
     metropolitan area's or division's amount that is based on the 
     number of cases of AIDS reported in the portion of the 
     metropolitan area or division that is located in Bergen 
     County and Passaic County, New Jersey, and adjusting for the 
     proportion of the metropolitan division's high incidence 
     bonus if this area in New Jersey also has a higher than 
     average per capita incidence of AIDS. The recipient cities 
     shall use amounts allocated under this subsection to carry 
     out eligible activities under section 855 of the AIDS Housing 
     Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. 12904) in their respective 
     portions of the metropolitan division that is located in New 
     Jersey.
       (d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the amount 
     allocated for fiscal year 2008 under section 854(c) of the 
     AIDS Housing Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. 12903(c)) to areas 
     with a higher than average per capita incidence of AIDS, 
     shall be adjusted by the Secretary on the basis of area 
     incidence reported over a three year period.
       Sec. 204. Except as explicitly provided in law, any grant, 
     cooperative agreement or other assistance made pursuant to 
     title II of this Act shall be made on a competitive basis and 
     in accordance with section 102 of the Department of Housing 
     and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3545).
       Sec. 205. Funds of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development subject to the Government Corporation Control Act 
     or section 402 of the Housing Act of 1950 shall be available, 
     without regard to the limitations on administrative expenses, 
     for legal services on a contract or fee basis, and for 
     utilizing and making payment for services and facilities of 
     the Federal National Mortgage Association, Government 
     National Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage 
     Corporation, Federal Financing Bank, Federal Reserve banks or 
     any member thereof, Federal Home Loan banks, and any insured 
     bank within the meaning of the Federal Deposit Insurance 
     Corporation Act (12 U.S.C. 1811 et seq.).
       Sec. 206. Unless otherwise provided for in this Act or 
     through a reprogramming of funds, no part of any 
     appropriation for the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development shall be available for any program, project or 
     activity in excess of amounts set forth in the budget 
     estimates submitted to Congress.
       Sec. 207. Corporations and agencies of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development which are subject to the 
     Government Corporation Control Act, are hereby authorized to 
     make such expenditures, within the limits of funds and 
     borrowing authority available to each such corporation or 
     agency and in accordance with law, and to make such contracts 
     and commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations as 
     provided by section 104 of such Act as may be necessary in 
     carrying out the programs set forth in the budget for 2008 
     for such corporation or agency except as hereinafter 
     provided: Provided, That collections of these corporations 
     and agencies may be used for new loan or mortgage purchase 
     commitments only to the extent expressly provided for in this 
     Act (unless such loans are in support of other forms of 
     assistance provided for in this or prior appropriations 
     Acts), except that this proviso shall not apply to the 
     mortgage insurance or guaranty operations of these 
     corporations, or where loans or mortgage purchases are 
     necessary to protect the financial interest of the United 
     States Government.
       Sec. 208. None of the funds provided in this title for 
     technical assistance, training, or management improvements 
     may be obligated or expended unless the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development provides to the Committees on 
     Appropriations a description of each proposed activity and a 
     detailed budget estimate of the costs associated with each 
     program, project or activity as part of the Budget 
     Justifications. For fiscal year 2008, the Secretary shall 
     transmit this information to the Committees by March 15, 2008 
     for 30 days of review.
       Sec. 209. The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall provide quarterly reports to the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations regarding all uncommitted, 
     unobligated, recaptured and excess funds in each program and 
     activity within the jurisdiction of the Department and shall 
     submit additional, updated budget information to these 
     Committees upon request.
       Sec. 210. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the amount allocated for fiscal year 2008 under section 
     854(c) of the AIDS Housing Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. 
     12903(c)), to the City of Wilmington, Delaware, on behalf of 
     the Wilmington, Delaware-Maryland-New Jersey Metropolitan 
     Division (``metropolitan division''), shall be adjusted by 
     the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development by allocating 
     to the State of New Jersey the proportion of the metropolitan 
     division's amount that is based on the number of cases of 
     AIDS reported in the portion of the metropolitan division 
     that is located in New Jersey, and adjusting for the 
     proportion of the metropolitan division's high incidence 
     bonus if this area in New Jersey also has a higher than 
     average per capita incidence of AIDS. The State of New Jersey 
     shall use amounts allocated to the State under this 
     subsection to carry out eligible activities under section 855 
     of the AIDS Housing Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. 12904) in the 
     portion of the metropolitan division that is located in New 
     Jersey.
       (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall allocate to 
     Wake County, North Carolina, the amounts that otherwise would 
     be allocated for fiscal year 2008 under section 854(c) of the 
     AIDS Housing Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. 12903(c)) to the City 
     of Raleigh, North Carolina, on behalf of the Raleigh-Cary, 
     North Carolina Metropolitan Statistical Area. Any amounts 
     allocated to Wake County shall be used to carry out eligible 
     activities under section 855 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 12904) 
     within such metropolitan statistical area.
       (c) Notwithstanding section 854(c) of the AIDS Housing 
     Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. 12903(c)), the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development may adjust the allocation of 
     the amounts that otherwise would be allocated for fiscal year 
     2008 under section 854(c) of such Act, upon the written 
     request of an applicant, in conjunction with the State(s), 
     for a formula allocation on behalf of a metropolitan 
     statistical area, to designate the State or States in which 
     the metropolitan statistical area is located as the eligible 
     grantee(s) of the allocation. In the case that a metropolitan 
     statistical area involves more than one State, such amounts 
     allocated to each State shall be in proportion to the number 
     of cases of AIDS reported in the portion of the metropolitan 
     statistical area located in that State. Any amounts allocated 
     to a State under this section shall be used to carry out 
     eligible activities within the portion of the metropolitan 
     statistical area located in that State.
       Sec. 211. The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall submit an annual report no later than August 30, 2008 
     and annually thereafter to the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations regarding the number of Federally assisted 
     units under

[[Page H8326]]

     lease and the per unit cost of these units to the Department 
     of Housing and Urban Development.
       Sec. 212. The Department of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall submit the Department's fiscal year 2009 congressional 
     budget justifications to the Committees on Appropriations of 
     the House of Representatives and the Senate using the 
     identical structure provided under this Act and only in 
     accordance with the direction specified in the report 
     accompanying this Act.
       Sec. 213. Incremental vouchers previously made available 
     under the heading ``Housing Certificate Fund'' or renewed 
     under the heading, ``Tenant-Based Rental Assistance,'' for 
     non-elderly disabled families shall, to the extent 
     practicable, continue to be provided to non-elderly disabled 
     families upon turnover.
       Sec. 214. A public housing agency or such other entity that 
     administers Federal housing assistance in the States of 
     Alaska, Iowa, and Mississippi shall not be required to 
     include a resident of public housing or a recipient of 
     assistance provided under section 8 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 on the board of directors or a similar 
     governing board of such agency or entity as required under 
     section (2)(b) of such Act. Each public housing agency or 
     other entity that administers Federal housing assistance 
     under section 8 in the States of Alaska, Iowa, and 
     Mississippi shall establish an advisory board of not less 
     than 6 residents of public housing or recipients of section 8 
     assistance to provide advice and comment to the public 
     housing agency or other administering entity on issues 
     related to public housing and section 8. Such advisory board 
     shall meet not less than quarterly.
       Sec. 215. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     subject to the conditions listed in subsection (b), for 
     fiscal years 2008 and 2009, the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development may authorize the transfer of project-based 
     assistance, debt and statutorily required low-income and very 
     low-income use restrictions, associated with one multifamily 
     housing project to another multifamily housing project.
       (b) The transfer authorized in subsection (a) is subject to 
     the following conditions:
       (1) the number of low-income and very low-income units and 
     the net dollar amount of Federal assistance provided by the 
     transferring project shall remain the same in the receiving 
     project;
       (2) the transferring project shall, as determined by the 
     Secretary, be either physically obsolete or economically non-
     viable;
       (3) the receiving project shall meet or exceed applicable 
     physical standards established by the Secretary;
       (4) the owner or mortgagor of the transferring project 
     shall notify and consult with the tenants residing in the 
     transferring project and provide a certification of approval 
     by all appropriate local governmental officials;
       (5) the tenants of the transferring project who remain 
     eligible for assistance to be provided by the receiving 
     project shall not be required to vacate their units in the 
     transferring project until new units in the receiving project 
     are available for occupancy;
       (6) the Secretary determines that this transfer is in the 
     best interest of the tenants;
       (7) if either the transferring project or the receiving 
     project meets the condition specified in subsection 
     (c)(2)(A), any lien on the receiving project resulting from 
     additional financing obtained by the owner shall be 
     subordinate to any FHA-insured mortgage lien transferred to, 
     or placed on, such project by the Secretary;
       (8) if the transferring project meets the requirements of 
     subsection (c)(2)(E), the owner or mortgagor of the receiving 
     project shall execute and record either a continuation of the 
     existing use agreement or a new use agreement for the project 
     where, in either case, any use restrictions in such agreement 
     are of no lesser duration than the existing use restrictions;
       (9) any financial risk to the FHA General and Special Risk 
     Insurance Fund, as determined by the Secretary, would be 
     reduced as a result of a transfer completed under this 
     section; and
       (10) the Secretary determines that Federal liability with 
     regard to this project will not be increased.
       (c) For purposes of this section--
       (1) the terms ``low-income'' and ``very low-income'' shall 
     have the meanings provided by the statute and/or regulations 
     governing the program under which the project is insured or 
     assisted;
       (2) the term ``multifamily housing project'' means housing 
     that meets one of the following conditions--
       (A) housing that is subject to a mortgage insured under the 
     National Housing Act;
       (B) housing that has project-based assistance attached to 
     the structure;
       (C) housing that is assisted under section 202 of the 
     Housing Act of 1959 as amended by section 801 of the 
     Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable Housing Act;
       (D) housing that is assisted under section 202 of the 
     Housing Act of 1959, as such section existed before the 
     enactment of the Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable 
     Housing Act; or
       (E) housing or vacant land that is subject to a use 
     agreement;
       (3) the term ``project-based assistance'' means--
       (A) assistance provided under section 8(b) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937;
       (B) assistance for housing constructed or substantially 
     rehabilitated pursuant to assistance provided under section 
     8(b)(2) of such Act (as such section existed immediately 
     before October 1, 1983);
       (C) rent supplement payments under section 101 of the 
     Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965;
       (D) additional assistance payments under section 236(f)(2) 
     of the National Housing Act; and,
       (E) assistance payments made under section 202(c)(2) of the 
     Housing Act of 1959;
       (4) the term ``receiving project'' means the multifamily 
     housing project to which the project-based assistance, debt, 
     and statutorily required use low-income and very low-income 
     restrictions are to be transferred;
       (5) the term ``transferring project'' means the multifamily 
     housing project which is transferring the project-based 
     assistance, debt and the statutorily required low-income and 
     very low-income use restrictions to the receiving project; 
     and,
       (6) the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development.
       Sec. 216. The funds made available for Native Alaskans 
     under the heading ``Native American Housing Block Grants'' in 
     title III of this Act shall be allocated to the same Native 
     Alaskan housing block grant recipients that received funds in 
     fiscal year 2005.
       Sec. 217. Incremental vouchers previously made available 
     under the heading, ``Housing Certificate Fund'' or renewed 
     under the heading, ``Tenant-Based Rental Assistance'', for 
     family unification shall, to the extent practicable, continue 
     to be provided for family unification.
       Sec. 218. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act or any other Act may be used to develop 
     or impose policies or procedures, including an account 
     structure, that subjects the Government National Mortgage 
     Association to the requirements of the Federal Credit Reform 
     Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 661 et seq.). This section shall not be 
     construed to exempt that entity from credit subsidy budgeting 
     or from budget presentation requirements previously adopted.
       Sec. 219. (a) No assistance shall be provided under section 
     8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f) 
     to any individual who--
       (1) is enrolled as a student at an institution of higher 
     education (as defined under section 102 of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002));
       (2) is under 24 years of age;
       (3) is not a veteran;
       (4) is unmarried;
       (5) does not have a dependent child;
       (6) is not a person with disabilities, as such term is 
     defined in section 3(b)(3)(E) of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(3)(E)) and was not receiving 
     assistance under such section 8 as of November 30, 2005; and
       (7) is not otherwise individually eligible, or has parents 
     who, individually or jointly, are not eligible, to receive 
     assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f).
       (b) For purposes of determining the eligibility of a person 
     to receive assistance under section 8 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f), any financial 
     assistance (in excess of amounts received for tuition) that 
     an individual receives under the Higher Education Act of 1965 
     (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.), from private sources, or an 
     institution of higher education (as defined under the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002)), shall be considered 
     income to that individual, except for a person over the age 
     of 23 with dependent children.
       (c) Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall issue final regulations to carry out the provisions of 
     this section.
       Sec. 220. Notwithstanding the limitation in the first 
     sentence of section 255(g) of the National Housing Act (12 
     U.S.C. 1715z-20(g)), the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development may, until September 30, 2008, insure and enter 
     into commitments to insure mortgages under section 255 of the 
     National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-20).
       Sec. 221. The National Housing Act is amended--
       (1) in sections 207(c)(3), 213(b)(2)(B)(i), 
     221(d)(3)(ii)(II), 221(d)(4)(ii)(II), 231(c)(2)(B), and 
     234(e)(3)(B) (12 U.S.C. 1713(c)(3), 1715e(b)(2)(B)(i), 
     1715l(d)(3)(ii)(II), 1715l(d)(4)(ii)(II), 1715v(c)(2)(B), and 
     1715y(e)(3)(B))--
       (A) by striking ``140 percent'' each place such term 
     appears and inserting ``170 percent''; and
       (B) by striking ``170 percent in high cost areas'' each 
     place such term appears and inserting ``215 percent in high 
     cost areas''; and
       (2) in section 220(d)(3)(B)(iii)(III) (12 U.S.C. 
     1715k(d)(3)(B)(iii)(III)) by striking ``206A'' and all that 
     follows through ``project-by-project basis'' and inserting 
     the following: ``206A of this Act) by not to exceed 170 
     percent in any geographical area where the Secretary finds 
     that cost levels so require and by not to exceed 170 percent, 
     or 215 percent in high cost areas, where the Secretary 
     determines it necessary on a project-by-project basis''.
       Sec. 222. (a) During fiscal year 2008, in the provision of 
     rental assistance under section 8(o) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)) in connection with a 
     program to demonstrate the economy and effectiveness of 
     providing such assistance for use in assisted living 
     facilities that is carried out in the counties of the State 
     of Michigan notwithstanding paragraphs (3) and (18)(B)(iii) 
     of such section 8(o), a family residing in an assisted living 
     facility in any

[[Page H8327]]

     such county, on behalf of which a public housing agency 
     provides assistance pursuant to section 8(o)(18) of such Act, 
     may be required, at the time the family initially receives 
     such assistance, to pay rent in an amount exceeding 40 
     percent of the monthly adjusted income of the family by such 
     a percentage or amount as the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development determines to be appropriate.
       Sec. 223. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     recipient of a grant under section 202b of the Housing Act of 
     1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q-2) after December 26, 2000, in 
     accordance with the unnumbered paragraph at the end of 
     section 202(b) of such Act, may, at its option, establish a 
     single-asset nonprofit entity to own the project and may lend 
     the grant funds to such entity, which may be a private 
     nonprofit organization described in section 831 of the 
     American Homeownership and Economic Opportunity Act of 2000.
       Sec. 224. The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall give priority consideration to applications from the 
     housing authorities of the Counties of San Bernardino and 
     Santa Clara and the City of San Jose, California to 
     participate in the Moving to Work Demonstration Agreement 
     under section 204, title V, of the Omnibus Consolidated 
     Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-
     134, April 26, 1996): Provided, That upon turnover, existing 
     requirements on the reissuance of section 8 vouchers shall be 
     maintained to ensure that not less than 75 percent of all 
     vouchers shall be made available to extremely low-income 
     families.


         Amendment Offered by Mr. Gary G. Miller of California

  Mr. GARY G. MILLER 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 Mr. Gary G. Miller of California:
       At the end of title II (before the short title), add the 
     following new section:
       Sec. ___. The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     may, notwithstanding any other provision of law, approve 
     additional Moving to Work Demonstration Agreements, which are 
     entered into between a public housing agency and the 
     Secretary under section 204 of Departments of Veterans 
     Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996 (as contained in section 
     101(e) of the Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and 
     Appropriations Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-134; 42 U.S.C. 
     1437f note)), but at no time may the number of active Moving 
     to Work Demonstration Agreements exceed 32.

  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A point of order is reserved.
  Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Gary G. Miller) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, the Moving to Work 
program has enabled Public Housing Authorities, PHAs, to create jobs 
for residents, add affordable housing stock, and help families build 
savings. Such efforts have gained recognition as being very successful 
in serving more families and helping recipients to self-sufficiency. 
The innovation and flexibility of the Moving to Work program helps more 
families realize self-sufficiency through locally oriented programs 
instead of HUD's one-size-fits-all approach.
  Despite these benefits, only 24 of the more than 3,000 PHAs in the 
Nation are participating in the Moving to Work program. This amendment 
merely clarifies existing law in order to eliminate confusion at HUD 
about the number of PHAs authorized to be designated as Moving to Work. 
Congress has authorized 32 PHAs to participate in the Moving to Work 
program. Despite this clear intent to have 32 PHAs be designated as 
Moving to Work, due to what I view as a misinterpretation at HUD, there 
are only 24 agencies that are currently allowed to participate in the 
Moving to Work program. Once PHAs leave the Moving to Work program, HUD 
has said that no new agencies can be selected to fill their vacancies.
  This simple and straightforward amendment would clarify Congress's 
intent to require HUD to implement Moving to Work at its fully 
authorized level. The amendment directs the Secretary of HUD to 
promptly approve new PHAs to participate in the Moving to Work program 
whenever the number of agencies is less than the total number and level 
we have authorized at 32. I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment.
  Does the chairman plan on opposing this amendment?
  Mr. OLVER. If the gentleman will yield, I do intend to insist upon 
the point of order.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Then if the gentleman is going to 
raise a point of order, I will withdraw the amendment.
  May I have a colloquy with the chairman?
  Mr. OLVER. I will be happy to engage in a colloquy.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Chairman Olver, the Moving to Work 
program has enabled Public Housing Authorities to create jobs for 
residents, add affordable housing stock, and help families build 
savings. Such efforts have gained recognition as being very successful 
and serving more families and helping recipients to self-sufficiency.
  Congress has authorized 32 PHAs to participate in the Moving to Work 
program. Unfortunately, due to the misinterpretation at HUD, there are 
only 24 PHAs that are allowed to participate in the Moving to Work 
program.
  Mr. Chairman, would you agree that it is the intent of Congress that 
HUD must implement the Moving to Work program at its fully authorized 
level?
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, to the gentleman who is offering the 
amendment and offering to withdraw it, I want to say that I am a 
supporter of Moving to Work; but the language here is clearly 
authorizing language, and we have not been accepting authorizing 
language at any point in this debate.
  So, I would be very happy to work with the gentleman on the Moving to 
Work program, and urge him to withdraw the amendment.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I thank the gentleman. If PHAs move 
off the Moving to Work program, HUD must immediately solicit new 
applicants to keep the program at full force, and I hope this colloquy 
will eliminate confusion at HUD about the number of PHAs authorized to 
be designated as Moving to Work.
  Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I ask to engage the 
chairman of Transportation and HUD in another colloquy.
  Mr. Chairman, I have serious concerns about the administration's 
proposal to increase the Federal Housing Administration's multifamily 
mortgage insurance premium by 35 percent for fiscal year 2008.
  The administration proposed a similar increase last year, and 
rescinded it after hearing from Members of Congress and those in the 
industry most affected. I believe we again do not have sufficient 
information about the impact of this proposal on affordable rental 
housing for American workforces.
  The chairman of the Financial Services Committee Mr. Frank and I are 
currently circulating a letter to HUD among our colleagues opposing the 
increase in the premium. As of Monday, we have 106 Members of Congress 
on record opposing the increase. A similar letter sent to HUD was 
recently signed by 38 Senators.
  We believe an increase in the premium will impact the communities 
where housing would be built as well as tenants in those projects. HUD 
needs to perform a full assessment of the likely impact of such a 
premium increase on the volume of multifamily rental housing 
development, and the consequential effects of higher financing costs on 
rents to be borne by moderate-income residents.
  This thorough assessment of the potential adverse effects of the 
proposed premium increase needs to be submitted to the appropriate 
congressional committees, giving Congress the opportunity to evaluate 
the proposal. This would need to happen before allowing the increase to 
go into effect by simple notice.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I would say to the gentleman from California 
that I very much respect the passion

[[Page H8328]]

for which he is working on this along with the chairman of the 
Financial Services Committee, and I look forward to working with you on 
this issue as we proceed.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the bill 
through page 127, line 3, 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 Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  The text of that portion of the bill is as follows:

       This title may be cited as the ``Department of Housing and 
     Urban Development Appropriations Act, 2008''.

                               TITLE III

                            RELATED AGENCIES

       Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For expenses necessary for the Architectural and 
     Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, as authorized by 
     section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 
     $6,150,000: Provided, That, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, there may be credited to this appropriation 
     funds received for publications and training expenses.

                      Federal Maritime Commission


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Maritime Commission 
     as authorized by section 201(d) of the Merchant Marine Act, 
     1936 (46 U.S.C. App. 1111), including services as authorized 
     by 5 U.S.C. 3109; hire of passenger motor vehicles as 
     authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343(b); and uniforms or allowances 
     therefore, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902, $22,072,000: 
     Provided, That not to exceed $2,000 shall be available for 
     official reception and representation expenses.

                  National Transportation Safety Board


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the National Transportation 
     Safety Board, including hire of passenger motor vehicles and 
     aircraft; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at 
     rates for individuals not to exceed the per diem rate 
     equivalent to the rate for a GS-15; uniforms, or allowances 
     therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-5902) 
     $85,000,000, of which not to exceed $2,000 may be used for 
     official reception and representation expenses. The amounts 
     made available to the National Transportation Safety Board in 
     this Act include amounts necessary to make lease payments due 
     in fiscal year 2008 only, on an obligation incurred in fiscal 
     year 2001 for a capital lease.

                 Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation


          Payment to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation

       For payment to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation 
     for use in neighborhood reinvestment activities, as 
     authorized by the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 8101-8107), $119,800,000, of which $5,000,000 
     shall be for a multi-family rental housing program.

           United States Interagency Council on Homelessness


                           Operating Expenses

       For necessary expenses (including payment of salaries, 
     authorized travel, hire of passenger motor vehicles, the 
     rental of conference rooms, and the employment of experts and 
     consultants under section 3109 of title 5, United States 
     Code) of the United States Interagency Council on 
     Homelessness in carrying out the functions pursuant to title 
     II of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, as amended, 
     $2,000,000.
       Title II of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, as 
     amended, is amended in section 209 by striking ``2007'' and 
     inserting ``2008''.

                                TITLE IV

                      GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT


                     (including transfers of funds)

       Sec. 401. Such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 
     2008 pay raises for programs funded in this Act shall be 
     absorbed within the levels appropriated in this Act or 
     previous appropriations Acts.
       Sec. 402. None of the funds in this Act shall be used for 
     the planning or execution of any program to pay the expenses 
     of, or otherwise compensate, non-Federal parties intervening 
     in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act.
       Sec. 403. None of the funds appropriated in this Act shall 
     remain available for obligation beyond the current fiscal 
     year, nor may any be transferred to other appropriations, 
     unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 404. The expenditure of any appropriation under this 
     Act for any consulting service through procurement contract 
     pursuant to section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, 
     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. 405. Except as otherwise provided in this Act, none of 
     the funds provided in this Act, provided by previous 
     appropriations Acts to the agencies or entities funded in 
     this Act that remain available for obligation or expenditure 
     in fiscal year 2008, or provided from any accounts in the 
     Treasury derived by the collection of fees and available to 
     the agencies funded by this Act, shall be available for 
     obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds 
     that: (1) creates a new program; (2) eliminates a program, 
     project, or activity; (3) increases funds or personnel for 
     any program, project, or activity for which funds have been 
     denied or restricted by the Congress; (4) proposes to use 
     funds directed for a specific activity by either the House or 
     Senate Committees on Appropriations for a different purpose; 
     (5) augments existing programs, projects, or activities in 
     excess of $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; (6) 
     reduces existing programs, projects, or activities by 
     $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; or (7) creates, 
     reorganizes, or restructures a branch, division, office, 
     bureau, board, commission, agency, administration, or 
     department different from the budget justifications submitted 
     to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations or the 
     table accompanying the statement of the managers accompanying 
     this Act, whichever is more detailed, unless prior approval 
     is received from the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations: Provided, That not later than 60 days after 
     the date of enactment of this Act, each agency funded by this 
     Act shall submit a report to the House and Senate Committees 
     on Appropriations to establish the baseline for application 
     of reprogramming and transfer authorities for the current 
     fiscal year: Provided further, That the report shall include: 
     (1) a table for each appropriation with a separate column to 
     display the President's budget request, adjustments made by 
     Congress, adjustments due to enacted rescissions, if 
     appropriate, and the fiscal year enacted level; (2) a 
     delineation in the table for each appropriation both by 
     object class and program, project, and activity as detailed 
     in the budget appendix for the respective appropriation; and 
     (3) an identification of items of special congressional 
     interest: Provided further, That the amount appropriated or 
     limited for salaries and expenses for an agency shall be 
     reduced by $100,000 per day for each day after the required 
     date that the report has not been submitted to the Congress.
       Sec. 406. Except as otherwise specifically provided by law, 
     not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances remaining 
     available at the end of fiscal year 2008 from appropriations 
     made available for salaries and expenses for fiscal year 2008 
     in this Act, shall remain available through September 30, 
     2009, for each such account for the purposes authorized: 
     Provided, That a request shall be submitted to the Committees 
     on Appropriations for approval prior to the expenditure of 
     such funds: Provided further, That these requests shall be 
     made in compliance with reprogramming guidelines.
       Sec. 407. All Federal agencies and departments that are 
     funded under this Act shall issue a report to the House and 
     Senate Committees on Appropriations on all sole source 
     contracts by no later than July 31, 2008. Such report shall 
     include the contractor, the amount of the contract and the 
     rationale for using a sole source contract.
       Sec. 408. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act 
     may be obligated or expended for any employee training that--
       (1) does not meet identified needs for knowledge, skills, 
     and abilities bearing directly upon the performance of 
     official duties;
       (2) contains elements likely to induce high levels of 
     emotional response or psychological stress in some 
     participants;
       (3) does not require prior employee notification of the 
     content and methods to be used in the training and written 
     end of course evaluation;
       (4) contains any methods or content associated with 
     religious or quasi-religious belief systems or ``new age'' 
     belief systems as defined in Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission Notice N-915.022, dated September 2, 1988; or
       (5) is offensive to, or designed to change, participants' 
     personal values or lifestyle outside the workplace.
       (b) Nothing in this section shall prohibit, restrict, or 
     otherwise preclude an agency from conducting training bearing 
     directly upon the performance of official duties.

                              {time}  1345

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:
       Sec. 409. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to enter into a contract with an entity that does not 
     participate in the basic pilot program described in section 
     403(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant 
     Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note).


                Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Sessions

  Mr. SESSIONS. 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. 15 offered by Mr. Sessions:
       At the end of the bill, before the short title, insert the 
     following new section:
       Sec. 410. None of the funds made available by this Act 
     shall be used to support Amtrak's route with the highest 
     loss, measured

[[Page H8329]]

     by passenger per mile cost as based on the National Railroad 
     Passenger Corporation's September 2006 Financial Performance 
     of Routes Report.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is very straightforward. It 
would eliminate funding for the absolute worst performing line at 
Amtrak, the Sunset Limited, which runs from New Orleans to Los Angeles.
  In 1997, Congress passed the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act, 
which required that Amtrak operate without any Federal operating 
assistance after 2002. Despite this commonsense requirement that they 
cease their fiscal irresponsibility and mismanagement, since Amtrak was 
supposed to be operating free of Federal subsidy, it has, instead, cost 
the taxpayers $3 billion in operating expenses.
  Mr. Chairman, people tuned in on C-SPAN to watch this debate may be 
wondering what exactly this $3 billion in taxpayer funding is paying 
for. Well, in the case of the Sunset Limited, it is being used to 
subsidize the travels of a very few passengers who want to take a train 
from New Orleans to Los Angeles.
  The trip is scheduled to take 46 hours and 20 minutes to complete, 
that is, assuming the train is running on time. This occurrence is, 
however, exceedingly unlikely. According to Amtrak's most recent 
monthly performance report, the Sunset Limited was only on time 11 
percent of the time. This makes the Sunset Limited the third worst on-
time performer for any of Amtrak's 33 routes during 2007.
  Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, taxpayers should be happy when the train is 
not running, though, because when it is, the route loses an average of 
almost $30 million a year. This means that Amtrak and the American 
taxpayer lose $0.57 per mile for each passenger on this train. For 
2006, it cost the Federal Government $524 per passenger on that route, 
more than revenue that was brought in.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment is the first step to instilling just a 
small measure of fiscal discipline at Amtrak. Failure to do so will 
only allow Amtrak to continue misusing and wasting taxpayer dollars.
  This amendment is supported by the National Taxpayers Union, 
Americans for Tax Reform, and Citizens Against Government Waste. I hope 
that all my colleagues will join me and those taxpayer advocates in 
saving the taxpayers from throwing more good money after bad on the 
Sunset Limited.
  I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  I would like to point out to the gentleman that the bill before us 
includes language that requires the Secretary of Transportation to 
review and ultimately approve or deny grant requests for each train 
route as part of the grant agreement. When grant requests are submitted 
to the Secretary, they include a detailed financial analysis and 
revenue projections, and the Secretary then determines whether to 
approve the grant request for the specific train route.
  I'd like to make another comment here. All too often we forget about 
rural areas. Rural communities deserve transportation choices. This 
line serves a number of rural areas in the South and Southwest. But I 
do again remind that the Secretary has the authority to review the 
financials in relation to a particular route and to approve or 
disapprove of grant requests.
  Amtrak has made some good moves over the recent past. They've reduced 
their debt by $500 million. They have exacted about $100 million of 
savings so far in their effort to reduce the costs of the long-distance 
routes. They've increased the amount of State investment that's 
involved in these routes, and they continue to show better revenue and 
ridership.
  But the route to deal with individual routes, the way to deal with 
individual routes is through the language that's already in the bill, 
and so I'm going to oppose the specific effort to eliminate one 
specific route when the route is already in place in the legislation 
for the Secretary to make that decision.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman who is the Chair of 
the subcommittee of the authorizing committee, Ms. Brown.
  (Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida asked and was given permission to 
revise and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, here we go again, trying 
to destroy passenger rail in this country. The United States used to be 
the best passenger rail system in the world. Now we're the caboose, and 
we don't even use cabooses anymore.
  For far too long this Congress has given Amtrak just enough money to 
limp along, never giving them the funds they needed to make serious 
improvements in the system.
  Amtrak was a first responder during Hurricane Katrina and used the 
Sunset Limited line to help evacuate thousands of gulf region residents 
while President Bush and his administration was nowhere to be found. 
Now they are becoming a key part of each State's future evacuation 
plan.
  Every industrialized country in the world is investing heavily in 
rail infrastructure because they realize that this is the future of 
transportation. But, sadly, as their systems get bigger and better, our 
system gets less and less money.
  Vote ``no'' on the amendment.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar).
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Minnesota is recognized for 
the remaining 2 minutes.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I thought we spent most of last night on 
amendments to kill the operating account of Amtrak and then kill the 
capital account of Amtrak. The only thing that wasn't offered was 
burial funds for Amtrak. But now comes the dismemberment amendment.
  This route is part of a national passenger rail system. It's the only 
route connecting California to the Southwest, to the gulf, and on to 
Florida. This route touches one-third of the Nation's population. Many 
of the people living in those communities along this route have no 
other passenger transportation, mass transportation alternative than 
the Sunset Limited.
  The gentleman from Texas talked about the time it takes to traverse 
that route. What he didn't say is that most of that time is spent by 
Amtrak on sidings waiting for freight rail trains to pass. Now, if you 
give passenger rail priority consideration on those routes, those 
trains would pass very quickly. We could cut a substantial, maybe a 
third or more of the time out of their passenger service.
  What's happening here is, going back to the origins of Amtrak, when 
freight rail companies started as passenger rail service found they 
could make more money carrying freight than passengers, they were 
carrying U.S. mail on the overnight railway post office, they 
petitioned to the Interstate Commerce Commission to discontinue 
passenger service when U.S. Postal Service moved to carrying their mail 
by truck.
  So one by one, they discontinued passenger rail service, dumped it 
all in the hands of the Federal Government.
  We need to keep Amtrak servicing. Defeat this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will 
be postponed.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to point something out. Last night the 
committee, while most Members were able to leave for dinner, the 
committee had to stay here and work until 10 p.m.. Lots of Members 
didn't show up then to offer

[[Page H8330]]

their amendments, and so now we have a surplus of amendments that we 
still have to go through today.
  Now, today, the committee is grinding through these amendments, and 
we've just hit a patch in the road where no Members were here to offer 
their amendments.
  Under the House rules, the committee could have chosen to rise and we 
could have moved to final passage without considering any of the other 
amendments that are still pending. The committee chose not to do that, 
out of fairness.
  But I want to point out that if Members want to tie up the 
committee's time ad nauseam on repetitive amendments, the same 
amendments on the same bills ad nauseam, then the least they can do is 
to be on the floor when those amendments are supposed to be offered. 
The next time there is such a gap, I will move to rise and move to 
final passage.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake

  Mr. FLAKE. 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. Flake:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. ___. (a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--None of the 
     funds in this Act shall be available for the Belmont Complex 
     in Armstrong County, Pennsylvania.
       (b) Corresponding Reduction of Funds.--The amount otherwise 
     provided by this Act for ``Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development--Community Development Fund'' (and specified for 
     the Economic Development Initiative) is hereby reduced by 
     $300,000.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, would it be possible to have the Clerk read 
the amendment in these instances where there are very specific 
amendments applying to a specific project within the legislation.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will report the 
amendment.
  There was no objection.

                              {time}  1400

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the committee for their indulgence 
here. I just wanted to make sure that Members who have earmarks that 
are being challenged here have the ability to come to the floor and are 
able to defend them.
  This amendment, Mr. Chairman, would strike $300,000 from funding for 
the Belmont Complex in Armstrong County, Pennsylvania.
  The Belmont Complex is a local recreational center. It offers an 
Olympic-size swimming pool with a 150-foot water slide and an indoor 
skating rink and arena. The center has an adult hockey team and also 
offers indoor soccer.
  To generate money, the center sells advertising space on the ice. A 
dashboard ad costs about $800. The center also charges $5 a day for 
admission to the pool. Individual pool memberships for the summer 
season are also available, and they can run up to $77.
  But, apparently, despite all the available revenue streams, the 
Federal taxpayers are being asked to pay $300,000 for this recreational 
center to rebuild or renovate the center.
  The bad news is I don't think any of us are given a free pass. We 
aren't given a season pass. That is something that is just for the 
locals. I think the entire project should be for the locals.
  Reading through this, it struck me that virtually every Member here 
in this body has probably a dozen or so of these recreational centers 
in their district that we could, with the same justification here, come 
to the Congress and say we need a Federal taxpayer subsidy for this. We 
are not charging enough for people to come in, where our local funds 
are low, so we are going to give the Federal taxpayer the chance to pay 
for it.
  We simply can't do that, obviously. We can't fund all the 
recreational centers across the country. So why do we choose this one? 
Why do we pick winners and losers here? Is it just because there is a 
particularly powerful Member who is behind it who can say, hey, I am 
going to get funds for my district for this recreational center? What 
happens to all the other ones? What do you tell the recreational center 
down the street just across the district line? You're out of luck? You 
have to charge more for your season passes?
  It just doesn't seem fair to me. This isn't the road we should go 
down. And if we have turned over a new leaf, and we are doing something 
different in terms of earmarks, then let's do something different 
instead of the same old same old.
  We are told that we are going to have a process that vets these a 
little better. There are, I believe, about 1,500 earmarks in this bill. 
We just got word of what they were just a couple of days ago. And so it 
just doesn't seem that the process is changing all that much. It looks 
too much now like it did when Republicans were in charge.
  So I think that we ought to change it, and that is why I am offering 
this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman offering this amendment 
doesn't happen to be here at the moment; so let me try to point out 
what is involved here.
  Yes, the Belmont Complex does provide recreational opportunities and 
conference and meeting space. Yes, it is a facility that is used for 
Chamber of Commerce meetings, and banquets, and business, and seminars, 
and training and testing for displaced workers, and local union 
meetings and negotiations, emergency rescue training, voter 
registration drives, local business-to-business job fairs.
  In the county, Armstrong County in Pennsylvania, which is one of 
those in the northern part of Appalachia that is struggling hard, 
losing population, by the way, if I remember the map exactly correctly. 
I was from Pennsylvania in an earlier period of my lifetime. These are 
all purposes that are important to the process of keeping the economy 
going in that community and that county.
  But most important to this particular earmark is that a 2003 fire 
damaged much of the building, and these funds are needed to make 
continual interior and exterior renovations and to make the facility 
handicapped-accessible. Those are important specific things that go 
beyond the other bits and pieces that are pulled together in this 
complex. The main building within the complex has had fire damage and 
needs this money for repair.
  Now, I just want to point out that the great explosion, the truly 
irresponsible explosion, of congressional earmarking began shortly 
after the party which is in the minority gained control of the Congress 
in 1995. And so during that period of time, we have gone from zero 
earmarking in the Labor, Health, and Education budget to over $1 
billion a year. We have tripled the number of earmarks in the defense 
bill. The number of earmarks in this legislation, while it has been 
reorganized a couple times, has gone up in similar kind of proportion. 
Yet this year, this year, we are reducing the number of earmarks and 
the number of dollars involved in those earmarks by 50 percent from 
what they were under the last time that a budget was put through 
completely with earmarks under the leadership of the gentleman's party. 
So we are trying to clean up a mess and get a good strong measure of 
the earmarking process.
  But this one, I think, is legitimate for its purposes, and I hope the 
amendment will be defeated.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, let me just say if you can justify this 
earmark for a recreational center to help them basically defray cost of 
memberships or to rebuild or renovate, you could do that for any 
recreational center in the country. There is nothing that I can see, 
and I wish the sponsor of the amendment would have come to the floor to 
actually defend it or shed some light on what makes this special, why 
there is a Federal nexus here that doesn't exist with other 
recreational centers across the country. I wish we

[[Page H8331]]

could have had that debate or not. So we have to assume that this is no 
different than any recreational center anywhere in the country. So if 
you can justify this one, you can justify any of them. And we simply 
can't afford that, and we shouldn't continue just to say, well, we have 
cut the number of earmarks or dollar value in half. I mean, we are 
trying to get back to fiscal sobriety here after a binge that took 
place for years, and I admitted that that binge was my party. But if we 
are trying to get back to sobriety, it doesn't count to say, all right, 
we are only going to drink half as much this year as we did before. 
That's just not acceptable.
  This process is out of control. It remains out of control. And this 
earmark is a great example of that. If we can approve earmarks for this 
kind of thing, anything goes. Katy bar the door.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, it was not my intention to 
speak on any of these earmarks, but the discussion that has gone on 
between the chairman and the gentleman from Arizona I was listening to 
upstairs, and it struck me that there needed to be some addition to 
this discussion.
  The suggestion that earmarks exploded as of the time the control of 
the Congress changed in 1995 and began to expand, et cetera, et cetera, 
is accurate, accurate, but for reasons entirely different than the 
gentleman from Arizona either realizes or understands.
  It is a fact that the other party controlled the Congress for 40 
years, and over all those years their chairmen, their subcommittee 
chairmen, their very high-ranking Members around here with years and 
years of power had developed very solid relationships with the second 
and third level in the various agencies around this town. And there 
weren't earmarks; there were phone marks. Key staff and otherwise were 
instructed to call those second- and third-tier people within the 
agencies and let them know what they thought the priorities should be. 
There wasn't a need for legislative earmarks because phone marks had a 
very significant impact upon the process. And we tend to ignore that 
reality.
  When the majority did change, the new majority found that that second 
and third level of bureaucracy weren't nearly as responsive to people 
with Rs after their name, or Republicans, and thus they began giving 
some specific direction as to what their priorities were, thus the term 
called ``earmarks.''
  Further, I think the gentleman does his party a disservice by 
suggesting that this was our fault. The reality is that even the 
earmarks where they are represent in the neighborhood of 1 percent of 
all the discretionary spending available in the appropriations process, 
and that while the Constitution says that appropriations should begin 
in the House of Representatives, to suggest that Members having ideas 
as to what priorities ought to be and even putting it in legislation is 
wrong, it seems to me, in connection with that, the gentleman is wrong.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Weiner). The gentleman from Arizona has 30 
seconds remaining.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, let me just respond.
  The truth is we went from about, as the chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee often points out, from zero earmarks in Labor-
HHS to some 1,400 last week. Much of that was under my party.
  I think Democrats are as much to blame probably as Republicans are. 
The difference is as Republicans, we pretend to stand for limited 
government. We should be saying this isn't what we should be doing. If 
the agencies are out of control, we need to rein them in through the 
oversight process rather than to try to compete with them in terms of 
wasteful spending.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Arizona has 
expired.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I had not intended to speak on this issue 
either, but I feel required to respond to one thing that the gentleman 
from Arizona said.
  He indicated that it was too bad that he had only had 2 or 3 days 
during which time he could review the earmarks in this bill. I simply 
want to say if he feels badly about that and wants to know why that is 
the case, all he has to do is look in the mirror along with a number of 
his other colleagues.
  Why do I say that? Because I tried about a month ago to make clear to 
the House that I thought the Appropriations Committee staff had had 
insufficient time to take a look at and screen a number of these 
earmarks, especially those that came early in the process. So I offered 
up another option, and what I proposed is that the committee simply be 
given more time to screen those earmarks, and that before the Congress 
adjourned in August, we would then publish all of them, and any persons 
who had doubts about them would have more than 30 days over the August 
recess, and our staffs could have reviewed each and every one of them 
for a much longer period of time.
  The gentleman and others on that side of the aisle chose to belittle 
that proposal, suggesting that we were trying to, quote, ``hide 
earmarks until conference.'' Not so. All we were trying to do was to 
give the staff and any Members who were interested additional time in 
which to review those earmarks. Our friends on the other side decided 
that they would rather criticize than agree to that, and so we 
acquiesced in their desires to have earmarks in each bill as they came 
to the floor.

                              {time}  1415

  We felt that there would be ample protection for Members because we 
also included a reform that would have required persons in the 
conference to be present and voting on every single item rather than 
having to endure what has happened in the past when large amounts of 
legislation were slipped into conference reports without a vote of the 
conference after the conference is over. But our judgment was not 
followed, and so as a result, we have this very limited time for 
Members to review projects as they come through in regular order. I'm 
sorry about that. But I would say to the gentleman, no one in this 
House can have it both ways. We've tried to accommodate the wishes of 
the House. Either way, we're doing the best we can. And if the 
gentleman doesn't like it, I think, as I say, all he has to do is look 
in the mirror because it was comments from people like him that 
required us to follow this procedure in this manner.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting 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 Acting 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:
       Sec. ___. (a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--None of the 
     funds in this Act shall be available for the Walter Clore 
     Wine and Culinary Center in Prosser, Washington.
       (b) Corresponding Reduction of Funds.--The amount otherwise 
     provided by this Act for ``Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development--Community Development Fund'' (and specified for 
     the Economic Development Initiative) is hereby reduced by 
     $250,000.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.

[[Page H8332]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. FLAKE. Let me just say, in response to the chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee, this isn't the best process. I appreciate 
having a couple of days and being able to come to the floor. The 
problem is, under what was proposed by the chairman, we would have had 
more time, yes, but we wouldn't have had the ability to challenge 
individual earmarks. So that was a trade-off that we were unwilling to 
make. And I still maintain that we made the best decision here. But I 
think it would be nice to have more than a couple of days to actually 
look at these, but I appreciate that the Appropriations Committee is 
doing so.
  This amendment would prohibit $250,000 in Federal funds from going to 
the Walter Clore Wine and Culinary Center in Prosser, Washington, and 
reduce the cost of the bill by a consistent amount.
  I'm sure people like to be wined and dined, but I think this earmark 
goes a little too far. I think that this is another example of, if we 
can justify economic development here, then we can justify just about 
anything.
  We often complain that the Federal Government, the agencies spend 
willy-nilly, they're wasting money here, they're wasting money there. 
They are, certainly. One amendment that I wanted to bring today but got 
it too late would be one to simply cut the account that provides 
economic development earmarks because I think the Federal agencies do 
waste money in this regard. But instead of reining that account in and 
saying you shouldn't be doing that, we're kind of competing with them 
and saying we're going to do our own economic development earmarks. I 
just fail to see a Federal nexus that exists here that wouldn't exist 
with other organizations.
  You can justify anything in terms of economic development. The act of 
spending money by itself inherently means there is economic 
development. But where do we choose? Do we just choose this one or that 
one? It just doesn't seem to be a very good process, particularly 
without a real Federal nexus here.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  I think the gentleman, in his opening remarks, said something that 
currently should be expanded. Current law within HUD has an Office of 
Economic Development, and its responsibility, and I want to quote what 
its responsibility is, it ``works with public and private sectors as 
well as not-for-profit organizations to provide financial and technical 
assistance to local communities to develop and implement their own 
economic development and community revitalization strategies.'' Now, 
that's current law. If the gentleman believes that that agency 
shouldn't exist, then certainly he can introduce a bill, and we can 
have a worthy debate on that. But that is existing law.
  And it is within that context, then, as this relates to my district, 
which is a very diverse agriculture area, labor intensive in many of 
the specialty crops, but there is a new industry that is emerging in my 
district, and that is the wine industry. It's only about 35 years old. 
Historically, the wine industry in this country has always been in 
California. This is emerging in my district, and it has the benefit, 
then, of economic development to expand, to bring more tourists into 
this area, which means there's more hotels, more restaurants. That is 
the very definition of what economic development is all about.
  So let me be very, very clear on this. This project is fully 
consistent with requirements for projects normally and routinely funded 
under this program and existing programs.
  And I might add, it is named for an individual who has been widely 
recognized as the father of the Washington wine industry. He is the one 
who convinced farmers to transfer some of their lands to growing wine 
grapes. And, frankly, they've been very successful.
  There has been $5 million raised by other governmental agencies and 
quasi-governmental agencies to build this center. This is part of that. 
What it demonstrates to me is that there is a strong commitment of this 
wide community that identifies this as a local economic development 
project.
  So while there has been a lot of discussion with the earmarks this 
year, and I suspect we will have more of those discussions, I firmly 
believe that within existing laws and within the context of economic 
development, this falls into a category that I feel very, very 
comfortable with in saying that we ought to earmark dollars for this 
center because it will expand the economic development in this largely 
rural area that I have the privilege of representing. So, to me, it is 
an example of what the economic development initiative is supposed to 
be.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, Washington wine industry revenues are 
estimated at about $3 billion a year. The industry employs, I believe, 
about 11,000 people. Over 2 million people visit Washington wineries 
every year. That's just the point I was making. This is an industry 
that does pretty well. And I just wonder why the Federal taxpayer has 
to be involved here.
  Public/private partnerships, there is nothing bad about that on its 
face; but not every public/private partnership is justified, 
particularly when that partner is the Federal Government. I just still 
fail to see a nexus.
  And, again, we should actually be providing more oversight of the 
Federal agencies that expend these economic development grants because 
a lot of it is wasted. I'm sure a lot of it is wasted in my own 
district. But we shouldn't be trying to compete with that account by 
earmarking our own funds.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, let me restate again that 
it is existing law within HUD of this office that provides for economic 
development. I am simply following the law and exercising my right as a 
Member of Congress, who is part of the writing of the appropriation 
bills, to earmark what I think is important for my district.
  Now, if the gentleman wants to, as I mentioned in my previous 
remarks, if he wants to have a debate on whether that office ought to 
exist, well, I think that is worthy of debate. In fact, I would have 
suggested to the gentleman that maybe he should have defunded 
completely the whole office; therefore, he could have been at least 
consistent rather than picking out one project that I think is worthy, 
following what the requirements are of the Economic Development Office.
  So with that, I would urge my colleagues to oppose the Flake 
amendment as it relates to the Walter Clore Center.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting 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 Acting 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:
       Sec. ___. (a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--None of the 
     funds in this Act shall be available for the North Central 
     Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission in Wausau, Wisconsin.
       (b) Corresponding Reduction of Funds.--The amount otherwise 
     provided by this Act for ``Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development--Community Development Fund'' (and specified for 
     neighborhood initiatives) is hereby reduced by $400,000.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, 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, as mentioned, this amendment would strike 
$400,000 in the bill from the North Central Wisconsin Regional Planning 
Commission.

[[Page H8333]]

  According to the certification letter submitted by the sponsor, the 
commission will receive Federal funding to establish the Technology 
Revolving Loan Fund.
  According to the Web site, the commission is a public agency 
dedicated to providing professional services to local governments. 
These services include economic development, geographic information 
systems, intergovernmental cooperation, land use planning, and 
transportation. The commission's funding comes from Federal grants and 
State and local money.
  This earmark brings up a lot of questions. First and foremost, why is 
this fund being created in one particular part of Wisconsin? I'm sure 
every Member of Congress would love to establish a revolving loan fund 
to help their local businesses. If it is deserving of Federal aid, why 
aren't others? Again, why do we pick and choose here?
  Can the sponsor of this earmark assure us that once this is done, 
that once these monies are loaned out, that more monies won't be 
sought? Is this an earmark that will beget more earmarks? It seems that 
these are questions that should be answered. It's a dangerous slippery 
slope, I think, if we use Federal taxpayer dollars for parochial 
revolving loan funds.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I seek to control the time in opposition, and 
I reserve my time.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, here is just another example, and maybe the 
sponsor of the earmark can enlighten us, but as to what makes this 
different, what makes this deserving of Federal funds? Why are we 
helping to set up a local revolving loan fund for local businesses? 
What is to stop every Member of Congress from wanting that in their own 
district? Isn't this a slippery slope if we just allow taxpayer money 
to be used in this fashion? If you can use it for economic development, 
if that is the criterion, any spending is justified.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman has indicated, this provides funds for 
a revolving loan fund for North Central Regional Planning Commission. 
The purpose is to provide small low-interest loans for small business 
start-ups or expansions. It is targeted to enterprises which have 
little access to capital and need to change the technology which they 
use in production.
  The planning commission is established by county governments under 
State statutory authority. It provides zoning and economic development 
assistance to counties. The planning commission covers a 10-county area 
and three congressional districts, mine, the gentleman from the eighth, 
Mr. Kagen, formerly Mr. Green, and also Mr. Petri's district.
  Why are we providing funds for this area? Very simple: this is an 
economically challenged area. And I make no apology whatsoever in 
trying to provide some modest assistance to the area. We have a similar 
fund in two other parts of my congressional direct. In Chippewa County, 
for instance, 3 years ago we established a similar fund.

                              {time}  1430

  That fund has saved 58 jobs in the area. They have provided grants, 
very small grants, to businesses in question, and they have already 
received $200,000 in repayments. All of the repayments are current.
  But I want to ask a series of questions about the gentleman's 
district. I make no apology for trying to provide small loans to 
domestic small business entrepreneurs. In the 10 years that I chaired 
the Foreign Operations Subcommittee, I learned very quickly the value 
of small loans rather than large, megadevelopment projects. I see no 
reason why we shouldn't provide those same lessons here at home.
  I find it ironic that someone from Arizona would challenge economic 
development funds in Wisconsin. Arizona ranks 24th in the Nation in per 
capita Federal dollars spent in Arizona; Wisconsin ranks 48th. So the 
gentleman is exactly twice as well off in terms of State ranking than 
my own State. Arizona receives $41 billion in Federal funds out of the 
budget; my State receives $31 billion. Arizona receives $7,300 per 
person; Wisconsin receives $5,675 per person. That is a $1,600 per 
capita difference.
  Eighty-five percent of the difference in what our two States get is 
due to differences in Federal salaries and in procurement. Arizona gets 
$7 billion more out of the Federal Government because of money spent 
for procurement than does the State of Wisconsin. In fact, Arizona gets 
a lot more money than all of the States in the upper Midwest. Arizona, 
as I said, ranks 24th. Wisconsin ranks 48th in per capita expenditure, 
Michigan ranks 47th, Minnesota 49th, Illinois 46th, Indiana 45th.
  On a per capita basis, Arizona gets 28 percent more out of the 
Federal budget than does Wisconsin. It gets 22 percent more per capita 
than does Michigan, 29 percent more than does Minnesota, 21 percent 
more than does Illinois, and 20 percent more than does Indiana.
  Let me also point out that I doubt very much that the Arizona 
delegation doesn't work very hard to see to it that giant defense 
contractors like Raytheon, Boeing, Honeywell and General Dynamics 
together receive almost $4 billion in funding from the Federal 
Government. I doubt very much that the delegations from those States 
don't work to get that money in their States. So I make no apology for 
this tiny pittance that we are trying to provide for my own State.
  Mr. Chairman, I also want to say, however, I think it comes with 
considerable ill grace for someone from Arizona to question the 
expenditure of $400,000 in Wisconsin, when Arizona has been the 
principal recipient of the second largest Federal earmark in the 
history of earmarking in this country, the Central Arizona Project. For 
Arizona, we have already spent $4.3 billion. The total cost of that 
project is expected to be $5.6 billion. The President's request is at 
$27 million this year.
  Mr. Chairman, that seems to me to be the pot calling the kettle 
black. I would urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will 
be postponed.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to continue my observations about what 
the gentleman receives from the Federal budget. The Republican Study 
Committee said that the $1.5 billion that was provided to the D.C. 
subway was the largest earmark in history. In fact, the Arizona project 
is almost four times as large as the D.C. subway. Yet the gentleman is 
complaining about a tiny $400,000 economic assistance grant for my 
State.
  I would also simply note that the median household income in the 
gentleman's district is $48,000. The median household income in my own 
district is $39,000, a $9,000 difference. A good portion of that higher 
median income lies in the fact that Arizona has a very large number of 
Federal installations in the gentleman's State. Fort Huachuca and 
several other Air Force bases inject enough funds to provide employment 
for 9,000 additional people, yet the gentleman is objecting to a small 
revolving loan fund which provides help in keeping about 50 jobs in 
Wisconsin.
  I make no apology in trying to get the median family income in my 
district just a mite closer to the much higher income found in the 
gentleman's district.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield for a colloquy to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from 
Massachusetts, the chairman of the subcommittee, for this colloquy.

[[Page H8334]]

  Mr. Chairman, in New Jersey, and all over the country, certain waste 
handlers and railroad companies have tried to exploit a supposed 
loophole in Federal law in order to set up unregulated waste transfer 
facilities.
  Under the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995, the 
Surface Transportation Board, or STB, has exclusive jurisdiction over 
transportation by rail carriers and the ability to grant Federal 
preemption over other laws at any level, local, State or Federal, that 
might impede such transportation. But Congress intended such authority 
to extend only to transportation by rail, not to the operation of 
facilities that are merely sited next to rail operations or have a 
business connection to a rail company.
  Unfortunately, certain companies have exploited this loophole to 
build or plan waste transfer stations next to rail lines and avoid any 
regulation from State or local authorities.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the Senate's efforts to close this 
loophole. They have passed an amendment in their version of the fiscal 
year 2008 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development appropriations 
bill, and I wanted to thank your subcommittee for recognizing this 
important issue in this bill's report language.
  I had intended to offer an amendment, which I will not offer at this 
time, that would take the STB out of the waste management business by 
ensuring that funding for any decisions relating to waste transfer 
stations be eliminated. Again, you have dealt with this in the bill's 
report language, so it is not necessary to move this amendment at this 
time. But it is important that States and local municipalities have 
some say in this process.
  Mr. OLVER. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murphy).
  Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I want to add a 
word of my support of Mr. Pallone's amendment. The issue of companies 
circumventing the law and the wishes of cities and towns in this Nation 
deserves to be addressed.
  In my district, in Bensalem, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, a firm 
wanted to build a waste transfer station. Given the potential 
environmental and health risks, both the local community and even the 
State voiced their objections to the proposal. As an end run around 
this, the rail company that would service the proposed waste transfer 
facility applied to the Federal Surface Transportation Board, or the 
STB, to, in effect, have the waste transfer facility declared a rail 
facility. This was an attempt to supersede the rulings of the State and 
local entities that had already rejected the proposed waste transfer 
station. Fortunately, the rail company's application was rejected, but 
they can reapply to the STB at any time.
  Just yesterday I stood with Bensalem Mayor Joe DiGirolamo and 
Pennsylvania State Representative Gene DiGirolamo and opposed this 
facility. Mr. Chairman, people in the local, State and Federal level 
are all opposed to this end run around the law.
  Mr. Chairman, when Congress created the STB, it was never intended to 
allow decisions by the STB to be used to override the wishes of cities 
and towns across the country, and certainly not as a means of 
superseding health and environmental regulations of State and local 
governments. Yet that is exactly what is happening.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey for his 
excellent leadership on this issue, and thank Chairman Olver for 
providing me the opportunity to speak today and stand up for the 
residents of Bensalem and the Eighth District of Pennsylvania.
  Mr. OLVER. To continue the colloquy, I yield to the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Hall).
  Mr. HALL of New York. Mr. Chairman, I wish to associate myself with 
the remarks of my colleagues from New Jersey and Pennsylvania. 
Communities in my home in New York, including the village of Croton-on-
Hudson in my district, are also being threatened by companies who are 
hoping to exploit this loophole through the STB to process solid waste 
without facing regulation under environmental protection laws. This 
type of activity is clearly outside the mission and the purview of the 
Surface Transportation Board, and I look forward to working with my 
colleagues and chairman to affirm that reality.
  I thank the chairman and the gentleman from New Jersey for their 
leadership and look forward to working as we go forward with you.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, to respond to this, last night, as the 
gentleman from New Jersey has already pointed out, we had an amendment 
being offered which was subject to a point of order. I had agreed that 
I would be happy to work with him, and I obviously will be very happy 
to work with the three Members who are part of this colloquy from New 
Jersey, from Pennsylvania and from New York, on this issue, which is an 
important issue and would require authorization legislation to do, and 
that is why the point of order lay last night.
  Mr. Chairman, I repeat, I will be happy to work with the three 
gentleman who have spoken on this issue as we go on toward conference.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake

  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting 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:
       Sec. ___. (a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--None of the 
     funds in this Act shall be available for the National Forest 
     Recreation Association in Woodlake, California.
       (b) Corresponding Reduction of Funds.--The amount otherwise 
     provided by this Act for ``Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development--Community Development Fund'' (and specified for 
     the Economic Development Initiative) is hereby reduced by 
     $50,000.

  yThe Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, 
the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. FLAKE. I thank the Chair.
  Let me first respond. I had yielded back my time when the gentleman 
from Wisconsin talked about Arizona, the Central Arizona Project as an 
earmark.
  Perhaps in the debate at the time it was called an earmark, but it 
doesn't fit the contemporary definition of earmark. There was no 
project over the history of this body probably that wasn't debated 
through authorization, appropriation, followed up by oversight, than a 
project like that. I would have no complaint if some of the projects 
that we are challenging here today went through that process of 
authorization, appropriation and oversight, but that isn't what this is 
about.
  The contemporary practice of earmarking that we have fallen into, 
under Republicans and Democrats, has been to circumvent the careful 
process of authorization, appropriation and oversight. So that is the 
complaint here. So bringing up the Central Arizona Project whenever an 
amendment is offered to take funding away from an economic development 
in a local community is a specious argument, I would add.
  This amendment would prohibit $50,000 in Federal funds from being 
used by the National Forest Recreation Association for the National 
Mule and Packer Museum and would reduce the cost of the bill by a 
consistent amount.
  According to the earmark description and certification letter 
submitted to the Appropriations Committee, the funding would be used 
for the construction of a museum to memorialize and help to preserve 
the role of mule teams and mule packers in opening and developing the 
West.

                              {time}  1445

  The funding, however, will go to the National Forest Recreation 
Association. Obviously, you cannot build much for $50,000. I assume 
there is a partnership with local entities.
  There is much that we don't know about this. Does the location exist? 
Will it be owned by the National Forest Recreation Association? Are 
there corporate sponsors? How much is the total cost of the museum? 
Will the Federal taxpayer be asked to pay more later on?
  It seems there is a 20-mule team museum in Boren, California. This is 
at least the second mule and packer museum we know of. Does that one 
receive Federal funding?
  I would simply say it is time for the American taxpayer to say 
``whoa'' and

[[Page H8335]]

stand up for fiscal sanity and actually stop the practice of earmarking 
like we are doing.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to rise in 
opposition to this amendment. As Mr. Hastings said earlier, there is in 
current law the Office of Economic Development, which has the 
responsibility of working with public and private sectors, as well as 
not-for-profit organizations, to provide financial and technical 
assistance to local communities to develop and implement their own 
economic development in their community. That's current law.
  If we want to change that, I agree with much of what the gentleman 
has to say, I just think this is not the right time and place to be 
covering it in this manner. But it gives me a little bit of a chance to 
talk about my district, and all 435 of us, I think, love to have the 
opportunity to talk about our districts.
  I have a map here which shows my district. It is the second largest 
district in California, a little over 21,000 square miles. I live down 
here. This is Nevada. This is central to northern California. It is 
about 450 miles this way, a couple hundred miles this way. A little 
perspective: eight States would fit within this county, one of the 
largest counties.
  In this county, the town of Bishop, some of the community people have 
every year for the last 40 years celebrated what they call Mule Days, 
and about 50,000 people come to this community of 3,500 people. In this 
whole county that I said eight States would fit in, about 17,000 people 
live, and about 3,500 people live in the town of Bishop. They are great 
people.
  Here are the eastern Sierras, Death Valley. We have the lowest spot 
in the 48 States and the highest spot. Death Valley is 280 feet below 
sea level, and we have Mount Whitney that is about 15,000 feet above 
sea level. It is a great district, just as each of your districts are.
  Several years ago, and actually they have been working on this for a 
few years, Bob Tanner and some of the people in Bishop thought that 
they should have a museum to celebrate the mules. Ninety-five percent 
of this county is owned by Federal and local governments. They don't 
have any room. There are only a few acres in this town that could even 
be developed. They don't have the land to develop for economic 
development. They rely totally on tourism, restaurants, motels, packers 
that take people up into the mountains. Mules have been an important 
part of this, and they want to establish a museum. They are asking for 
$50,000. L.A. City is going to donate $2 million worth of land, 8 
acres. The county and the city are putting up a little over a million 
and a half dollars, and the people that live there are going to raise 
another hundred, $250,000.
  One thing that I think we forget is that the people in Bishop pay 
taxes. They pay Federal taxes, and I guarantee you that during the time 
that Jerry represented them and the time I have had the opportunity to 
represent them, they have gotten very little back from the Federal 
Government for the taxes that they have sent here to Washington.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Would the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McKEON. I would be happy to yield.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
  Indeed, this territory was a part of my district for some time, and 
the people are incredibly wonderful people. They reflect the best of 
the American West. And there is no doubt that they are the best and 
they are there in the West in no small part because of the mule.
  I must say that the gentleman is making a very, very important point. 
It is a long, long ways away from somebody else's district to become an 
expert in terms of a subject like this. It causes me just to smile, and 
so I intend to help the gentleman if I possibly can by voting ``no'' on 
this amendment.
  Mr. McKEON. I thank the gentleman.
  Let me tell you a little bit about mules because this is one of the 
things that they are going to honor in this museum. George Washington 
introduced mules into our country. He received a jack donkey in 1786 
from the King of Spain, and he started breeding and using mules. Within 
a few years, he had 58 mules working on his plantation a few miles 
south in Mount Vernon.
  Since then, mules have been used to develop the West. All across the 
Nation, they helped the pioneers move. They could go 30 miles a day 
where wagon trains could only go about 5. They were an integral part of 
the development of this country. Even today, we have 600 mules on 
special assignment serving in Afghanistan helping the Army do the 
things that they helped the Army do 100 years ago.
  I think $50,000, you know, is a good contribution to give to these 
people, the money that they have sent back here.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to thank the gentleman from Arizona for 
the opportunity to come to the floor to discuss the American Mule and 
Packer Museum and the economic development impact it will have on my 
district.
  Let me first start by saying that this $50,000 is not included in 
this bill to laud the humble and noble mule. These funds will be used 
to boost tourism dollars in the small city of Bishop, CA by helping to 
build a local heritage museum.
  The city of Bishop is located in Inyo County--which is geographically 
one of the largest counties in the country and is 95 percent owned by 
the federal government. Bishop is a classic western frontier city and 
has been squeezed out of all other industries by the encroachment of 
federal land, which literally surrounds it and limits the community to 
survival on tourism dollars. Those vitally important dollars come from 
visitors eager to see the great Wild West, ride out like our 
forefathers into the Eastern Sierra, enjoy the natural beauty on a 
hike, or hire a mule packer to explore the federal forests in the area.
  The $50,000 dollar grant contained in this bill for the American Mule 
Museum is a modest federal investment in a worthy economic development 
project and a good example of how federal seed money is leveraged to 
develop local projects.
  Every year, at the fairgrounds on Main Street, the small city of 
Bishop hosts a famous and popular heritage festival known as ``Mule 
Days.'' Some communities have an Apple Harvest festival, some have 
Frontier Days. In Bishop, we celebrate ``Mule Days.'' My friend from 
Arizona may not be familiar with the essential role Packers and their 
trusted mules had to the settlement of the west, but California's home 
state President did. Next to me is a picture of then-Governor Ronald 
Reagan acting as the Grand Marshall to the Bishop Mule Days parade in 
1974.
  Mule Days is the single largest draw to that community, bringing 
fifty thousand Californians and tourists interested in frontier life 
into downtown Bishop, where they shop, dine and stay during the 
festival. In addition to honoring their history, this museum would help 
expand that tourism by drawing folks in year-round, rather than just 
during the long Memorial Day weekend Mule Days celebration. The City of 
Los Angeles, a longtime landholder in our northern county, is going to 
donate an estimated 8 acres, valued at $2,000,000 for the project. Inyo 
County will spend an additional $1.5 million with the hook-ups, parking 
lots and access roads. Finally, this federal grant, directed to 
National Forest and Recreation Association, in Woodlake, CA (the non-
profit overseeing the project) and private fundraising will be used 
towards the excavation and reconstruction of the famed Livermore 
Packing Station, and the surrounding corrals in Bishop.
  There is a federal interest in preserving the history of how the West 
was settled. There are many residents in the city and surrounding areas 
who are direct descendants of those pioneers who headed west. A museum 
dedicated to local heritage and mule packers that were so important to 
the founding of the area will be a proper place to preserve their 
artifacts and documents into the future.
  The residents of the City of Bishop, my constituents and federal tax 
payers are dependent on tourism dollars for their city funds. There are 
480 separate EDI projects listed in the THUD bill ranging from $50,000 
up to $500,000 with the majority of projects falling in the $100 K to 
$200 K range. The projects, with a few exceptions, are for the 
planning, land purchase, construction or renovation of facilities 
deemed to be important to economic development in both rural and urban 
areas. The construction of a museum celebrating local history is a 
common theme throughout many of the projects. I urge my colleagues to 
reject this amendment and help preserve a piece of American history in 
a place that is deserving of federal assistance.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

[[Page H8336]]

  Mr. LEWIS of California. I am happy to yield to the gentleman from 
California.
  Mr. McKEON. I thank the gentleman very much. As you can see, when I 
start talking about my district, I get pretty excited. I have a lot of 
good things to say about it.
  Bishop is a classic western frontier city. It has been squeezed out 
of all other big industries by all of the other public lands that are 
owned around them, and they have to survive on tourism. So if they can 
add this museum, it will help their tourism and it will help bring 
people there year-round, which will benefit their economy.
  In closing, let me say that this is a partnership. It is not just 
Federal dollars, even though there is no such thing as ``Federal 
dollars.'' It all comes out of our pockets, and the people in Bishop 
pay those Federal dollars back here.
  But as I mentioned earlier, the City of Los Angeles is going to 
participate by donating the land which is worth $2 million. Inyo County 
will spend an additional $1.5 million to work on the project, and local 
people will raise the difference.
  The final thing I wanted to say is that there are 480 separate 
economic development projects in this bill. According to current law, 
that is what the law required. The chairman and the ranking member have 
gone through, their staffs, they have evaluated all of the projects 
requested. Bob Tanner and his friends in Bishop that requested this 
project wrote up their project. They sent it to me and Senator 
Feinstein. We included it in the request. They were one of the ones 
chosen, one of the 480. These projects range from $50,000, this is the 
smallest, to $500,000, with the majority falling between $100,000 and 
$200,000.
  The projects, with few exceptions, are for planning, land purchase, 
construction or renovation of facilities deemed to be important to 
economic development in both rural and urban areas. This is a very 
rural area. The construction of a museum celebrating local history is a 
common theme throughout many of these projects. We followed the law. We 
did the things that are asked of us. I think this is a worthy project.
  I thank the chairman and ranking member for including it in this 
bill. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Reclaiming my time, I want to thank my 
friend from California for representing the people of Inyo County so 
well since I had to leave them in the last redistricting. I intend to 
support your position.
  Mr. McKEON. If the gentleman would continue to yield, one final 
thing.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Is that Ronald Reagan on a mule?
  Mr. McKEON. Ronald Reagan led the Mule Days parade in 1974, riding a 
mule in the Mule Days parade.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Could it possibly be? Thank you.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I am glad the gentleman brought up Ronald 
Reagan. I think it was Reagan, when he was presented with the highway 
bill back in 1987, that had, I believe, around 150 earmarks as opposed 
to the highway bill we did later, in 2005, with 6,300. He said at that 
time, ``I haven't seen this much lard since I gave away ribbons at the 
county fair.'' So Ronald Reagan certainly recognized that Congress, at 
least at that stage, before we even got into the contemporary practice 
of earmarking, was out of control.
  I would also like to make the point, and I am glad that the gentleman 
mentioned, there is no such thing as Federal money. It is money given 
by the taxpayer to the Federal Government. Some of it funds the core 
functions of government. Some of it is spent on things that I don't 
think are the core function of government, and I don't think most 
taxpayers around the country do either, when you say this money is 
being returned, but it is not. As long as we are running a deficit, 
which is now 2, $300 billion, then the money is borrowed to pay for 
projects like this.
  I simply don't think that we are giving the taxpayer a fair shake. I 
think we should stubbornly refuse to fund this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting 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 Acting 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:
       Sec. ___. (a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--None of the 
     funds in this Act shall be available for the Huntsville 
     Museum of Art in Huntsville, Alabama.
       (b) Corresponding Reduction of Funds.--The amount otherwise 
     provided by this Act for ``Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development--Community Development Fund'' (and specified for 
     the Economic Development Initiative) is hereby reduced by 
     $200,000.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, 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, the amendment would prevent $200,000 from 
being used to fund the Huntsville Museum of Art in Huntsville, Alabama, 
and would reduce the cost of the bill by a corresponding amount.
  Mr. Chairman, there are, I think, 480 earmarks funded in the Economic 
Development Initiative account, at least 11 proposed to fund museums. 
There stands about a million dollars total for museums. This doesn't 
take into account projects described as cultural centers and other 
various exhibits.
  The spending initiatives do not illustrate any sort of restraint on 
our part on the Federal level. In the past, we have funded Faulkner 
museums, teapot museums. This year we are funding museums about mules 
and hunting and fishing museums. The Huntsville Museum of Art was named 
as one of the State of Alabama's top destinations by the Alabama Bureau 
of Tourism and Travel. They bring as many as 23,000 visitors for a 
single exhibit.

                              {time}  1500

  Mr. Chairman, all of us have museums in our districts. All of those 
museums, I'm sure, if given the opportunity, would take Federal money 
to defray some of their costs. We simply can't fund all of them.
  I don't know why we have the account in the agency. Like I said, we 
should go after that one, but here we have to show some restraint. And 
every once in a while, I think the taxpayer would appreciate if we 
actually stopped funding for some of these earmarks.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Alabama is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak on behalf of this project that Mr. 
Flake has attacked here. I'm the offerer of this project, the 
Huntsville Museum of Art, located in the city of Huntsville, Alabama, 
the largest city in my congressional district. This is a museum project 
that I think is very appropriate to the economic development initiative 
account.
  This museum chose to locate in the downtown area of the city of 
Huntsville some years ago. In the 1950s, early 1960s, the city of 
Huntsville's population was around 30,000 people. Currently its 
population is close to 200,000 people, but like many downtown areas, 
our downtown had deteriorated. It was a target for crime. It was a 
target for all kinds of movement there that would not have been in the 
best interests of the core of a city of this size.
  The Museum of Art chose to locate its new facility there. It 
partnered with the community. It raised $8 million to build this 
facility that it's in. It is now in another expansion because of the 
success of the downtown area, because

[[Page H8337]]

of the momentum that it helped create. Students are coming into the 
downtown area. People are coming into there from the region 100 miles 
around the area, and it's really caused the city of Huntsville to 
renovate and revise its downtown area. Business is coming back, and I 
think in terms of economic developments issues, it's accomplishing just 
what it should accomplish.
  So I'm eager to defend this amendment and say that currently the 
$200,000 that we've been able to achieve through the economic 
development initiative, through this committee, and I thank the 
chairman and the staff and the ranking member and the staff for 
considering this project, will go along with another $8 million that 
will be raised from the community so that we can create exhibition 
space, so that we can create meeting space. This is not a routine 
museum expansion that this $200,000 will go toward. It's a small amount 
of money that will be pooled with another amount of money to renovate a 
downtown area that is in much need of renovation.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I just will close on this one, saying again 
this is one of many museums that we are funding here. We simply can't 
fund them all. At some point it would be nice to give the taxpayers a 
gift and actually say we're not going to fund a particular earmark. We 
did it a couple of weeks ago.
  This is not an idle process. We've had one occasion already where 
I've come to offer an earmark, and the sponsor of the earmark beat me 
to the floor and offered an amendment to revoke his own earmark. So 
obviously there needed to be more vetting of that earmark. I would 
assume that there are others like it.
  So this is a process we should go through. I would urge support of 
the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I don't want to get into the debate on this 
specific project, but I again want to simply note that I find it 
interesting that the gentleman from Arizona is questioning small 
economic development programs in other States when, in fact, as I said 
earlier, the second largest earmark in the history of the Congress is 
the Central Arizona Project, upon which we have already spent not $4.3 
million, but $4.3 billion, total cost estimated to be $5.6 billion.
  And I also have in my hand, as a certain Senator from my own State 
used to say, 61 pages of military contracts that are let to firms in 
Arizona. We don't have in our State something like Fort Huachuca or 
Luke or Davis Air Force Base, and I'm sure that if we did, we would be 
experiencing the benefit to our economy that the gentleman's State is 
experiencing.
  But I wonder if the gentleman has any idea what the $44,000 was spent 
on in a contract with Two Pals and a Gal?
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. FLAKE. I have no clue.
  Mr. OBEY. I don't either. It would be interesting to find out. That's 
another expenditure in Arizona.
  Mr. FLAKE. If the gentleman would further yield for a minute, perhaps 
the gentleman wasn't on the floor last week. I actually challenged an 
earmark that was going largely to my own district.
  Arizona is just like other States in this regard. I don't object to 
projects that go through the process. I assume that the Central Arizona 
Project had a hearing or two. It was authorized and went through the 
process. What I object to is the contemporary practice of earmarks.
  Mr. OBEY. Taking back my time, I was here when we went through all of 
that with the Central Arizona Project, and I assure you that the 
project was not approved because of the merits. It was approved because 
of the persistence of the Arizona delegation, and if anyone thinks that 
a little politics didn't go into determining that $4.5 billion project, 
I'd like to sell them a couple of bridges.
  So, all I can say is it is fine for someone who comes from a district 
as prosperous as yours to belittle or question these modest economic 
development efforts that are being provided around the country in 
districts that have a per family income of $8,000, $9,000, $10,000 less 
than yours. This is, after all, one country.
  And just as I believe that the most fortunate human beings in this 
country ought to be willing to extend a helping hand for those who are 
least fortunate, I also think that those communities that are well off 
ought to be able to extend a helping hand to the communities that are 
less well off, and that certainly is the case with the number of the 
economic development projects that this committee is trying to fund, 
recognizing that we are, after all, all one country.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman, just briefly in close, this is a modest 
economic development initiative. It's very appropriate under this 
account, and it will allow this museum project to revitalize an area of 
downtown that is in much need of revitalization.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
  The amendment was rejected.


            Amendment Offered by Mr. Frank of Massachusetts

  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. 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. Frank of Massachusetts:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. 410. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to implement or enforce the requirement under section 
     12(c) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437j(c); relating to community service).

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I offer this on behalf of 
myself and our colleague from New York Mr. Rangel, who, in fact, in a 
previous Congress in 2002, I believe, offered a similar amendment. It 
would suspend for a year, because we do this 1 year at a time, the work 
requirement in the public housing sector. We're talking about 8 hours a 
month.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I'm prepared to accept this amendment on the 
part of Mr. Frank and Mr. Rangel.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I'm certainly prepared for it to be 
accepted.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I have no objection. We have no 
objection. We accept the amendment.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of 
my time, and I will go make a great speech in my office.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake

  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting 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:
       Sec. ___. (a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--None of the 
     funds in this Act shall be available for the Hunting and 
     Fishing Museum of Pennsylvania in Tionesta, Pennsylvania.
       (b) Corresponding Reduction of Funds.--The amount otherwise 
     provided by this Act for ``Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development--Community Development Fund'' (and specified for 
     the Economic Development Initiative) is hereby reduced by 
     $100,000.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the

[[Page H8338]]

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, just once I would love to hear the other 
side say, we have no objection to that amendment and will accept it, 
but I suppose I won't be so lucky today.
  This amendment would prevent $100,000 in funding for the Hunting and 
Fishing Museum in Pennsylvania and reduce the cost of the bill by a 
corresponding amount.
  Mr. Chairman, my staff and I have never had a hard time fishing for 
earmarks that seem to be fiscally irresponsible, but this one seemed to 
be a particularly easy catch. It seems that there is no museum that we 
will not fund. We have funded teapot museums. We've funded mule 
museums. We have funded rock and roll halls of fame. Now, we're being 
asked to fund a museum honoring the time-honored hobbies of hunting and 
fishing.
  According to the earmark description, the earmark would fund the 
development and creation of interactive, educational and historical 
exhibits. According to the Web site for the Hunting and Fishing Museum, 
the museum came as a result of its location in a forest area of 
Pennsylvania where hunting and fishing are already big industries.
  I enjoy fishing and hunting as much as the next person, but I'm not 
convinced that the Federal Government has a role here. I'd like to have 
explained what the Federal nexus is.
  According to the National Association for Sporting Goods, the hunting 
industry did $2.8 billion in business sales in 2004. For fiscal year 
2003, the fishing industry's retail sales totaled over $40 billion. 
With these kind of profits, why are these industries relying on the 
Federal Government to fund a museum honoring their pastimes? Are we not 
picking winners and losers when we select only a handful of museums to 
fund? Is this a fair and equitable process?
  More than that, more than being equitable, some say if everybody is 
given the chance and there's an account to do this, that it's okay, 
that it's justified, everybody's getting theirs, let me get mine. But I 
think, particularly for us on this side of the aisle who say that we 
believe in limited government, economic freedom, individual 
responsibility, it seems a particularly hard sell.
  I'm not making fun of the hobbies of hunting and fishing. As I 
mentioned, I do a fair amount of both myself. But here I just fail to 
see a Federal nexus and a Federal role.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the 
amendment and claim the time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I find it ironic today 
the maker of this amendment represents one of the more affluent parts 
of America, one of the parts of America that wouldn't be there, 
wouldn't be growing and prospering without billions and billions of 
Federal investment.
  We can start with the 336-mile diversion canal that diverts water 
from the Colorado River so they can irrigate the desert and make it a 
city. It seems to me that's a pretty expensive economic development 
project taking desert and making it grow.
  Mesa last year, his home area, $35 million of their budget is Federal 
money, and he keeps talking about the process. Well, I think I 
understand the process, and I'd be glad to debate the process with him 
any day, anytime, anywhere. I've been in business all my life, 
retailing. I served in local government 8 years, State government 19 
years, Federal Government 11 years, and I understand process.
  Rural America is not a part of the process of funds from the Federal 
Government. This bureaucracy you brag about how they allocate money and 
how they hand it out as if this was some pure process. Rural 
communities don't have planning departments. They don't have planning 
directors. They don't have consultants. They don't hire lobbyists like 
Mesa and Phoenix and Arizona do. They're fighting for their economic 
lives.
  This little forest county is less than 10,000 people. I think the 
population went from close to 5,500 to 7,500 because we opened a prison 
there. It used to be the home of an Evenflo Bottle Company, and those 
people would like to see a little investment in economic development in 
that community. It used to be the home of a glass plant. It used to be 
the home of a cabinet factory. They're all gone.
  It is a beautiful area, some of the most beautiful parts of America. 
It is the best hunting and fishing in America, and tourism is the only 
tool they have that's working. This Hunting and Fishing Museum is 
another tool to try to keep hunters and fishermen and travelers and 
visitors to visit that part of the area.
  Another thing, its interactive displays teach young people about 
hunting and fishing. We have a lot of people today that don't have 
fathers at home teaching them to hunt and fish. The Hunting and Fishing 
Museum is going to have classes. They're going to have classrooms. 
They're going to teach young people the joy of hunting and fishing. I 
find you take a young man and you teach him to fish, you teach him to 
hunt, you get him involved in a sport, he's less likely to be in 
crimes, drugs and on the streets.
  It's a part of the fiber of America. There is no urban museum that 
isn't loaded with Federal dollars to build it.

                              {time}  1515

  Rural museums don't have that same pathway. I defy a museum in 
America that doesn't have Federal funding in it. Because a little 
community asks for 50 or 100,000, this is some sort of a crime?
  I'm sorry. I'm not going to apologize. I served Forest County as a 
State House member, a State senator and now a Congressman. I ran a 
business within 10 miles, and many of these people were customers of 
mine when I had a supermarket. These are good people fighting for their 
economic lives trying to build this museum.
  The State has allocated $4 million, but they have to get matching 
money. This $100,000 will get them another $100,000 from the State, 
because as they raise money, they get money. I gladly debate this 
museum. It's a good investment for the future for Forest County and for 
America.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, nobody is suggesting that it is a crime to 
support this kind of earmark, nor would it be a crime to actually deny 
funding for it. That's what the process is about.
  My complaint, and nobody has suggested either, that there's this pure 
process at the Federal agency level. It's dysfunctional. We haven't 
provided the type of oversight that we need to.
  The fact that there is an account over there to actually fund 
economic development projects suggests to me that it's out of control, 
that that's what we are about, what we should be about. We control the 
Federal purse strings. It should be in our interest actually to rein in 
spending over there rather than trying to compete with it and say if 
they do effect spending on this project or that, whomever has the 
district, that we shouldn't compete with that here and say, well, we 
can do one, one-up them with the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. If they 
had funded another hall of fame, we should say, is it the Federal 
Government's role to fund these? That's what I am questioning here.
  If we can fund teapot museums and mule museums and hunting and 
fishing museums, what is off limits? What would come here that we could 
say we are not going to fund that? We could fund a mule museum. How 
about a donkey museum. Is that out of line? Where do we say enough is 
enough, and where do we say let's give the taxpayer a break?
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. According to the Department of 
Transportation in 2005, his area received $580 million for its 
construction of a $1.4 billion, that's a pretty big percentage, of a 
19.6 mile light rail system serving metropolitan Phoenix.
  Why should people from Forest County have to pay that? I should make 
that argument. We can use it. Mass transit gets huge amounts of money, 
and Arizona gets lots of that. The largesse goes to the urban areas 
that have the ability to get it.
  One thing about the earmark process, I am not saying it's perfect, 
but I have

[[Page H8339]]

never asked for an earmark that I wouldn't defend publicly in any 
setting. I am proud today to ask this Congress to give $100,000 to the 
Hunting and Fishing Museum in little Forest County, that is trying to 
rebuild their economic base, enhance their tourism and teach our young 
people the value of wildlife and fishing and hunting and the beauty of 
the area. That's a noble issue.
  I will gladly support the ability to help that rural county. I ask 
support of this Congress for this earmark.
  The Acting 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 Acting 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:
       Sec. ___. (a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--None of the 
     funds in this Act shall be available for the Friends of the 
     Cheat Rails to Trails Program.
       (b) Corresponding Reduction of Funds.--The amount otherwise 
     provided by this Act for ``Department of Transportation--
     Administrative Provisions--Federal Highway Administration'' 
     (and specified for the Transportation, Community, and System 
     Preservation Program) is hereby reduced by $300,000.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, 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 take $300,000 from the 
Friends of the Cheat Rails-to-Trails program. The Cheat Trail is one 
small part of the 13,600 miles of trails built by the Rails-to-Trails 
Conservancy. The program's mission is to create a nationwide network of 
trails for former rail lines.
  The program is a nationwide effort, yet this earmark is aimed 
directly at one trail in West Virginia. This is not the first time 
Friends of Cheat have bypassed the Rails-to-Trails program for funding. 
The House approved a $300,000 earmark for the Cheat trail just last 
year. If the trail is in such need of funding, isn't it coming from the 
funding and the many grants allocated in the Rails-to-Trails program?
  This is another problem I have with the contemporary practice of 
earmarking. If we set up processes at the Federal agency level, and we 
set up accounts, often when people apply to that account, and apply for 
a grant and don't get it, then we in Congress will go and give them 
that project anyway through an earmark.
  So if we are telling the Federal agencies, here is a process that you 
should go through that is merit based, that is competition based, and 
then fund those who don't get a contract, what are we saying? If we 
have a problem with a Federal agency's process or program, then we 
should amend them.
  We should change them. We should call the agency heads before us and 
say explain why are you doing this, why are you giving money to this 
organization and not that one, but not to circumvent the process and 
basically add to it.
  The Rails-to-Trails program has over 100,000 members, receives 
Federal, State and private funding. It was created over 20 years ago. I 
think that if this organization was to apply to the program, they are 
quite capable of finding funding. There is funding there.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from West Virginia is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, in a way, I hardly know where to start 
here, but I might start with the gentleman's question that he poses 
time and time again, not only today but in previous days: Is it the 
Federal Government's role to fund these projects?
  He has several different arguments against projects. When projects of 
a very significant nature are pointed out that are going on in his 
district, he says, oh, well, in the past they were authorized, 
appropriated, and he says they have oversight. To what extent, we don't 
know.
  But the point is, they went through a process here in Congress. 
Article I, section 7 doesn't say what process it should go through. It 
says that it's the Congress' job to do that. Every Member of this body 
is looking at their congressional district and thinking about economic 
developments and what are the needs.
  If you are in a transition economy, transitioning from a basic 
industry, manufacturing economy to a new economy, tourism is a very 
important part of that new economy, of that vision into the future.
  We have seen a lot of projects from industrial areas that fall into 
that category, whether they are museums, whether they are trails, 
whether they are any of those kinds of appurtenances, if you will, that 
contribute to the economic development in the tourism realm.
  Well, if the gentleman's question is, is it the government's role, 
the Federal Government's role, to fund these projects, which he asks 
over and over again, as the alternative argument against these 
projects, then it has been answered over and over and over again. It is 
the Federal Government's role to do it through this body. 
Constitutionally, it is our responsibility. Article I makes that very 
clear.
  So I just want to point that out and then speak and thank the 
gentleman for the opportunity to stand up to speak for Friends of 
Cheat, because they are doing just that. They are laying the kind of 
infrastructure that is necessary and crucial to that new economy, and 
that aspect of our economy in the future of West Virginia is going to 
be tourism. He has allowed me to speak to that.
  Before I speak to it, I would like to thank the gentleman from 
Massachusetts for his leadership and review of this project. I know his 
staff has spent hours on it, because my staff has spent hours on the 
projects that we have approved. But this funding will be used, as the 
gentleman said, to acquire land and develop a trail in order to create 
those kinds of infrastructure that are attractive and make usable the 
bounty that is West Virginia.
  I thank the gentleman for allowing me the opportunity to speak in 
favor of this project. I want to compliment him for the tremendous 
assets that are going into Arizona. I am extremely impressed; it's an 
affluent area. His predecessors have worked very hard, as has been 
pointed out here today.
  There is nothing the matter with that, and there is nothing the 
matter with the process that those projects went through. Nor is there 
anything the matter with the projects that we are talking about here 
today have gone through.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FLAKE. Might I inquire as to the time remaining.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman has 3 minutes remaining.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Iowa (Mr. King).
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arizona 
for bringing this amendment, and I appreciate the gentleman from West 
Virginia coming down to defend this particular language that's here.
  I think we need to take a look at this thing from a perspective 
that's perhaps broader than this particular project, that being that 
the issues that have been raised here in this Congress will be 
discussed again and again throughout this appropriations process.
  But if the project has merit, it should have merit. It should be able 
to succeed in its efforts without being specifically identified.
  But I think it has a fair amount of weight to drag with it, in that 
that trail has been there a long time. It could wait awhile longer.
  I would submit that the issues that surround the particular district 
that the gentleman represents should be considered in light of this 
particular appropriation. The report that came out in the Wall Street 
Journal that's a little more than a year old, about land that has been 
purchased along the river that happens to be the same river that this 
trail runs along, I don't know that it's adjacent, brings a question to 
mind as to whether or not the gentleman

[[Page H8340]]

from West Virginia will be able to follow through on statements 
reported in the Wall Street Journal that say any claim whatsoever that 
says these investments are in any way related to my actions as a Member 
of Congress is categorically false.
  I don't deny that statement. I don't actually take issue with that. I 
would just ask the gentleman if he could suspend his aggressive effort 
to fund this project until such time as these questions that surround 
this Cheat River project could be resolved.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, let me just close. Let me say, again, I fail 
to see the relevance of the number of defense contractors that Arizona 
has or the amount of Federal money that goes there by contract, by 
competitive bid or otherwise. How is that relevant to this process?
  The truth is, there is something wrong with the process when we have 
thousands and thousands and thousands of earmarks, when we have 1,500 
and just a couple of days to review them before we come here to the 
floor. There is something wrong with that process.
  As I have said before, we can try all we want to conjure up some 
justification for the contemporary practice of earmarking. But if we 
think the taxpayers across the country are buying it, we are drinking 
our own bath water.
  We are believing our own press releases if we think that's the case, 
because they're not. They're not believing it, and they shouldn't. 
There is no noble pedigree to this kind of earmarking. There really 
isn't.
  So to appropriate money in this fashion is simply not becoming of 
this Congress. We are better than that. We should have more respect for 
the institution than that.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will 
be postponed.

                              {time}  1530


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake

  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I have one final earmark at the desk.
  The Acting 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:
       Sec. ___. (a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--None of the 
     funds in this Act shall be available for the Houston Zoo in 
     Houston, Texas.
       (b) Corresponding Reduction of Funds.--The amount otherwise 
     provided by this Act for ``Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development--Community Development Fund'' (and specified for 
     the Economic Development Initiative) is hereby reduced by 
     $300,000.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. FLAKE. I thank the Chairman.
  This amendment would prohibit $300,000 in Federal funds from being 
used by the Houston Zoo in Houston, Texas, for an educational broadcast 
program and would reduce the cost of the bill by a consistent amount.
  According to the earmark description in this certification letter, 
this funding would be used to develop an educational broadcast program 
to provide interactive distance learning, first to the neighboring 
institutions at the Texas Medical Center, and ultimately expanding the 
program to regional school districts.
  According to the sponsor's letter, this program would enable children 
and students to ask questions of and converse with zoo experts in real 
time, replicating an in-classroom dynamic, but in an exciting and 
unique manner.
  I should say the Houston Zoo is the permanent home of 4,500 animals; 
the zoo attracts more than 1.5 million visitors a year; general 
admission is $10 for an adult, $5 for a child. In fact, according to 
the City Navigator, annual revenue for the Houston Zoo in 2006 totaled 
$39 billion. In 2006 alone, the Houston Zoo had over $43 million in net 
assets and nearly $20 million in excess revenue. It has a membership 
base of over 28,000 households. Corporate sponsors include Continental 
Airlines, Shell Oil, JPMorgan, BMC Software, Conoco-Phillips, FedEx. 
The list goes on and on.
  Again, here, if we are going to start to fund programs at zoos like 
this, where does it end? Virtually every Member has a zoo or some type 
of wildlife preserve in their district. Where do we say enough is 
enough?
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of the time.
  Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to claim the time in 
opposition.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FLAKE. Here again, let me simply say there are a lot of zoos 
around the country, a lot of zoos that every one of which would like to 
receive Federal funding. Where do we say enough is enough? Where do we 
say this zoo is worthy, they have two tigers; this one only has one 
lion? The tigers get it? I mean, where do we have some kind of 
equitable process rather than Members just being able to designate 
funding of this type? We simply cannot continue to go on in this 
fashion.
  Again, somebody will probably point out Arizona has a lot of defense 
contractors and gets a lot of Federal money. Again, I fail to see the 
relevance of that argument here. Let's throw the taxpayers a bone here, 
if you will, and let's finally say we are going to stop funding for one 
of these earmarks and actually return to fiscal sanity. We are running 
between a $200 billion and $300 billion deficit this year. Remember, 
money comes into Washington, we don't have enough to fund the programs, 
and so we are borrowing money to actually pay for programs like this. 
We can't continue to do that. I urge support for the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I am not sure what standard the 
gentleman from Arizona follows, but as a member of the Appropriations 
Committee, as a guardian of the public Treasury, representing the 
people of Houston, I have approached all spending requests from the 
perspective as someone who has a second mortgage on the house and all 
the credit cards are topped out. My starting answer on all spending 
requests is ``no,'' and ``yes'' has to be earned.
  I have published all of my appropriations requests on my Web site for 
many years. I published both my request letters as well as the final 
result of those requests that the members of the committee have 
graciously agreed to support because they know that any request coming 
from me and my office has already been carefully screened. I won't 
submit requests that haven't already passed my very careful scrutiny.
  Again, I approach the request from the perspective of there is not 
enough money in the Treasury to do it; the starting answer is ``no,'' 
and ``yes'' has to be earned; the request has to fall within the 
functions of the Federal Government, and it has to be something for 
which there is no other source of revenue.
  I am proud to represent the Texas Medical Center. I am proud to 
represent the Houston Zoo. This $300,000 will be used by the zoo. They 
are matching it, providing a 3-1 private match to these dollars that 
are going to go exclusively into providing live video feeds to 
critically ill children and children that are dying of cancer who 
otherwise would have no interaction with the outside world.
  The Texas Medical Center is recognized around the world as probably 
the greatest concentration of medical talent anywhere in the world. God 
forbid anybody within the sound of my voice comes down with cancer or a 
dreaded disease; but if they do, there is no better place to find a 
cure for that than at the Texas Medical Center.
  If you are a child with terrible burns, trapped in your room and 
unable to get out and visit the zoo personally, there

[[Page H8341]]

is no television channel in Houston for you to see what goes on at the 
zoo. The zoo is going to use these dollars to construct dedicated 
transmission facilities to these dying children, critically ill 
children in their hospital rooms so they can talk to the feeders, 
people actually working with the animals, observe the animals around 
the clock. And, certainly, your mental attitude is a tremendous part of 
getting well and recovering.
  This request was the only one that I submitted on behalf of the 
Houston Zoo. They submitted a lot of requests to me. In fact, I think 
the appropriators will find that most of the requests from me will take 
about one page, because I am very careful and only submit a very few. I 
am proud of all of them. They are all on my Web site. And I can tell 
you, this is one that I am very grateful to the chairman Mr. Olver and 
to the ranking member Mr. Knollenberg for supporting. They know they 
don't get many requests from me, and this one certainly is one that is 
appropriate to help these dying and critically ill children revive 
their spirits in interacting with and seeing what marvelous work the 
Houston Zoo is doing, which is, of course, right next door to the Texas 
Medical Center.
  Finally, I want to encourage Members to vote against this amendment 
based on the merits, but then also because the amendment doesn't save 
any money. I am one of the most fiscally conservative Members of this 
House and proud of it. I voted against all of these big new spending 
programs over the last many years, whether it be the farm bill; I voted 
against the farm bill, billions of dollars for AIDS in Africa as money 
we don't have; voted against the No Child Left Behind because that is 
an intrusion of the 10th amendment sovereignty of the States and money 
we can't afford to spend; voted against the Medicare prescription drug 
program. I have voted against most of the big spending programs that 
have been driven through this House, because I truly believe that I 
have got a responsibility to my daughter and future generations to try 
to keep Federal spending at a minimum, diminish the size, power, and 
cost to the Federal Government.
  As Mr. Jefferson, my hero, said, apply core republican principles, 
with a small ``R,'' keeping most power and responsibility at the local 
level. If you apply core republican principles, the knot will always 
untie itself.
  So I am always looking for ways to save money. So I would ask Members 
to vote against this amendment first on the merits; and then, secondly, 
because unfortunately, once again, Mr. Flake's amendment doesn't save 
any money. He is not reducing the overall 302(a) allocation of the 
bill. So this is another phantom savings that is not going to result in 
a savings of one nickel for taxpayers by cutting out the live video 
feeds to these dying and critically ill children in the medical center.
  And I am sick and tired of phony amendments that act like they are 
going to save money. I have already scrutinized this, along with every 
other request from my office. I am proud of the work the zoo is doing 
and the work the medical center is doing. And you can expect me to be 
out here vigorously defending the work of this committee investing in 
the sciences.
  I thank you, Chairman Obey. The chairman of my Subcommittee on the 
Sciences, Mr. Mollohan, is here. Our ranking member, Mr. Frelinghuysen 
of New Jersey. God bless them for the investments they are making into 
sciences and NASA and medical and scientific research. That is our 
Nation's insurance policy. I will be out here vigorously defending them 
against anyone attempting to cut those investments into sciences or 
NASA or in medical research. That is this Nation's insurance policy.
  And I especially resent somebody coming out here and offering a phony 
amendment that is not going to save one nickel of taxpayer money; 
because this $300,000 is not being taken out of the overall spending, 
it is just going to be spent by bureaucrats.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, again, I do not want to comment on the 
particular project under question, but, again, I just want to make a 
point to my friend from Arizona. And I love the State of Arizona. It is 
a beautiful State. I go there every year to visit some friends. I think 
it is absolutely wonderful.
  But when I came to this Congress, I believe there were four 
congressional districts in Arizona, four Representatives of Arizona in 
this House, and there were 10 Representatives from the State of 
Wisconsin. Now, almost 40 years later, Wisconsin has eight 
congressional districts, eight Representatives, and Arizona, I believe, 
has a similar number. That means that Arizona has grown at an 
incredibly rapid rate, and an awful lot of money from a lot of other 
States has helped finance that economic growth.
  And I return to the Central Arizona Project. I am not expressing a 
judgment about that project one way or the other, but I do know that it 
is one of the two or three most expensive earmarks in history. And I 
would simply suggest that I find it ironic that the gentleman has 
chosen to go after several projects today in States whose economies are 
far less prosperous than the gentleman's own State.
  I also would question whether or not there is any greater purity in a 
highway, for instance, being built on the basis of a determination by 
two or three persons from a given State that knows the area, I don't 
know why that is any less pure than to have some partisan bureaucrat in 
the agency decide.


 Moment of Silence Observed in Memory of Officer Jacob J. Chestnut and 
                        Detective John M. Gibson

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Chair asks the gentleman from Wisconsin to 
suspend for one moment.
  Pursuant to the Chair's announcement of earlier today, the Committee 
will now observe a moment of silence in memory of Officer Jacob J. 
Chestnut and Detective John M. Gibson.
  Will all those present in the Chamber and those visiting us in the 
gallery please rise for a moment of silence.
  The gentleman from Wisconsin may continue.
  Mr. OBEY. As I was saying, I don't know why one should assume that a 
decision to build a highway or any other project, if made by partisan 
bureaucrats or politically appointed bureaucrats in an agency, I don't 
know why that is any more pure than a decision being made out in the 
open by Members of Congress, who I think know their districts as well 
as any bureaucrat.
  So all I would suggest is that while I am certainly not fond of the 
earmarking process, I am also not fond of the idea that somehow those 
of us from States not quite as prosperous as the gentleman's need to be 
embarrassed by the fact that we are asking for a little better deal in 
terms of Federal money spent in our districts, especially when the 
gentleman's State is above the national average in terms of the amount 
of Federal dollars spent in his own State.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will 
be postponed.


          Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida

  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. 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. 25 offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to 
     eliminate, consolidate, de-consolidate, co-locate, execute 
     inter-facility reorganization, or plan for the consolidation/
     deconsolidation, inter-facility reorganization, or co-
     location of any FAA air traffic control facility or service, 
     with the exception of the reversal of the transfer of the 
     radar functions from the Palm Springs Terminal Radar Approach 
     Control (TRACON) to the Southern California TRACON.


[[Page H8342]]


  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today with 
Representatives Poe, Filner, and Bono to offer an amendment prohibiting 
the Federal Aviation Administration from eliminating, consolidating, 
colocating, or planning to consolidate or colocate any terminal radar 
approach control center, or TRACON.
  Our amendment is virtually identical to the amendment that was 
overwhelmingly approved by the House in a bipartisan fashion by almost 
100 votes just last June. Yet, since the House went on record of 
opposing further consolidation, the FAA has done virtually nothing to 
address our concerns. Even more, it has accelerated its consolidation 
efforts while shutting out stakeholders from the process.
  Mr. Chairman, the TRACON system guides airplanes within a 50-mile 
radius of the airport on their takeoffs and final approaches. The FAA 
has embarked on an ambitious consolidation and colocation plan which 
will significantly limit our air traffic capacities in the future. I 
warn that this policy is shortsighted.
  It is now rumored that the FAA's current consolidation proposal seeks 
to eliminate or consolidate nearly 50 TRACONs in over 30 States across 
the United States.

                              {time}  1545

  In some instances, entire States will be left without any approach 
radar system within their borders. In other instances, consolidation 
runs the risk of placing undue stress on nearby TRACONs already having 
to deal with larger airspaces and staffing shortfalls.
  In Florida, the FAA is planning to consolidate the TRACONs of Miami 
International, Ft. Lauderdale International and Palm Beach 
International airports into one TRACON. Note that all three of these 
airports are within a Federal high-risk urban area, and smack dab in 
the heart of Hurricane Alley.
  Once this plan is implemented, if a terrorist attack or natural 
disaster were to strike the Miami TRACON, then all three international 
airports would lose their approach radar system. Controllers in 
Jacksonville, an airport more than 350 miles away, will be forced to 
direct approaching aircraft throughout virtually the entire State.
  Realize, Mr. Chairman, this is not a question of whether or not 
consolidation can technologically be done. It can be done and it is 
being done. On the contrary, this is a question of should it be done 
and what risk is Congress willing to run.
  Further, in the instances where consensus is possible and 
consolidation could be appropriate, the FAA is still refusing to 
involve stakeholders in the process. To that end, this amendment 
appropriately exempts the TRACONs of Palm Springs and southern 
California from the limitation.
  Opponents of our amendment likely will argue that the construction of 
some new control facilities, including one in my district, will be 
delayed and funds lost if we do not allow consolidation. To them I say, 
why can't we keep those funds available until all stakeholders can 
reach a viable solution? Congress does it all the time.
  Some point to the FAA authorization bill as the appropriate place to 
address this issue. And I have great respect for the chairman of that 
committee with whom I've had a conversation. If that's the case, 
though, why do we keep throwing money at the problem in this bill? At 
the very least, we should tie this money to smart policy and a 
transparent process.
  The FAA's TRACON consolidation runs the grave risk of leaving our air 
traffic system vulnerable during critical times and setting a dangerous 
precedent for a process that excludes stakeholders from decisions that 
impact their lives. This is not a risk that Congress should be willing 
to take.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, the major problem, other than lack of funds, 
related to aviation in this country for the next period of time is the 
great growth in traffic. We are expecting total traffic to pass 1 
billion passengers within the next 10 years. Over the last 10 years it 
has risen from, gone well above 500 million passengers per year.
  Now, this amendment will make the cost of providing facilities and 
equipment in order to be able to meet that great growth in traffic much 
higher than it otherwise would be. The modern equipment that is 
necessary, most of the present towers need to be upgraded, the 
equipment needs to be upgraded, towers need to be built for the next 
generation of air traffic control to deal with all of that huge 
increase in expected traffic. The towers themselves are expensive. The 
electronic equipment, the facilities, what you call the STARS systems 
for control, all of these are expensive items, and the expense of the 
process burgeons if we do not make other kinds of efficiencies.
  Now, this amendment would halt all of the modernization of air 
traffic control facilities, both TRACONs and towers, and the equipment 
within those facilities. Consolidation has already gone on very 
successfully in some parts of the country.
  The gentleman from Florida has suggested that there are problems in 
safety, potential problems in safety. Look, in California they have 
consolidated to now two TRACONs covering the whole State for the 30-
plus million people in California and the roughly 40 commercial air 
systems, airports that are there. So that kind of consolidation has 
gone on also in New York, also in Chicago, also in Atlanta, in all of 
those places, some of the most complicated air traffic systems in the 
country. The most complicated ones have already been undergoing 
consolidations, and this proposal would stop that process.
  It would cost us $85 million in savings from planned and designed and 
in construction consolidations that are already in process. It would 
cost another $110 million in funds which would expire, because funds 
for FAA facilities and equipment goes on a 3-year cycle.
  In addition, there would be $225 million in construction funds that 
will be placed on hold. It is an extremely costly endeavor, and it is 
generally wrongheaded, really. We have to have this consolidation 
because it's critical to the efficient dealing with our movement of air 
traffic in this country.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota 
(Mr. Oberstar).
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Without a great deal of enthusiasm, I oppose the 
amendment of the gentleman, although I supported it last year. But this 
year we have in place in our FAA reauthorization bill a process that 
will cure the problem the gentleman has brought to the House floor.
  Frankly, the FAA has not been responsive to the gentleman from 
Florida. Worse, they have been dismissive. They have not consulted with 
him or with his airport or with the community that he represents.
  In the legislation that the gentleman from Illinois, chairman of the 
subcommittee and I have fashioned with bipartisan support, we have a 
process in place. Once our authorization bill is enacted, that will 
require the FAA to consult with communities, with airport authorities, 
with the Members of Congress on these consolidation proposals and 
report back to the Congress. We'll get another crack at it. We'll do it 
in due course and due appropriate process, not the way FAA is proposing 
to do it, certainly not with a base-closing commission approach that 
the administration offered to the Congress.
  Just today the gentleman from Illinois held a hearing on the wretched 
conditions in a great many of our air traffic control facilities, which 
the FAA is ignoring under the guise of modernization of air traffic 
control system.
  Well, come on. That's not happening for another 5 to 10 years. 
Meanwhile, people have to sit there and suffer through mold and rain 
and mildew and, in northern Minnesota, in my district in Duluth, snow 
coming through the windows, or flies in the air traffic control tower 
in the winter. Come on. That's not taking care of our facilities.

[[Page H8343]]

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. I move to strike the last word, Mr. Chairman.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. I, too, am opposed to this amendment. A number of 
planned and paid-for capital improvement projects will be delayed or 
completely cancelled if this amendment goes through. And I think that 
the discussion you've heard from the two previous speakers is enough to 
suggest that, as much as we may want to help the dilemma in the 
gentleman's Florida area, there is a lot of other land out there across 
this country that needs to be looked at, too.
  I yield to the ranking member of the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee, Mr. John Mica.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this 
amendment. I'm pleased to join Mr. Oberstar who chairs our committee, 
and as the ranking member, and you'll hear from our ranking member on 
the Aviation Subcommittee, also opposed to this amendment and, I 
believe, Mr. Costello, who's the Chair of the Aviation Subcommittee, 
which I previously chaired, is opposed to this amendment. So rarely 
have we had such bipartisan support in opposing an amendment.
  As Mr. Oberstar said, too, maybe this may be well-intended to try to 
deal with some problems we've had in the past, but let me tell you, 
this amendment can have some very severe consequences. We're talking 
about closing down the modernization of our air traffic control system.
  Here's the headline of today's Washington Times: ``FAA Target Airline 
Delays.'' I can't come to the floor and not be besieged by Members who 
haven't been delayed by flights. If you really want to close down our 
Nation's aviation system, pass this amendment.
  We have successfully done these consolidations in the past. We'll do 
them and modernize and get the latest equipment. However, a moratorium 
on consolidations through January of 2009 will cause FAA to lose $110 
million of expiring funds this year that are targeted toward 
modernizing these facilities, and nearly a quarter of a billion dollars 
in construction costs will be placed on hold for projects currently in 
process across the country. This would be a disaster.
  Many of the airports affected are planning to make improvements, and 
all of this attempt to get our aviation industry moving and air traffic 
moving and modernization of the system will come to a grinding halt. 
May be well-intended, may try to solve a problem that the gentleman 
from Florida has experienced, but this is not the solution.
  I urge opposition.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield now to the 
gentleman on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Mr. Petri 
from Wisconsin.
  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I join with my colleagues on the committee 
who have studied this matter in opposing the amendment before us.
  Just this morning the Aviation Subcommittee conducted a hearing on 
our aging air traffic control facilities, some of which are in very, 
very bad condition, and this amendment would move us in the wrong 
direction rather than the right direction. The impact of the amendment 
would be, according to the FAA, that it would lose some $110 million in 
funds that have been programmed to modernize the facilities that it 
needs to maintain to keep our system moving. And this will expire if 
the amendment is adopted.
  The average age of FAA towers is some 27 years and in route centers 
are 43 years. They need to spend some $30 billion over the next few 
years to modernize the facilities and maintain them.
  And I realize that it's a well-meaning amendment, but it would set us 
back and delay the efficiency and mobility of our population, and could 
even result in some increase in risk in the system.
  For those reasons, I would urge rejection of the amendment.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Would the Chair advise how much time I have 
remaining.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman has 30 seconds.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I ask unanimous consent that each side be 
given an additional 2 minutes.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to Mr. 
Poe, my colleague from Texas.
  Mr. POE. Mr. Chairman, I am strongly a proponent of this amendment. I 
represent southeast Texas. We have a TRACON at Houston Intercontinental 
Airport. We have one in Beaumont, 90 miles away. And I am not convinced 
that the consolidation of these two TRACONs in Houston is a good idea 
for safety.
  I'm also concerned about the fact that we have more and more planes 
in the air, but yet the FAA wants to have fewer and fewer facilities in 
the United States to control that aviation.
  I'm also concerned, as the gentleman from Florida is, about security. 
Down in southeast Texas, what I represent, I represent the number one 
refinery in the United States, the number two refinery in the United 
States. Twenty-two percent of the Nation's aviation fuel is produced in 
my area.

                              {time}  1600

  And if there was some tragic event, some terrorist attack on Houston 
and the Intercontinental Airport, who would be controlling the skies? 
Some TRACON unit in Oklahoma City and New Mexico? I think not. I think 
it is good that we have two TRACONs in the area.
  And, lastly, I am not convinced that this would save any money. Just 
as we went through with the BRAC military base closures, we are finding 
that that did not save the taxpayers any money, especially with 
Ellington Field in Houston.
  So for all those reasons I think this is a wise amendment for safety 
and security, and I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, going forward, my colleagues argue that we would lose 
$110 million that expires at the end of this year for FAA. I remind my 
colleagues that this is the United States Congress, and I have been 
here when we have extended the kinds of funds that would be made 
allocable to agencies by time. If we wanted to, the $110 million that 
has been discussed could be extended for 2 or 3 years, and FAA could be 
delayed in that particular undertaking with reference to so-called 
modernization.
  What they did in this particular measure, after we passed the measure 
last year, FAA then accelerated their process rather than sitting down 
and talking with the stakeholders such as the Members of Congress or 
pilots or air traffic controllers or airport operators or aviation 
operators and the general public; absolutely no discussion, and then 
put forward the measures that have come out now. That is the primary 
reason that I am on the floor. Sixteen thousand controllers and 
engineers believe this to be the case.
  For the Record I will include a letter from the National Air Traffic 
Controllers Association.
                                              National Air Traffic


                             Controllers Association, AFL-CIO,

                                    Washington, DC, July 23, 2007.

      Vote Yes on the Hastings-Poe-Filner-Bono Amendment to THUD 
                             Appropriations

       Dear Member of Congress: As the President of the National 
     Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA), representing 
     over 16,000 controllers, engineers, architects, nurses and 
     aviation safety professionals, I urge you to vote yes on the 
     Hastings-Poe-Filner-Bono amendment to H.R. 3074, the FY08 
     Transportation Appropriations Act. Representative Alcee 
     Hastings offered a very similar amendment to last year's 
     TTHUD bill to prevent the FAA from consolidating Terminal 
     Approach Control (TRACON) facilities, and it passed with 261 
     bipartisan votes.
       In the past, NATCA and the FAA have worked in tandem to 
     identify air traffic control facility consolidations that 
     could potentially make sense and to ensure that the process 
     involves the important input from vital stakeholders. 
     Unfortunately, the FAA is no longer taking into consideration 
     the legitimate concerns of stakeholders such as Members of 
     Congress, pilots, air traffic controllers, airport operators, 
     aviation operators, and the general public.
       NATCA believes that the FAA must consider air traffic 
     control facility consolidations/colocations using a 
     transparent process

[[Page H8344]]

     because the Agency has an obligation to involve stakeholders 
     in any Agency effort that could affect the safety and 
     efficiency of the airspace. A full risk-assessment, including 
     the Homeland Security implications of placing all of our 
     radar functions in one location, must be conducted and made 
     open to public scrutiny.
       A moratorium on consolidations is necessary to provide the 
     opportunity for Congress to evaluate the specific operational 
     need for proposed consolidations and prevent the Agency from 
     moving ahead with flawed consolidation plans without a 
     defined policy.
       We hope that you will support the efforts of our nation's 
     professional air traffic control workforce in keeping our 
     National Airspace System the safest in the world by 
     supporting this amendment. Vote yes on Hastings-Poe-Filner-
     Bono.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Patrick Forrey,
                                                        President.

  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Costello).
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly rise in opposition to the Hastings 
amendment, joining the chairman of the full committee, Chairman 
Oberstar; the ranking member Mr. Mica; and Mr. Petri.
  Mr. Hastings is exactly right. The FAA has done a very poor job of 
communicating with Members of Congress and stakeholders on its plans to 
consolidate and relocate facilities, but halting the process at this 
stage is not the answer.
  Instead, what we need is an open, continuous, and defined process, 
and that is exactly what we have in the reauthorization bill that the 
Transportation Committee passed just a few weeks ago. It allows 
affected stakeholders to work together with the FAA to develop criteria 
and make recommendations that will be submitted to the Congress and 
published in the Federal Register for proper review and oversight. Any 
objections or changes made to the recommendations must again be 
submitted to the Congress. Congress does not relinquish its role, but, 
instead, can provide thorough review, oversight, and input.
  Let me say that preventing consolidation and relocation is not the 
answer. We just held a hearing this morning, the Aviation Subcommittee, 
in which we discussed the FAA's aging traffic control facilities. Many 
of these facilities are 40 years old or older, and they are exceeding 
their useful life expectancy in not meeting current operational 
requirements. This has resulted in the GAO's giving many of the 
facilities a score of fair to poor.
  We must ensure that the FAA make the investments needed to maintain 
the current existing infrastructure, including in some cases 
consolidation and relocation, to ensure that the current system can 
continue to operate in a safe and reliable way. I believe the best 
course of action is to address this issue through the reauthorization 
bill, and that is exactly what we have done in passing the bill out of 
committee.
  As a result, I oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to vote 
``no'' on the Hastings amendment.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to point out that the 
gentleman from Florida has made the point that the House passed last 
year legislation doing this. That was never acted upon and was not 
included in the CR, the final CR for the 2007 budget. That was adopted 
in the House version of the bill, but it was not carried through to the 
CR. So there is no precedent of merit there.
  Secondly, the crux of our problem is that we have a huge growth of 
air traffic that is expected within a 20-year period. From 1995 to the 
year 2015, we will have gone from half a billion passengers to a 
billion passengers, and that is in the commercial traffic, plus all of 
the increase in general aviation. We cannot sit with our head in the 
sand and not modernize all these facilities, the towers, the 
facilities, the equipment, the control systems that are necessary to 
deal with that increase in traffic, and that has to be done. It has 
already been done in some of our major parts of the country.
  The gentleman from Texas has concerns about Texas. The authorizing 
language which the T&I Committee has reported out includes a system to 
look at those cases to review and to set up a system for reviewing how 
those systems will be set up in additional places as the consolidation 
of TRACONs and the modernization of these facilities and the 
reequipment of these facilities must go forward.
  So I think that that part of it is a red herring, truly. In the case 
of Chicago and New York and Philadelphia and Washington and California, 
our heaviest traffic locations in the country, and Atlanta besides, we 
already have these consolidations in place. And in the case of 
California, 40-some-odd airports and their tower facilities have been 
included now in 2 TRACONs where there used to be 8 or more TRACONs in 
the State of California.
  So the number of TRACONs is going to come down. It must come down, 
and we must get on with this modernization of the facilities and 
equipment that otherwise would always be very costly. It must be done.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OLVER. I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Florida, 
though I don't think I have much time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Just to say, Mr. Chairman, you know there is 
another component to all of this, and that is that the 16,000 air 
traffic controllers and the people that work in these modern facilities 
are overburdened, and I just for the life of me do not understand how 
we don't understand the dynamics of their work.
  And I thank the chairman for yielding.
  Mr. OLVER. They will be much less burdened if they have new 
facilities and new equipment, equipment that is modern and that can 
manage to handle that traffic in a much more efficient manner.
  I hope that the amendment will not be adopted.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
``noes'' appeared to have it.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida will 
be postponed.


                 Amendment Offered by Mr. Frelinghuysen

  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. 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. Frelinghuysen:
       At the end of the bill, before the short title, insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available under this Act 
     may be used by the Federal Aviation Administration to 
     implement its preferred alternative of the New York/New 
     Jersey/Philadelphia Airspace Redesign project.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to offer this amendment 
on my own behalf as well as Congressman Garrett from New Jersey, my 
colleague; and Congressman Christopher Shays from Connecticut.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to my colleague from 
New Jersey, Scott Garrett.
  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  I am pleased to come to the floor today with my colleague from New 
Jersey, Morristown, and also my other colleague here as well from 
Connecticut, Christopher Shays, as we propose an amendment that will 
ask the FAA to basically more closely consider how their proposed 
airspace redesign plan will impact upon the quality of life of the 
residents of the State of New Jersey, from Connecticut, and also from 
the State of New York as well.
  Now, we all recognize that the skies over our area are more crowded 
than ever before, and air travel is, obviously, a worthy goal. But the 
FAA must make noise and air pollution a top consideration whenever they 
work to redesign their airspace.

[[Page H8345]]

  Residents of the communities across the five States are facing a 
threat now to the quiet of their communities and also to the value of 
their homes as well. The residents of my area, the Fifth District of 
New Jersey, are especially concerned about this. Just recently we held 
what you call a town meeting of sorts, and nearly 1,500 people came out 
to the public hearing up in Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey, and that was 
just about a month ago. And they came out to voice their concerns 
directly to the FAA.
  The FAA received comments from all present, but wouldn't it have been 
a lot better if the FAA had taken those comments before they drafted 
their preferred alternative? The citizens who came to that meeting left 
with a deep concern that the FAA just is not listening. So this 
amendment is really here to help force the FAA to listen to those 
people in the area.
  So as noise in these communities increases, there is a very real 
possibility that the values of their homes are going to decrease. 
Residents are concerned their communities are going to be drastically 
affected by the fact that the FAA is simply trying to save 2, 3, 4, 5 
minutes from the travelers' air time.
  So, in conclusion, we are simply asking now through this amendment 
that the FAA reconsider their preferred alternative with an eye towards 
protecting the communities and considering that at the same time that 
they consider the air travelers as well.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, this and the previous amendment go together. 
Together, if these two amendments pass, our air traffic control system 
will be set back years in the process from which they have been going 
forward in trying to modernize both the air traffic design and the 
TRACON facilities to be used.
  The FAA has spent more than $50 million on airspace redesign in the 
New York, Philadelphia, New Jersey, western Connecticut area already. 
They have posted hundreds of outreach meetings to understand the needs 
and concerns. In addition, the design has undergone independent 
analysis by the inspector general throughout the process, and the FAA 
has adopted each of the IG's recommendations.
  Now, what are the benefits, what are the purposes of the airspace 
redesign? Well, number one, we have got this huge expected increase in 
traffic that I have already spoken to twice.
  Secondly, the air traffic region that is being described here, and 
this amendment only affects that region, not the whole country, only 
that region, but that air traffic system, that airspace system, is the 
system where the greatest delays, the greatest delays, are happening as 
we speak.
  The redesign of the airspace would allow for a major reduction in 
delays, first of all. By so doing, there would be less noise. They 
would be able to fly at higher altitudes, and use a gradual glide 
pattern in rather than stepwise glide patterns in, and use the whole 
airspace so that the net reduction of people who are affected by noise, 
by the levels of noise, is very large.
  In addition to that, environmentally if you are not flying around for 
long periods of time in the airspace and under delay and in holding 
patterns and sitting on the tarmac with the engines going, then you are 
saving a lot of fuel.

                              {time}  1615

  There will be much less fuel burned, therefore, much better air 
quality control in the process.
  All of these taken together, along with the fact that if you've got 
delays in that major area where so much traffic occurs, then there are 
backups with delays all over the country. So the air space design issue 
is a critical issue in totality for our modernization of our traffic 
control.
  So, I oppose the amendment, and I hope it will not be adopted.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Minnesota, the chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. The New York-New Jersey-Philadelphia metropolitan area 
has the most complex air space in the United States; that means, the 
most complex air space in the world. Four of the Nation's five airports 
reporting the worst on-time performance are Newark, LaGuardia, JFK and 
Philadelphia. Holding time is five times greater than any place in the 
country.
  The percentage of flights that arrive in Newark over an hour late is 
15 percent of all the fights. Seventy-five percent of the Nation's 
domestic and international flights are affected by delays and 
inefficiencies in the New York-New Jersey-Philadelphia air space, no 
matter where they're going.
  You have international flights arriving from the transatlantic 
corridor. You have flights arriving from Canada, flights arriving from 
South America, flights arriving transcontinental from the United States 
on the east coast merging into this area. Sure, there are awful noise 
impacts upon residents, but the redesign will save noise to some 
619,000 people, shifting it elsewhere, shifting it away from other 
people. FAA has held over 120 public meetings since they began the 
process of the air space redesign. This will save 20 percent of delays 
and 12 million minutes a year. This is important to the Nation, not 
just to this region.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. I, too, oppose the amendment. I agree that we need 
to do something with the problems that are out there. We have to strike 
a balance between our neighborhoods and our close-in airports. And I 
know that Mr. Garrett spoke about 1,500 people showing up for a hearing 
and/or town hall hearing, some kind. That's a lot of people, so there 
is a lot of grief and upset out there. But the traffic delays of the 
New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania airports, as has been pointed out 
by Mr. Oberstar, are the worst in history, and I think it's less than 
50 percent of the flights were on time. The FAA does need to act.
  At this time, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, Mr. Mica from Florida, 
a member of the T&I Committee.
  Mr. MICA. It is, again, rare that we have the chairmen on both sides 
of the aisle, the appropriation and authorizing committee, all 
uniformly in opposition to an amendment. But let me tell you, if you 
want to close down air traffic in the United States indefinitely in the 
Northeast, adopt this amendment.
  Now, this isn't something that we just cooked up, that we're going to 
redesign the air space in the Northeast corridor. We started on this in 
1998. We haven't redesigned the air corridor in the northeast United 
States since 1988. Imagine not expanding the roads or the 
transportation system in the Northeast since 1998 and the congestion 
you would have, and that's exactly what we've got.
  Now, I've been to the districts. I've been to Mr. Garrett's district, 
Mr. Fossella's district. I've been to Mr. Shays' district. And I 
continue to work with Members, when I chaired the Aviation 
Subcommittee, and now as ranking member, and we will work with them, 
but we have got to redesign the air space. Imagine having no expansion 
highways. Now, planes are no different than highways; they run in 
corridors. But we haven't changed it in the Northeast corridor since 
1988. We have been working on this redesign since 1998, some 10 years. 
We have got to make these changes and move forward with them.
  And we need to listen to the people. We need to make certain that we 
don't harm their environment, their noise levels, and take into 
consideration as many of the points that have been raised. But I urge 
you to defeat this amendment.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, might I inquire as to how much time is 
remaining?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan has 2\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri).
  Mr. PETRI. I thank my colleague for yielding.
  First of all, let me say that there is no one in this body who pays 
more attention and is more hardworking in defending the interests of 
his constituents than Mr. Frelinghuysen, the author of this amendment. 
But the fact of

[[Page H8346]]

the matter is that it's not in the national interest to stop this study 
in its track. They're not doing it just because they want to. They're 
doing it because the Nation has grown. The system is at capacity. It 
needs to be redesigned to accommodate the movement of people by air 
through this New York region. If we don't do it, they will have to go 
by train, and that's almost at capacity. And the roads are congested. 
It will slow down our economy. It will impact and affect the growth of 
the whole region if this can't go forward.
  So, I would urge people to defeat the amendment. We will work with 
the Member from New Jersey and others to make sure they're sensitive to 
local noise concerns, but this is not the way to do it.
  I urge rejection of the amendment.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
  For well over 15 years, I've been an advocate of reducing aircraft 
noise over northern New Jersey. I have attended dozens of public 
hearings, had meetings with FAA officials, responded to thousands of 
letters from constituents whose lives have been negatively affected by 
the existing air traffic patterns and related noise. I have been more 
than a proponent of a design of air space over New York and New Jersey 
metropolitan area, the first such redesign conducted by the FAA, but I 
have actually been working on funding for this design plan.
  And let me say, I respect Mr. Oberstar. I respect all of the big guns 
that are out against this amendment. But the issue is, and Mr. Oberstar 
mentioned it, is that the FAA has always been dismissive of aircraft 
noise concerns. We're not trying to say that we shouldn't be concerned 
about airline safety and too much congestion, and we don't want to do 
damage to our airline industry, but for those in the flight patterns 
now, what they propose negatively affects our constituents in northern 
New Jersey.
  Quite honestly, the FAA, if you will pardon the expression, has been 
blowing us off for a long time. They've been dismissive. So this 
amendment is all about sending a wake-up call to Administrator Blakely.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello).
  Mr. COSTELLO. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise today in 
opposition to the amendment.
  As Mr. Mica said, the last comprehensive change to the air space 
Northeast corridor occurred in 1987 and 1988. Since that time, the 
traffic has grown significantly. Delays and inefficiencies in the New 
York-New Jersey-Philadelphia metropolitan area must be addressed as 
they have reached an all-time high.
  Eighty-six percent of the delays caused by the New York center were 
due to the air space volume. Let me repeat that. Eighty-six percent of 
the delays caused by the New York center were due to air space volume.
  In the first quarter of 2007, the five airports with the worst on-
time performance were Newark, LaGuardia, O'Hare, JFK and Philadelphia. 
Four of the five airports are part of the air space redesign. The New 
York-New Jersey-Philadelphia air space will handle 15 to 20 percent of 
all of the air traffic in the Nation by 2011.
  The FAA has a specific process in place that it must follow in 
implementing the air space redesign. Over the course of the project, 
the FAA has held over 120 meetings to allow stakeholder input, many of 
which were not required by law. My colleagues, Mr. Andrews, Mr. Sestak 
and I have asked the GAO to look into the air space redesign to make 
sure that the FAA has followed the law in implementing this redesign. 
However, I do not believe that we should be halting the project at this 
time. It is too critical to our system not to go forward.
  Congress should not pick winners and losers in the air space redesign 
debate. This amendment is asking us to do just that. And for that 
reason, I ask my colleagues to oppose the amendment.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Fossella).
  Mr. FOSSELLA. I thank the gentleman for yielding and rise in strong 
opposition to this amendment, with much due respect to my friend and 
colleague from New Jersey.
  And in large part it has been echoed, but let me repeat it. If 
anybody who was sitting on a runway, whether you are across this 
country, especially in LaGuardia or Kennedy, and in particular, Newark 
Airport, you would be stampeding this House to ensure that this 
redesign go through. The reason being, as has been detailed 
extensively, and who knows it better than the riding public, is that 
congestion is at all all-time high and only will get worse unless this 
plan is put in place.
  The second, and perhaps I would, quote, in clean hands talk with 
respect to air noise with the people of Staten Island, that practically 
every plane that takes off to the south goes over Staten Island. So I 
can appreciate those who don't want more planes going over because the 
people in Staten Island suffer every day.
  The preferred alternative in the plan will reduce traffic from Newark 
Airport from about 20 minutes to 12 minutes; will reduce air noise, as 
I said, over Staten Island; will reduce costs to airlines by $248 
million by 2011; and a 1999 study showed that by 2010, we would hurt 
the U.S. economy by about another $4 billion, and the preferred 
alternative outlined in the plan could save our economy as much as 7 to 
9 billion.
  It is important and imperative that this plan go through. The riding 
public deserves it. Those sitting on runways now deserve it. Those 
waiting to get to Newark or any other airport deserve it. And I would 
just urge a speedy and urgent opposition to this amendment.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Before yielding to my colleague from Connecticut, 
this appropriations bill relating to the FAA has always carried 
language directing the FAA to deal with the issue of air noise. It has 
been repeatedly ignored.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to Mr. Shays of 
Connecticut.
  Mr. SHAYS. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  The Frelinghuysen-Shays-Garrett amendment should be adopted. The big 
guns, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee involved in 
transportation and, the ranking member and the chairman of the full 
Transportation Committee, and the ranking member are all against it. 
And what they're doing is sending a message once again to the FAA that 
they can continue to be arrogant, that they can continue to ignore the 
public, that they can continue to do whatever they want as it relates 
clearly to safety and efficiency, but they don't have to care about 
anything else. They don't have to care about quality of life. They 
don't have to listen to anybody about quality of life, particularly as 
it relates to impact of noise. They can ignore us as they have 
continued to ignore us throughout the years.
  So now what you will have in LaGuardia is planes taking off twice as 
often. They will veer to the left, then they will veer to the right. 
They will veer to the left, they will veer to the right. They won't run 
these planes over Long Island Sound. They will run them right over 
individual homes. They don't care. They don't listen. They don't give 
us an opportunity to speak.
  I have constituents who have attended hearings, but are told, Listen 
to us. You can't testify.
  If we want the FAA to come and allow testimony, they say we'll come 
to Danbury (where the planes are at 8,000 feet), but we won't come in 
to Stamford where they're 4,000 feet. They don't want anyone to know 
what they're doing. We need to pay attention to them. We need to give 
some authority to those in the community who have a different view . . 
. to those who are concerned about noise and quality of life.
  I rise today in support of the [Frelinghuysen/Shays/Garrett] 
amendment that would prohibit funding for the Federal Aviation 
Administration to implement its New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia 
Airspace Redesign for one year until FAA Reauthorization is complete.
  First, let me say I understand the FAA's desire to improve efficiency 
at LaGuardia, Newark, Teterboro, Philadelphia and JFK. I represent a 
great number of business travelers who are frustrated by long delays at 
many of these airports.

[[Page H8347]]

  With that being said, however, I strongly oppose the FAA's Integrated 
Airspace Alternative that would route more air traffic over residential 
neighborshoods. Over the past few months, the FAA has zeroed in on this 
proposal as its preferred alternative.
  Throughout this time, I have shared my concerns and the concerns of 
my constituents with the FAA, particularly the fact that the plan 
brings more planes into the region at the expense of the region's 
quality of life.
  I am particularly disappointed the FAA has not implemented any noise 
mitigation strategies in the district I represent, or in many districts 
throughout the Northeast, despite the wide swath of land over the 
Fourth District that will be adversely impacted by planes flying as low 
as 4,000 feet.
  Even though there is no mandate to consider quality of life issues, 
the FAA simply must not ignore the hugely negative impacts of air noise 
in this process.
  I believe that if the FAA had to consider the quality of life impacts 
of the Integrated Airspace Alternative, it would never have concluded 
that airspace redesign was the appropriate first attempt at relieving 
air traffic congestion.
  It seems to me there are other solutions that should be considered 
before implementing such a radical alternative that negatively affects 
so many thousands of residents throughout the Northeast.
  In my judgment, a one year delay to this plan is appropriate. We are 
working to reauthorize the FAA this year. I am hopeful we can give the 
FAA authority to implement other solutions in the authorization 
process, and protect precious quality-of-life. I urge adoption of this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey 
will be postponed.


                    Amendment offered by Mr. DeFazio

  Mr. DeFAZIO. 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. DeFazio:
       At the end of the bill before the short title, insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available under this Act 
     may be used to establish or implement a cross-border motor 
     carrier demonstration or pilot project or program to allow 
     Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to operate beyond the 
     commercial zones on the United States-Mexico border.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. In May, the Appropriations Committee included language 
in the FY07 supplemental to impose requirements on the Department of 
Transportation before they open the U.S. border to Mexican trucks, 
giving them free range across the United States of America. This 
language by the committee was the first step in ensuring that the 
Department of Transportation considered safety and security 
ramifications before allowing cross-border traffic and before rushing 
into a pilot. And unfortunately, the Bush administration immediately 
declared that they were in compliance with the law, making no changes 
in their program.

                              {time}  1630

  This is a paper-based program. They have not inspected physically one 
Mexican truck. They have not interviewed one Mexican driver. In Mexico, 
they have no system of drug testing, unlike the United States of 
America, and no certified drug-testing laboratories, unlike the United 
States of America. They have no hours of service in Mexico. Mexican 
drivers are frequently required to drive as long as 72 hours. They take 
drugs to do it. They freely admit that in the Mexican press.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, would the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I would be perfectly happy to accept the 
gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, would the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. HUNTER. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to join the gentleman in this amendment to 
strike the funds for this project on the basis that this poses a 
security risk for our country.
  We have absolutely no view of the background of the hundreds and 
thousands of truckers who will be coming in behind the wheels of these 
vehicles now with no offload requirement. In the areas of narcotics 
transportation and potentially terrorist transportation, this is an 
exposure for the United States.
  I support the gentleman strongly.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I would like to support Congressman 
DeFazio's amendment and appreciate the chairman's willingness to 
consider it. Coming from the Midwestern part of the country, we 
literally have had Mexican trucks end up in our region, how, we don't 
know, where the driver was actually moving the steering wheel with a 
vise grip. Now, how does that get to the State of Ohio all the way from 
the border with Mexico? Something is really broken in the system 
already. We should not expand anything. We should fix the problem that 
we have today.
  Let me tell you, the sheriffs in Ohio along the turnpike and all of 
our surface roads are busy dealing with traffic that shouldn't be there 
in the first place. A lot of those vehicles are carrying illegal 
narcotics into our region. That border is a sieve. We ought to take 
care of it.
  Mr. Chairman, I support the gentleman's amendment and commend him for 
offering it here today.
  Mrs. BOYDA of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, would the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield to the gentlewoman from Kansas.
  Mrs. BOYDA of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I, too, am in strong, strong 
support of this. The House has overwhelmingly voted 411-3 to pass this 
amendment. To be honest, I think it is just an egregious grab of power 
by the administration to take the will of the American people and the 
will of this Congress and completely disregard it.
  There are not systems or laboratories in place to test for drugs. 
There isn't documentation in order to make sure that we have inspected 
our trucks, that we have the training, and that there is drug testing. 
It is just a complete farce to be told that these safety requirements 
are going to be met.
  Mr. Chairman, I know that I, as well as the people of the Second 
District of Kansas, are strongly urging the President to stop this. I 
certainly support this bill, which will stop the funding and stop this 
pilot program.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I will 
be very, very brief.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I just want to make sure that we are 
all in agreement here. I think the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Olver) is. I am. That should be the end of it.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the chair and the ranking member for their 
support on this. This will be a tremendous step toward protecting the 
American traveling public. It will move us away from a system of faith-
based regulation and protection to one based on the rule of law and 
regulations.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this 
bipartisan amendment. The gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), Chairman 
of the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, has worked tirelessly on 
the issue of cross-border trucking in this Congress and I commend his 
determination in probing the details of the Administration's plans to 
open the U.S.-Mexico border to truck traffic.
  While I strongly support this amendment, I am at the same time 
extremely disappointed that Congress must take yet another step to 
compel the Administration to do the right thing and protect the safety 
of the American people.
  Members of Congress face growing frustration with the 
Administration's clear desire to

[[Page H8348]]

open the U.S.-Mexico border at any cost, with minimal regard for the 
safety of the traveling public, and little attention to the concerns 
raised by the House and Senate. Today's amendment is the culmination of 
a mounting effort to ensure safety and to hold the U.S. Department of 
Transportation (``DOT'') accountable as the Department reveals its 
plans for opening our nation's southern border.
  On February 23, 2007, Secretary of Transportation Peters announced 
the start of a one-year pilot program to grant 100 Mexico-domiciled 
trucking companies unrestricted access to U.S. roads, beyond the 
commercial zones at the U.S.-Mexico border. DOT has acknowledged that 
this pilot program is the first step to full border opening. This 
announcement had generated a groundswell of opposition.
  Since February, Congress has tried to shed some light on this pilot 
program. On March 13, 2007, the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit 
held an oversight hearing on the pilot program. Chairman DeFazio and I 
have asked the Inspector General of the Department of Transportation to 
review the proposed pilot program for compliance with all applicable 
motor carrier safety and hazardous materials laws and regulations.
  On March 29, 2007, Representative Boyda introduced H.R. 1773, the 
Safe American Roads Act of 2007, of which I am a proud sponsor. This 
legislation limits the authority of the Secretary of Transportation to 
unilaterally open the United States-Mexico border to truck and bus 
traffic under the ruse of a hasty pilot program. Instead the bill 
provides the U.S. with an opportunity to test, evaluate, and learn from 
the impacts of allowing Mexico-domiciled trucks on our highways, but 
only once a strict set of prerequisites are met and only under a 
specific set of conditions.
  At the beginning of May, the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure ordered the bill reported to the House by a vote of 66-
0. The House passed the bill on May 15, 2007, by an overwhelming vote 
of 411-3.
  The message to Secretary Peters has been clear: proceed with caution 
and do not open the border to Mexico-domiciled trucks until sufficient 
checks are in place to ensure that they meet U.S. motor carrier safety 
laws. Yet, DOT opposes the safeguards included in H.R 1773. It 
continues to charge ahead, and intends to start the pilot program as 
early as next month.
  The agency seems to have little regard for what findings or 
shortcomings may come to light in the reviews required to date by 
Congress. DOT has been unwilling to make changes to its plans to bring 
the proposed pilot program in line with the strict criteria strongly 
supported by the House. As a result, we must take this action today to 
bring this program to a standstill.
  I continue to question whether DOT is truly ready to open the border, 
and whether adequate systems are in place to make sure Mexican carriers 
meet our strict federal safety requirements. It is well-established 
that Mexican law does not require many fundamental elements of highway 
safety that are required for U.S. vehicles and drivers, including 
hours-of-service restrictions, drug and alcohol testing, and commercial 
driver's licensing requirements. Data collection issues and tracking 
violations of Mexican drivers while operating in the U.S. also remains 
a challenge.
  The United States is bound to live up to its commitments under the 
North American Free Trade Agreement (``NAFTA''). However, nothing in 
NAFTA suggests that we must allow Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to 
operate throughout the U.S. if they pose a safety hazard to our 
citizens.
  Launching a cross-border pilot program represents a major shift in 
transportation policy. It is the responsibility of DOT to ensure that 
any program that allows trucks from Mexico to enter the United States 
must be conducted with the safety of the American people as the highest 
priority. We must not forget this in a rush to open the border.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the DeFazio amendment
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
  The amendment was agreed to.


      Amendment No. 16 Offered by Mr. Gary G. Miller of California

  Mr. GARY G. MILLER 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 No. 16 offered by Mr. Gary G. Miller of 
     California:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. 410. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to take any action to issue a final rule or notice 
     based on, or otherwise implement, all or any part of the 
     proposed rule of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development published on Friday, May 11, 2007, on page 27048 
     of volume 72 of the Federal Register (Docket No. FR-5087-P-
     01), relating to standards for mortgagor's investment in 
     mortgaged property.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Gary G. Miller) and a Member opposed 
each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to 
prevent HUD from implementing a new rule that will effectively close 
homeownership opportunity to many American families.
  In today's housing market, one of the primary barriers to achieving 
the dream of homeownership is the lack of accumulated wealth and 
disposable income. Fortunately, some nonprofit organizations have 
developed programs to provide down payments to qualifying families. 
Such programs empower individuals and families who lack the necessary 
funds for down payment and other related costs, but can afford the 
monthly mortgage payment to become homeowners.
  These down payment assistance programs have proven successful in 
expanding ownership opportunity to low- and moderate-income families. 
In the past, HUD has permitted the use of these programs in conjunction 
with FHA-insured loans. Recently, however, HUD issued a proposed rule 
that would effectively eliminate seller-funded down payment assistance 
programs.
  I am very concerned about the impact of this proposed rule on 
homeownership in this country. Rather than going too far, I believe we 
should develop reasonable and fair criteria by which these programs can 
continue to operate while also protecting the FHA insurance fund. If 
there are legitimate problems that have been identified by HUD, then 
let's work together to fix the problems.
  The amendment I offer today with Housing and Community Opportunity 
Subcommittee Chairman Waters and Mr. Al Green of Texas would prohibit 
funds from being used to implement this proposed rule. It would give 
Congress time to work with HUD to preserve down payment assistance 
programs while imposing strong regulations and oversight. This 
amendment will would allow us to put the control in place that will 
weed out the bad actors, while still allowing those who help millions 
become homeowners to continue their good work.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment to 
preserve homeownership opportunities for all Americans.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment which 
would overturn HUD's urgent attempt to halt these scam practices by the 
so-called nonprofits that operate under the veil of helping people get 
mortgages.
  Under the guidance of the Inspector General, and in coordination with 
the Treasury Department, HUD is moving to crack down on so-called 
nonprofits that offer to pay the down payment so that families can 
purchase a home. This amendment would overturn that effort and cost the 
taxpayers some millions of dollars in defaulted loans.
  While there may be honest nonprofits, and I am sure there are, that 
genuinely want to help increase homeownership, this program does have 
many problems.
  First, the default rate for mortgages in which the down payment is 
paid for by nonprofits is three times the national average. That is the 
default rate. This has cost millions and is a source of instability to 
the fund, and, according to HUD, is a major reason that the FHA fund is 
rapidly heading to a deficit situation.
  Second, there is no free lunch. The mortgages are simply turned 
upside down with the down payment added to the price of the home. They 
are not free to the homeowner. Further, expensive fees are often added 
to the costs of the mortgage by nonprofits.
  The Treasury Department is moving quickly to revoke the nonprofit 
status

[[Page H8349]]

of many of these organizations, but HUD needs to act now and needs to 
get this rule out as final.
  I oppose any attempt to delay the rule and oppose this amendment. I 
think that if the Federal Government is so concerned about how a 
program is operating that it feels compelled to draft a regulation, I 
think we should carefully review the situation before we rush to 
overturn that effort. Frankly, we have not done that.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I am actually in support of this amendment. 
I think the authorizers have been hard at work at reforming the FHA 
program, and I support their efforts to resolve this issue.
  I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Miller-
Waters-Green amendment to H.R. 3074. On June 22, 2007, the Subcommittee 
on Housing and Community Opportunity, which I chair, held a hearing on 
homeowner down payment assistance programs. That hearing provided a 
window into down payment assistance programs that I had not seen 
before.
  The hearing was prompted by the issuance of the HUD proposed rule on 
May 11, 2007, to terminate down payment assistance programs. I applaud 
HUD for extending the comment period for the proposed rule, but that is 
not enough.
  Down payment assistance provided by charitable organizations to low- 
and moderate-income individuals and families to purchase homes has been 
a mainstay of HUD and FHA since 1999. In fact, we heard testimony that 
30 to 40 percent of FHA loans used some type of down payment 
assistance.
  What was even more astonishing was that HUD proposed a similar rule 
in 1999, only to have never finalized it. Indeed, HUD's failure to 
finalize a rule gave de facto approval for the continuation of many 
down payment assistance programs.
  Down payment assistance is often used in conjunction with HUD's 
mortgage insurance under the 203(b) program administered by FHA. Down 
payment assistance programs have helped nearly 1 million low- and 
moderate-income persons become homeowners, providing an instant source 
of equity for them. Homeownership would be out of reach to thousands of 
homeowners without down payment assistance programs.
  Unfortunately, HUD's issuance of the proposed rule on May 11, 2007, 
would eliminate the use of down payment assistance programs. FHA 
opposes the use of direct or indirect funding provided from the sale of 
property, and that is fine. But an across-the-board rejection of all 
down payment assistance programs without further review, analysis or 
clarification from HUD is unacceptable.
  Down payment assistance programs do not need to be the scapegoat for, 
as what one HUD called it, the ``looming shortfall'' in HUD's fiscal 
year 2008 budget. I believe if HUD is left to its own devices, this is 
exactly what will happen to down payment assistance programs.
  I support down payment assistance programs meeting Federal 
requirements. Therefore, I ask that you join Gary Miller, Al Green and 
me in supporting the amendment to prohibit HUD from implementing the 
proposed rule with any funds from this bill.
  Mr. OLVER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the 
amendment because it is a good amendment, and HUD's language is bad 
language.
  Mr. Chairman, since 1997, this program has assisted literally nearly 
1 million families with down payment assistance. In my district alone, 
it has helped more than 600 families. This program is a privately 
funded down payment assistance program. I think that is important for 
us to highlight, a privately funded down payment assistance program.
  Yes, there is some concern with reference to the appraisals, but that 
can be amended and fixed by way of a program similar to what the VA 
has. The VA has a blind pool appraisal process. With a blind pool 
appraisal process, you can get the appraisals that are fair market 
value, and you will save the program that has helped so many families.
  This program is viable. It helps community development. It is 
meaningful. It helps needy buyers. It is workable. It can work through 
HUD, and it is achievable without this language. I suggest that my 
colleagues vote for it. Let's save this program. Let's vote for this 
amendment.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, I respect my good friend's argument on behalf of 
Treasury and HUD; however, I want to remind my colleagues that it has 
been just a few years ago that Treasury and HUD came to us and asked us 
to implement the American Dream Down Payment Assistance Act, which 
means the Federal Government will give individuals the down payment and 
closing cost money necessary to be able to own a home that otherwise 
they would never be able to own a home where they can make the payment.
  The argument made to us is the private sector is doing it. We can 
implement upon what the private sector is doing, and with the 
government's participation, we can put even more people into homes.

                              {time}  1645

  Now, if we have a problem as some say with appraisals that are not 
being factual enough, then let's implement the same underwriting 
criteria that FHA will use on zero downpayment and FHA uses on the 
American Dream Downpayment Act. If you can come up with a reasonable 
appraisal to give Federal dollars to somebody to buy a home, why can 
you not come up with the same criteria for a reasonable appraisal to 
help the private sector put people into homes?
  Mr. Green made a very good point. We put a million people into homes 
with the Downpayment Assistance Program provided by the private sector, 
and the argument made in committee was 15 percent of these loans that 
were made are troubled. Now, that does not mean that 15 percent are 
being foreclosed upon. That means 15 percent might have missed a 
payment at one point in time or had some other problem at some other 
point in time.
  But on the other side, you have 850,000 people, families who own a 
home today, who built up equity they would not have otherwise have had 
renting a home and now have a home that had it not been for the private 
sector would have been renting an apartment or be in section 8 or in 
government housing.
  If that 15 percent relates to 4 or 5 percent in foreclosures, and if 
that 4 or 5 percent has something to do with underwriting standards 
being used that do not meet the criteria they should meet, or if 
appraisals are being implemented that do not meet the criteria they 
should meet, let's get together as a Congress first in committee, let's 
deal with the problems and rewrite the law and bring it before this 
House and debate it, and let's make sure that the bad apples and those 
that my friend said are practicing scam practices are eliminated.
  But to think that we are going to eliminate the possibility in the 
next 4 or 5 years for a million families to own a home, or have them 
come to the Federal Government and ask for a downpayment when they 
could also go to the private sector and ask for a downpayment, it seems 
some way disingenuous and unrealistic for us to do that. If there is a 
problem, let's fix it. If FHA can offer a zero downpayment loan under 
given underwriting criteria, and we use the same underwriting criteria 
for a downpayment assistance loan and the person owes $200,000 with 
zero downpayment and $194,000 with the downpayment assistance, they are 
better off with the program.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Gary G. Miller).
  The amendment was agreed to.


               Amendment No. 22 Offered by Mr. Hensarling

  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will report the 
amendment.

[[Page H8350]]

  There was no objection.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment No. 22 Offered by Mr. Hensarling:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       None of the funds in this Act may be used for the Edmunds 
     Center for the Arts, City of Edmunds (WA).

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, there are a number of earmarks in this 
bill that are somewhat similar to this one. I will be the first to 
admit I don't know all that much about the Edmonds Center for the Arts. 
But as I follow these typical earmark debates, I know that soon there 
will be a Member to come to the floor to tell me he knows his district 
better than I do. Mr. Chairman, I concede the point.
  He will also tell me that this body has the authority to provide for 
this earmark. Mr. Chairman, I once again concede the point.
  I am sure they will come down here and say good things can be done 
with the money. Mr. Chairman, once again, I will concede the point.
  They will also tell us well, it is a very small portion of the 
Federal budget. Mr. Chairman, I will concede the point.
  But here is what I will not concede: the money is a very small 
portion of the Federal budget. But I fear again that earmarks in 
general, and perhaps this category in specific, become a larger portion 
of the culture of spending which is harmful to the Nation. We need to 
look at it very closely.
  Often amendments are brought to the floor that many Members will say 
this is just draconian. We can't manage to spend less money here. Okay, 
so we offer earmark amendments and people say, well, it is just a small 
portion of the Federal budget. It is kind of like either the porridge 
is too hot or the porridge is too cold. When is the right time to offer 
an amendment to try to save taxpayers money?
  So this is money that under the certification letter the funding 
would be used for renovation of the Edmonds Center for the Arts. Again, 
there are a number of earmarks that do this. I assume, frankly, there 
are Members of both parties that are requesting this funding. But it 
needs to be put in context because every time we so-called ``invest'' 
in a project like this, there is somebody out in America that is being 
divested in order to pay for the investment. So we have to look very 
closely at where this money is coming from.
  Now, Member after Member comes to the floor to tell us we should do 
everything we can to preserve the Social Security trust fund. We know 
under our unified budget today that as long as we are running a 
deficit, and unfortunately we still are, it is declining due to lots of 
tax revenue, but we still have a deficit. We know that this expenditure 
is going to come ultimately out of the Social Security trust fund. Yet 
so many Members come to the floor to decry the practice. So is this 
money going to the Edmonds Center for the Arts worth raiding the Social 
Security trust fund? I believe not.
  In addition, we know that the Democrats, Mr. Chairman, in their 
budget resolution, it contains the single largest tax increase in 
American history. Over 5 years if we don't figure out a way to stop it, 
the average American family will have an average $3,000 a year tax 
burden. That is money coming out of their pocket that they could have 
used for their arts, their entertainment, and their transportation; but 
they are being divested in order to invest in centers for the arts.
  As I said earlier, I have no doubt that the sponsor of the earmark 
knows his district better than I do, just like I know my district 
better than he does. In talking to people in the Fifth Congressional 
District of Texas, they think their tax money might be used for better 
purposes. And if it is going to go to art centers, they kind of prefer 
that Mesquite Art Center be funded. They prefer the Henderson County 
Performing Arts Center be funded. They prefer the Lake Country 
Playhouse in Mineola to be funded; and they prefer the Kaufman County 
Civic Theater in Terrell, Texas, be funded, and the list goes on.
  Given that we are threatened with the single largest tax increase in 
history, a vote for this is to raid the Social Security trust fund. And 
already with the spending we have, we are due to double taxes on the 
next generation.
  I know Congress has the right to do this. I don't question our 
authority; I question our wisdom in doing that.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.
  Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. INSLEE. This is a misguided amendment. It is quite a surprise 
that of all of the decent efforts to help communities across the 
country, for some reason the gentleman picked this one. That is 
something beyond at least my understanding. The particular project 
involved here is a community center that is involved in a whole host of 
youth projects, including the Edmonds Boys and Girls Club, the Sno-King 
County Youth Club, the Triple Threat Basketball Club, the Brighton 
School, the Cascade Symphony Orchestra, the Edmonds High School Multi-
Class Reunion, the Olympic Ballet Theater, the Sno-King Community 
Chorale, and Edmonds Community College.
  I don't know why those seem like such un-American activities to the 
gentleman, but to our community and to the country at large, those are 
integral parts of our communities. I may note this is not a situation 
where somehow there has been some sort of Federal largesse, that is an 
intrusion into the community.
  This is an effort where we have multiple parties that have been 
associated with funding this project. This is not just the Federal 
Government. In fact, it is less than 10 percent of the entire project. 
It is financed with Federal funds. It is largely a matter of local 
development, including a variety of local corporations. So where we 
have less than 10 percent in this final phase, why this has been 
selected doesn't make sense.
  Now there is a difference, I suppose. I hold a press release from the 
author of the amendment dated February 28, 2007, announcing that the 
city of Winnsboro, Texas, had received $100,000 in Federal funds. The 
author of the amendment said: ``I am excited that some of the hard-
earned tax dollars sent to Washington are flowing back into the 
county.'' There is a difference, I suppose, between that money flowing 
to Edmonds, Washington. In that case it was money going to the 
proponent of this amendment. In this case it goes to a different one. I 
am not sure I understand the difference.
  I guess the difference is the money that went to Texas was chosen by 
the bureaucrats. The money that is selected here has been chosen by the 
United States House of Representatives. Now, I don't know why the 
proponent believes there is some intrinsic genius of the bureaucrats. 
Some believe all bureaucrats are smarter than all Congressmen, or the 
least wise bureaucrat is smarter than the most intelligent Congressman. 
Some may hold that view; I don't.
  We have a valid community purpose here. We have a small Federal 
commitment, and we have a useful thing that is helping kids at risk as 
well as community development. I note that an economic evaluation of 
this particular project showed that it would have significant economic 
value as well as community value in helping the kids in these local 
communities.
  So I would commend this small investment of Federal dollars in this 
community.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will 
be postponed.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

[[Page H8351]]

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield time to enter into a colloquy with 
the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Shuler).
  Mr. SHULER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today on behalf of myself and the 
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp).
  In 1941, the United States was building up for World War II in dire 
need of new sources of energy. The Tennessee Valley Authority obtained 
Federal authority for construction of a hydroelectric dam in Swain 
County, North Carolina. This construction required that an important 
road be flooded. In a 1943 agreement, the Federal Government promised 
to rebuild the road.
  In the 64 years since the agreement was signed, no road has been 
completed and no settlement was offered to the people of Swain County. 
The 2001 Transportation bill provided $16 million to study the 
environmental costs of building this new road. The National Park 
Service will complete this study in September.

                              {time}  1700

  Mr. Chairman, the financial and economical costs are too high to 
build this road. The National Park Service has said that the final 
environmental impact study will recommend a cash settlement with the 
people of Swain County.
  Senators Alexander and Dole have amended the Senate version of this 
bill with language to allow the Park Service to use remaining funds 
from this study for this solution. This commonsense solution enjoys 
strong bipartisan support in the North Carolina and Tennessee House 
delegations.
  Mr. Chairman, would you be willing to work with me and Congressman 
Wamp to ensure that this bipartisan language is included in the final 
conference version of this bill?
  Mr. OLVER. I would like to thank the gentleman for bringing this 
issue to our attention.
  Sixty-four years is a long and, it seems, quite unreasonable time to 
wait for the government to resolve this issue. So I pledge to work with 
you both on this issue as we move forward in this process and 
conference this bill with the Senate.
  Mr. SHULER. Thank you, and I would like to thank my colleague Zack 
Wamp for his hard work along with this bill, and I certainly thank the 
chairman for your hard work and your dedication.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield now to Mr. Crowley from New York 
also for a colloquy.
  Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this legislation and 
want to commend you and the ranking member and your staffs for the hard 
work that has been put into this bill. I would also like to engage you, 
as you mentioned, in a colloquy.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased the committee included $15.8 million to 
hire and train new air traffic controllers. This will go a long way in 
helping to ensure the safety of our skies. However, I believe that more 
needs to be done.
  I note that we have 1,100 fewer fully certified air traffic 
controllers than we did on 9/11.
  Mr. Chairman, my concerns were underscored by a recent incident at La 
Guardia Airport, which is in my district in the Seventh Congressional 
District in Queens. As you know, La Guardia Airport is one of the 
busiest airports in the Nation. Over 1,000 flights a day and 27 million 
passengers a year frequent the airport.
  On July 5 of this year, two planes nearly crashed on the runway. 
While a catastrophe was narrowly avoided this time, many questions 
remain as to the cause of the incident, including whether it was due to 
a staffing shortage, a lack of well-qualified air traffic controllers, 
or simply pure human error.
  I believe we must examine the incident at La Guardia while we also 
examine the larger issue, which is determining how we must address the 
impending air traffic controller shortage. That is why I believe that 
Congress must fund a study by the National Academy of Sciences.
  This study would examine what factors are contributing to air traffic 
safety concerns, including human factors, increased traffic activity, 
and the technology and equipment at our Nation's airports. Ultimately 
the report will recommend how to address this issue, particularly with 
regard to staffing standards and whether we need to train more air 
traffic controllers.
  I intended to offer an amendment today to fund this study, but it 
would have been subject to a point of order. So instead, Mr. Chairman, 
I am hoping we can agree to work together as this legislation moves 
forward to find a way to address this issue and potentially fund this 
study.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, this is a vital public safety concern that 
we must address. I understand that the FAA has been working with the 
National Academy of Sciences and has factored in many of its 
recommendations from the Academy. The FAA is also working with Mitre 
algorithms, models and base assumptions.
  I, too, want to ensure that the skies remain safe, and I will work 
with the gentleman to ensure an adequate number of controllers exist in 
that area.
  Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, if I could just respond, I want to thank 
the chairman, and as you know, if we don't address this issue, the next 
incident at La Guardia may not be a near miss, but rather a tragedy, 
one that I hope we would avoid. And I would imagine if it were a 
tragedy, we would be having a different conversation than this 
colloquy.
  I appreciate the gentleman for his time.


               Amendment No. 21 Offered by Mr. Hensarling

  Mr. HENSARLING. 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. 21 offered by Mr. Hensarling:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. 410. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used for parking facilities.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is aimed at limiting 
funding for parking facilities within this bill, which is not including 
Federal facilities that might be included within bills dealing with our 
military bases, GAO, national parks, what have you.
  Mr. Chairman, apparently there are about 15 or so of these earmarks 
covering Members of both parties, and again, as I said earlier, Mr. 
Chairman, I know that the funds represented are probably a small 
portion of Federal spending, but I think it is good, I think it is wise 
that this House pause from time to time and look at the fiscal 
challenge that we are facing and to remember, if everything is a 
priority, then nothing is a priority.
  So, again, I have no doubt that parking facilities are needed all 
over America, but I doubt the wisdom within the confines of this bill 
of using Federal taxpayer money today to pay for them.
  Let's take a look at the challenge that we're facing, Mr. Chairman, 
and just don't take my word for the fact that we have a great fiscal 
challenge. Let's listen to our Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke. 
He said recently, without ``early and meaningful action'' to address 
spending in Washington, ``the U.S. economy could be seriously weakened; 
with future generations bearing much of the cost.''
  Let's listen to the Brookings Institute, not exactly a bastion of 
conservative thought: ``The authors of this book believe that the 
Nation's fiscal situation is out of control and could do serious damage 
to the economy in coming decades.''
  Let's listen to the General Accountability Office: The rising costs 
of government spending, specifically entitlements, are ``a fiscal 
cancer'' that threatens ``catastrophic consequences for our country'' 
and could ``bankrupt America.''
  Let's listen again to the GAO: ``Absent policy changes on the 
spending and/or revenue sides of the budget, a growing imbalance 
between expected Federal spending and tax revenues will mean escalating 
and ultimately unsustainable Federal deficits and debt

[[Page H8352]]

that serve to threaten our future national security as well as the 
standard of living for the American people.''
  The Federal budget continues to grow way beyond the ability of the 
family budget to pay for it, and seemingly, the only standard for 
spending the people's money today is do we have a noble purpose, and 
can some good use be made of the money. But, Mr. Chairman, that 
standard is not sufficient. It's not sufficient when we're threatening 
future generations with a fiscal calamity. Sooner or later, this body 
needs to say enough is enough.
  Almost every State in the Union, I think, save but two or three, are 
running a surplus. We're running a deficit, and what are we doing? 
We're funding local parking facilities.
  Now, Mr. Chairman, I'm not here to debate the constitutionality of 
doing that, but, again, I'm here to debate the wisdom, given the fiscal 
challenges the Nation faces, and all too often I fear that this body is 
more focused on the next election and not the next generation. But the 
Comptroller General has said we're on the verge of being the first 
generation in America's history to leave the next generation with a 
lower standard of living.
  Mr. Chairman, fiscal responsibility has to be included in each and 
every bill, and we have a bill that's growing about 6.7 percent. Let's 
somewhere draw a line in the sand on behalf of American families, on 
behalf of American taxpayers, on behalf of future generations and just 
say, you know, today the Federal taxpayer and future generations are 
not going to have to pay for parking facilities. It's all this 
amendment is about, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, the author of this amendment is undoubtedly 
trying to get at some egregious earmarks that are funded in this bill 
or in some other bill; however, in drafting a provision that is so 
broad in scope that what we have is an amendment that's careless.
  There are legitimate parking facilities that can be built using 
Federal funds, and I use an example, for instance, the parking 
facilities that we have with elder housing projects, built in various 
places around the country, but this amendment would kill that.
  Under current law Federal funds can be used to fund park-and-ride 
facilities and other activities aimed at encouraging carpooling and 
vanpooling. In fact, these activities are of such a high priority that 
they're eligible for 100 percent Federal funding and require no State 
or local match. Similarly, Federal funds are used to build safety rest 
areas along our interstates. This amendment would put an end to that.
  For these reasons and others, this amendment must be defeated.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OLVER. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I would just point out that 
this bill funds what we call the 811 program, housing for disabled. 
Now, I don't know why we would want to say that we would vote money to 
build housing for the disabled but no parking. Have we found a new 
group of totally mobile disabled?
  I mean, this amendment would say that if you got funds under the 811 
program to build housing for disabled people, you couldn't provide 
parking for vans, for transportation. I'm really baffled as to the 
scope, and I do think that telling people that they could not provide 
parking at a disabled housing facility is a very poor idea.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, this money's going to have to come from somewhere. So, 
again, I would invite the committee chairman to tell us, is this part 
of the largest tax increase in history? Is this coming out of the 
Social Security Trust Fund? Is this going to be debt passed on to 
future generations? Where is the money going to come from? Does it 
reach that purpose?
  And I cannot believe that the only parking lots that are made 
available to those who are disabled are somehow coming from the Federal 
taxpayer. I just don't believe it.
  With that, I would urge an ``aye'' vote.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 3 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, the answer to the gentleman 
from Texas is when you have federally funded housing for the disabled, 
the parking that goes for the disabled and the service vehicles comes 
from that money. So the gentleman says, why does the Federal Government 
have to pay for parking? I don't know who else the gentleman thinks is 
going to pay for parking at housing that is built for people who are 
disabled.
  If the gentleman is unhappy with this, then perhaps he should draft 
his amendments more seriously.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar).
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding.
  Parking facilities are eligible under a number of our surface 
transportation programs, funded out of the Highway Trust Fund. In the 
SAFETEA-LU legislation, we authorize funding for parking facilities to 
encourage commuters to park their vehicles and use public 
transportation.
  Congestion is a growing problem all across this country. It costs us 
$68 billion a year. The more cars we can get off the roadway and more 
people use public transportation, the better off citizens are in their 
drive patterns. And the parking facilities encourage carpooling, 
vanpooling and use of light rail and commuter rail and local bus 
transit operations.
  Furthermore, because they're funded with Highway Trust Fund moneys, 
no fees can be charged at these parking facilities, so they're not 
revenue-generating activities.
  Furthermore, we have imposed very strict standards for highway safety 
for long-haul truckers. Hours of service have been limited so that 
roadways will be safer, but those long-haul truckers, working long 
hours, need safe places where they can rest.

                              {time}  1715

  The hours of service limitation requires them to stay off the roadway 
before they become fatigued. That's why we have parking facilities to 
accommodate over-the-road truck drivers, as well as passenger vehicle 
drivers.
  So the parking facilities we provide under the SAFETEA-LU national 
transportation program is in the best public interest, in the interest 
of public safety and in the interest of roadway safety, to the best 
interest of the driving public, reduces congestion, and we ought not to 
take this broad brush stroke and strike the spending.
  No, we carefully considered these issues in the course of fashioning 
the SAFETEA-LU in the House and the Senate and conference and on this 
House floor. Let's keep existing policy in place and defeat this 
misguided amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will 
be postponed.


                  Announcement by the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were 
postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 14 by Mr. Westmoreland of Georgia.
  Amendment No. 15 by Mr. Sessions of Texas.
  An amendment by Mr. Flake of Arizona regarding Belmont Complex.

[[Page H8353]]

  An amendment by Mr. Flake of Arizona regarding the Wisconsin Regional 
Planning Commission.
  An amendment by Mr. Flake of Arizona regarding Woodlake, California.
  An amendment by Mr. Flake of Arizona regarding the Rails to Trails 
program.
  An amendment by Mr. Flake of Arizona regarding the Houston Zoo.
  Amendment No. 25 by Mr. Hastings of Florida.
  An amendment by Mr. Frelinghuysen of New Jersey.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


              Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Westmoreland

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia 
(Mr. Westmoreland) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 116, 
noes 307, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 696]

                               AYES--116

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Bachmann
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Boozman
     Brady (TX)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Buyer
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Carter
     Chabot
     Coble
     Conaway
     Davis, David
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Feeney
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Graves
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jindal
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Latham
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Paul
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Upton
     Walberg
     Wamp
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf

                               NOES--307

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Bono
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castle
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Lincoln
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Faleomavaega
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickering
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Fortuno
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Pence
     Tancredo
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1741

  Mr. CALVERT, Mr. CLYBURN, Mr. UDALL of New Mexico, Mr. MARIO DIAZ-
BALART of Florida, Mr. NUNES, and Mr. RANGEL changed their vote from 
``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. CAMP of Michigan changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Sessions

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Sessions) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  Members will be reminded there will be seven 2-minute votes to 
follow.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 139, 
noes 283, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 697]

                               AYES--139

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Bachmann
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Chabot
     Coble
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Culberson
     Davis, David
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Emerson
     Everett
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Lamborn
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Paul
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Reichert
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt

[[Page H8354]]


     Tiberi
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Wicker
     Wilson (SC)

                               NOES--283

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castle
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Lincoln
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Faleomavaega
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Klein (FL)
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickering
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Putnam
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Pence
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Young (AK)


                  Announcement by the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised they have 
less than 1 minute remaining on this vote.

                              {time}  1746

  Mrs. BOYDA of Kansas and Mr. PICKERING changed their vote from 
``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Flake) regarding Belmont Complex on which further proceedings were 
postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  Members are reminded to remain in the Chamber.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 87, 
noes 335, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 698]

                                AYES--87

     Akin
     Bachmann
     Barrett (SC)
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Blackburn
     Brady (TX)
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Coble
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Davis, David
     Deal (GA)
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Flake
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Hulshof
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jindal
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Linder
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McHenry
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Pearce
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe
     Price (GA)
     Ramstad
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Smith (NE)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walden (OR)
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)

                               NOES--335

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Faleomavaega
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Forbes
     Fortuno
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayes
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Platts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez

[[Page H8355]]


     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Pence
     Pickering
     Reynolds
     Tancredo
     Young (AK)


                  Announcement by the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are reminded that they 
have 1 minute remaining to vote.

                              {time}  1750

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Flake) regarding the Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission on 
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote. Members are 
admonished to stay in the Chamber.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 68, 
noes 356, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 699]

                                AYES--68

     Akin
     Bachmann
     Barrett (SC)
     Blackburn
     Boehner
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Chabot
     Coble
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Davis, David
     Deal (GA)
     Duncan
     Feeney
     Flake
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gingrey
     Graves
     Hastert
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jindal
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Linder
     Mack
     Marchant
     McHenry
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Pearce
     Pitts
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Rohrabacher
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Walberg
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)

                               NOES--356

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Faleomavaega
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Pence
     Tancredo
     Young (AK)


                  Announcement by the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are reminded that 
there is 1 minute remaining on this vote.

                              {time}  1755

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Flake) regarding Woodlake, California, on which further 
proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice 
vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote. Members are urged 
in the strongest terms to remain in the Chamber.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 69, 
noes 352, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 700]

                                AYES--69

     Akin
     Bachmann
     Barrett (SC)
     Barton (TX)
     Bilbray
     Blackburn
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Buyer
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Chabot
     Coble
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Davis, David
     Deal (GA)
     Duncan
     Feeney
     Flake
     Fossella
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Graves
     Hastert
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jindal
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Linder
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     McCaul (TX)
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Petri
     Pitts
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Ramstad
     Rohrabacher
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Smith (NE)
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Thornberry
     Walberg
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)

                               NOES--352

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer

[[Page H8356]]


     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Faleomavaega
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickering
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Clarke
     Conyers
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Donnelly
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Obey
     Pence
     Tancredo
     Young (AK)


                  Announcement by the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are reminded that 
there is 1 minute remaining on this vote.

                              {time}  1759

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Flake) regarding the Rails to Trails program on which further 
proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice 
vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote. Members are 
strongly encouraged to remain in the Chamber.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 81, 
noes 342, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 701]

                                AYES--81

     Akin
     Bachmann
     Barrett (SC)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Blackburn
     Boehner
     Brady (TX)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Carter
     Chabot
     Coble
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Davis, David
     Deal (GA)
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Feeney
     Flake
     Fossella
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Graves
     Hastert
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Hulshof
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jindal
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Linder
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     McCarthy (CA)
     McHenry
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Pearce
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Rohrabacher
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Smith (NE)
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walberg
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)

                               NOES--342

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Buchanan
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castle
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickering
     Platts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton

[[Page H8357]]


     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Faleomavaega
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Pence
     Tancredo
     Young (AK)


                  Announcement by the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised there is 1 
minute remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1802

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Flake) regarding the Houston Zoo on which further proceedings were 
postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote. Members are 
strongly encouraged to remain in the Chamber.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 77, 
noes 347, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 702]

                                AYES--77

     Akin
     Bachmann
     Barrett (SC)
     Bilbray
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Chabot
     Coble
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Davis, David
     Deal (GA)
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Feeney
     Flake
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Graves
     Hastert
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hulshof
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jindal
     Johnson (IL)
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Linder
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Price (GA)
     Ramstad
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Smith (NE)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)

                               NOES--347

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Faleomavaega
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Forbes
     Fortuno
     Foxx
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickering
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Pence
     Tancredo
     Young (AK)


                  Announcement by the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised there is 1 
minute remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1806

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 702, I inadvertently 
voted ``yes.'' My vote should have been recorded as a ``no.''


          Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Hastings) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 268, 
noes 158, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 703]

                               AYES--268

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardoza
     Carney
     Carter
     Castor
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Lincoln
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Faleomavaega
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fortenberry

[[Page H8358]]


     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Heller
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     King (NY)
     Klein (FL)
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     Langevin
     Lantos
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Norton
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paul
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sali
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--158

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachmann
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Castle
     Coble
     Conaway
     Costello
     Culberson
     Davis, David
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Dicks
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Everett
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Flake
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hirono
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Jindal
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Keller
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     Lewis (KY)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Marchant
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mitchell
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Musgrave
     Napolitano
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pastor
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Reichert
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Thompson (CA)
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wolf

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1810

  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. ISRAEL changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall vote No. 703 on the amendment 
offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida, I inadvertently voted ``no'', while 
intending to vote ``aye''.


                 Amendment Offered by Mr. Frelinghuysen

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Frelinghuysen) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote. Members are urged 
to remain in the Chamber.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 65, 
noes 360, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 704]

                                AYES--65

     Aderholt
     Andrews
     Bartlett (MD)
     Blunt
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Calvert
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Carter
     Castle
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Culberson
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Engel
     Ferguson
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gillibrand
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Hall (NY)
     Hastings (FL)
     Heller
     Hinchey
     Holt
     Israel
     Issa
     Jones (NC)
     King (IA)
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     Matheson
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCotter
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (NC)
     Murphy (CT)
     Nunes
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Radanovich
     Reynolds
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Sali
     Sensenbrenner
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Tancredo
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Waters
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (SC)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--360

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Chabot
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Drake
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Faleomavaega
     Fallin
     Farr
     Feeney
     Filner
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (OH)
     Jordan
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pastor
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Roskam
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.

[[Page H8359]]


     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Wexler
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Bachus
     Bishop (UT)
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Fattah
     Higgins
     Honda
     Marshall
     Myrick
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1814

  Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina and Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida 
changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                              {time}  1815

  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Cardoza). The Committee will rise 
informally.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ryan of Ohio) assumed the chair.

                          ____________________