[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 40 (Friday, March 6, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H3060-H3066]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS, FISCAL YEAR 2009

  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the previous order of the House, 
I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 38) making further continuing 
appropriations for fiscal year 2009, and for other purposes, and ask 
for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
  The text of the joint resolution is as follows:

                              H.J. Res. 38

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2009 (division A of 
     Public Law 110-329) is amended by striking the date specified 
     in section 106(3) and inserting ``March 11, 2009''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, 
the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lewis) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.


                             General Leave

  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous and tabular material on H.J. Res. 38.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Madam Speaker, this proposition simply keeps the government open 
until midnight on Wednesday so we can complete our business. I urge its 
adoption.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I guess you all know that we didn't have to be here today debating 
yet another extension of a continuing resolution and we certainly 
didn't have to wait until the fiscal year was almost half over to 
complete a package of spending bills addressing funding for 2009. And 
yet here we are, 157 days into the new fiscal year, passing another 
short-term CR while our work on 2009 bills remains unfinished. 
Unfinished. What a shame. Madam Speaker, what a shame.
  Had the Appropriations Committee been allowed by the Democrat 
leadership to do its work this year, we could have easily passed each 
of the 12 spending bills. Each of the bills would have benefited from 
Members offering ideas, debate. We actually do have talented Members on 
both sides of the aisle at the subcommittee level, not allowed to 
participate in the process.

                              {time}  1045

  Whether you are a Republican or a Democrat, liberal or conservative, 
your rights as a duly elected Member of this body have been belittled 
by a majority leadership that believes absolute power flows from the 
top.
  Members should have had the opportunity to do what they were elected 
to do, shape legislation and make sure that their own voices and the 
voices of their people are heard. Instead, virtually every Member of 
the House has been shut out of the process of writing this massive $410 
billion spending bill that will govern how taxpayer dollars are spent 
for the remainder of this year.
  The sad irony is that while the House passes another CR that keeps 
the government running, the Senate is doing what the House could only 
dream of doing, offering and debating amendments to the omnibus bill. 
It is no wonder so many Members of the House aspire to serve in the 
Senate. The Senate is the only place left in the U.S. Congress where 
legislation is still considered under a reasonably open process.
  The Senate has wisely observed what the House has failed to 
recognize: Not one of the nine bills in the omnibus spending package 
was ever debated or considered in the House or the Senate. Six of the 
nine bills in the omnibus were never debated or considered by the full 
House Appropriations Committee. Senators are doing the right thing by 
attempting to improve this legislation, which is busting at the seams 
with too much spending.
  The Senate's action last night sends an unmistakable signal that 
spending fatigue has finally set in. Certainly not in the House, but in 
the Senate spending fatigue has finally set in. Senators from both 
parties recognize what the House leadership failed to observe, that the 
spending in the omnibus is excessive and goes far beyond what our 
public believes is reasonable and responsible.
  Omnibus funding represents a $32 billion or 8 percent increase over 
last year for the very same agencies and programs. This represents the 
largest annual Federal Government spending increase since President 
Carter served in 1978.
  There is a storm brewing out there in the hinterlands, fueled by the 
public's disdain over the free-for-all spending of the Congress. 
Hundreds of billions of dollars directed to the stimulus package, Wall 
Street, auto makers, and the line of folks with their hands out 
continue to grow. Where does the spending end, Madam Speaker?
  It has been said completing the omnibus is merely completing last 
year's unfinished business. But what a wasted opportunity it is to 
demonstrate to the American people that this Congress and this 
administration ``gets it,'' and that we are ready to roll up our 
sleeves and address government spending going forward. Again, where 
does the spending end?
  The Members of the House have had enough of the ``my way or the 
highway'' legislative process that has governed the formulation of the 
omnibus, the stimulus package and every supplemental bill passed over 
the last couple of years, and I believe the majority of our Members 
have had it with the proliferation of spending that will come to define 
the 111th Congress under this majority.
  Madam Speaker, each of us recognizes that extending a CR one more 
time is an admission of our failure to complete our work on time. It 
will surely pass, but let's not lose sight that this is simply doing 
our work in the worst possible way. Again, it didn't have to be this 
way.
  In closing, Madam Speaker, let me say that I don't believe this is 
Chairman Obey's fault. While we may disagree over policy and funding 
levels, we both believe that it is time to get our appropriations 
process back on track. I look forward to working with the chairman this 
year and I am hopeful that together we can embrace an open process that 
allows for the full participation of the Members on both sides of the 
aisle.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I reserve my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 3 
minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner).
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, the continuing resolution before us 
today presents us with a golden opportunity to send over to the other 
body some legislation that does not contain thousands of earmarks, 
legislation that is not bloated, legislation

[[Page H3061]]

that is not overspending. We can improve this joint resolution by 
adopting a motion to recommit to have the continuing resolution go 
through the end of this fiscal year, meaning September 30th, and that 
will present the other body with a choice; to keep the government open 
by passing this continuing resolution through the end of the fiscal 
year, or continuing going on a bloated, earmark-laden track.
  I would hope that we would get the fiscal year 2009 appropriations 
over with so that the Appropriations Committee can do the work on the 
fiscal year 2010 budget. The way to save the taxpayers a lot of money, 
the way to stop all of the earmarks that have been crammed into the 
omnibus bill that this House passed last week is to pass a continuing 
resolution that continues government agencies at their existing 
spending level through the end of this fiscal year. I would hope that 
we would have an opportunity to vote on that, and I would 
enthusiastically support it, as would most of the taxpayers of this 
country.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I am proud to yield 1 minute 
to the Republican leader, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).
  Mr. BOEHNER. Let me thank my colleague for yielding and suggest that 
this continuing resolution we have on the floor today shouldn't be for 
the next 4 or 5 days; it really ought to be through the end of this 
fiscal year, which is September 30th of this year.
  I know there are a lot of Members that have a lot of other issues 
that they would like to include in this, but the fact is that American 
families are hurting, small businesses are hurting around the country, 
our economy is hurting, and I think we can help our economy and we can 
send a strong signal to the American people by extending this spending 
freeze through September 30th.
  Let's show the American taxpayers that we get it. Let's show 
investors in our American economy that we get it. Because clearly the 
bill that has been under consideration both here in the House and now 
in the Senate has a $30 billion increase over last year's spending and 
includes nearly 9,000 earmarks, and the way to put all of this to a 
stop is to just have a spending freeze. Let's show the American people 
we understand the pain that they are under and show them that we are 
willing to tighten our belt.
  So when we have our opportunity to offer our motion to recommit at 
the end of this process, there will be an extension of that date 
through September 30th, with some increases for those in police 
departments and the FBI and other law enforcement jurisdictions, and it 
is something that I think is a responsible way forward. I would 
encourage my colleagues to support the motion to recommit.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I am happy to yield 2 minutes 
to my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier).
  (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding.
  To paraphrase the late Admiral James Stockdale from his famous vice 
presidential debate of nearly 17 years ago, why are we here?
  I don't quite get this. I know there will be some who want to blame 
George Bush or any other Republican out there, but the fact of the 
matter is, for the first time in a long time, we have a Democratic 
President, a Democratic House of Representatives and a Democratic 
United States Senate, and yet we at this moment are dealing with the 
possibility of a government shutdown. I just don't quite comprehend 
this.
  The American people, as our Republican leader and my California 
colleague, the distinguished ranking member of the committee, have 
said, the American people are hurting. We know very well with the 
unemployment rate that just came through it today at 8.5 percent, a 
one-half percent increase over 8 percent, that there are a lot of 
people who are suffering. We know of individual stories, and I have got 
to tell you the most painful one for me was to hear of the father of 
three young teenagers who committed suicide out in California over 
this.
  So, we have a very, very difficult challenge ahead of us, and yet we 
are sitting here dealing with this issue and a massive increase in 
spending, which clearly the American people do not want. It is a policy 
that has failed. It failed throughout the 1930s.
  We know what needs to be done, Madam Speaker, for us to get our 
economy back on track. What we need to do is we need to follow the 
model that was put forward by John F. Kennedy in 1961, the model of 
Ronald Reagan in 1981, because those solutions have in fact succeeded 
in the past. And yet we know that massive increases in spending, as the 
rest of the world has learned, are not the answer for the future.
  I strongly support our effort to keep this spending as low as 
possible by supporting our motion to recommit.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 
minutes to the Republican Conference chairman, the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Pence).
  (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, we come to this well at a very difficult 
time in the life of our Nation. American families are struggling under 
the weight of this recession. Millions of Americans are watching as 
their life savings are evaporating before their eyes. My own family has 
been touched by the hardship in the housing crisis and by job loss. So 
I come to this floor with a sense of urgency, and it is a sense of 
urgency that was confirmed this morning with the jobs report and a 
startling reality.
  But in the midst of these very difficult times, the American people 
are rising to the occasion. As we speak in this well this morning, 
millions of Americans are doing in their small businesses, in their 
family farms and around their kitchen tables what this Congress should 
be doing. They are finding places to save. They are putting off 
expenditures that they don't have to make this year to make sure they 
make ends meet for the priorities in their lives.
  Yet this Congress, by this massive omnibus bill, is going on with 
spending as usual. An 8 percent increase in Federal spending, the 
largest increase in a single year since I was in high school in the 
1970s, apart from those months following September 11th, is not what 
the American people expect to see this Congress doing.
  ``Spending as usual'' with thousands upon thousands of earmarks and 
special projects is not what the American people expect from this 
Congress during these difficult times. Madam Speaker, they want to see 
the Congress doing what they are doing, and that is making careful 
decisions, practicing fiscal discipline and setting aside ``business as 
usual'' to confront these challenging times.

                              {time}  1100

  And so I rise today to say, let's not just do this continuing 
resolution for a week but, as others have said, for the rest of this 
year, let's freeze Federal spending in virtually every area of the 
government. Let's say no earmarks in the Year 2009.
  And it's not a value judgment on the Members who've made those 
project requests. I, myself, don't request projects of that nature. But 
it is to say, Madam Speaker, that in these difficult times, we have to 
do what every American family, every small business owner and every 
family farmer is doing, and that is making sacrifices and practicing 
discipline.
  I urge my colleagues in both parties to join the minority today in 
supporting our motion to recommit. It's a motion that would essentially 
freeze all Federal spending, say to historic increases in spending in 
these difficult times, no to earmarks, and say yes to the practiced 
values of millions of Americans in these difficult days.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 
minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
  Mr. FLAKE. Madam Speaker, speaking as a partisan Republican, perhaps 
I should want the President to sign the omnibus bill if it is passed. 
There may be money for tattoo removal in the omnibus bill, but it won't 
be easy to remove the tattoo that comes with signing a bill like this, 
with nearly 9,000 earmarks contained in it.
  Now, most of the attention has been put on the silly earmarks like 
swine odor abatement in Iowa or the tattoo removal in California. But 
more damaging are the thousands, literally,

[[Page H3062]]

thousands, Madam Speaker, of no-bid contracts that are contained in 
this legislation, thousands of congressionally-directed earmarks to 
private companies, which are no-bid contracts. And that will be a gift 
for Republicans that will probably keep on giving, because, as they are 
discovered in this legislation going forward, there are bound to be 
problems.
  Already we know that the Department of Justice is investigating a 
lobbying firm that secured a number of earmarks in this legislation for 
its clients, and then turned around and made campaign contributions to 
the Members that secured those earmarks. There's an investigation going 
on right now. And those earmarks are still in the bill.
  So, as I mentioned, as a partisan Republican, we probably should say, 
President, sign this bill. It will be good for us politically because 
it will be tougher for you to enact your agenda afterwards. But it's 
not good for the country.
  It's not enough for the President to say this is last year's 
business. He should know that most of the bills contained in this 
omnibus spending measure didn't even go through the full committee 
process. Nearly 9,000 earmarks, most of them were air-dropped right at 
the end. We didn't see them last year. We saw most of them only 48 
hours this year before the bill was signed. We had no ability to 
challenge any of them. So saying that is last year's business is simply 
not accurate.
  Even if it were last year's business, let's take that analogy a 
little further. Iraq policy. If the President were to say----
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Tauscher). The time of the gentleman 
has expired.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 
seconds.
  Mr. FLAKE. If the President were to say, you know, this Iraq policy 
that was last year's business, I've inherited it. I'm just going to 
continue it, continue with the status quo. But he's not, nor should he. 
He is the President. His signature will go on the bottom of this bill, 
and he shouldn't sign it.
  We should enact a long-term, 1-year CR and fund the government at 
last year's levels. Let's act on the fiscal responsibility that we all 
say that we are for.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 
minutes to the gentleman from Indiana, my classmate, Dan Burton.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. You know, the people of this country, Madam 
Speaker, are not only hurting, they're mad as hell. They're losing 
their jobs. They're losing their homes. And then they look at 
Washington, D.C., and they see us spending this country right down the 
tubes.
  They worry about their kids and their grandkids and what kind of a 
life we're going to leave for them with higher taxes and huge amounts 
of inflation because we're blowing so much money right now. And they 
say, why are they doing that? Why don't they freeze spending? Why don't 
they live like I have to live back in my district, back in my home?
  $787 billion, ultimately over $1 trillion in the stimulus, $410 
billion in this bill, a budget of $3.9 trillion, with a $635 billion 
down payment on a new health care plan that's going to lead to 
socialized medicine and probably bankrupt the country down the road.
  The people of this country want us to do our job. They want us to 
make sure that they have a better quality of life. They want to make 
sure they have lower taxes and they can send their kids to school and 
not have to worry about not having the money to do it.
  And what are we doing here?
  We're blowing their money over and over again, trillions of dollars, 
and putting them in a bigger and bigger hole.
  My good friends on the Democrat side, I hope they'll listen to the 
people of this country. I hope you'll listen.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).
  Mr. KINGSTON. Madam Speaker, here we are, March 6, doing what the 
Democrats should have done at the fiscal year closing on October 1. 
Now, I understand they were intimidated by George Bush and did not want 
to pass a budget out of the Democratically-controlled House or Senate. 
But they've now been in control of all three, House, Senate and White 
House, for 6 weeks, and nothing has been done.
  Well, there have been some things done. For example, they had time to 
create 31 new Federal programs. They've had time to do some paybacks, 
political paybacks to their union supporters through executive orders. 
They've had time to entertain Stevie Wonder at the White House, to have 
the Nation's Governors into the White House for a little conga line 
dancing and, of course, they've had time to attack Rush Limbaugh.
  Meanwhile, since election day the Dow has dropped 1,300 points, 
wiping out people's college education accounts and retirement savings. 
Unemployment is now above 8 percent. And yet, today, we're going to 
pass, or we're trying to pass a continuing resolution because we can't 
do what should have been done by the Democrat leadership October 1st.
  This bill, by the way, is $410 billion. It's an 8 percent increase. 
When combined with the $790 billion stimulus package, that represents 
an 80 percent increase in Federal spending in 1 year. You know, if it 
worked, we would be in great shape because, under President Bush we 
passed a stimulus package. And I voted against that one. Fannie Mae, 
$200 billion, that stimulus package last year, $168 billion, AIG now up 
to $180 billion, Bear Stearns, $29 billion, the Wall Street bailout, 
$700 billion. If spending worked, we would have the economy turned 
around by now. We would be in great shape. But it doesn't work.
  Let's reject this 80 percent increase in Federal Government spending. 
Let's do things to create jobs and rescue the savings of America's 
middle class.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson).
  Mr. CULBERSON. At a time when Americans are more concerned than ever 
before about the security of their job, about their next paycheck, 
about the strength of the American economy, at a time when everyone in 
Congress should be focused on protecting the American economy from 
sliding deeper into recession, the new majority in Congress is focused 
on spending more money and less time than any Congress in U.S. history.
  These first 32 days that the new majority has been in control have 
been focused on, in many ways I'm reminded of what used to happen when 
a conquered city fell to a conquering army. The army was given 3 days 
to pillage.
  This is like an unrestrained, absolutely unrestrained spending spree 
that we've never seen before in our history. We have, in these 32 days, 
the new majority in Congress has spent about $1.6 trillion, $800 
billion in the stimulus package, $400 billion with this omnibus here in 
front of us, $350 billion with the additional TARP funds, at least $65 
billion in the new SCHIP children's health insurance bill.
  We are spending money we do not have. We're borrowing money to pay 
off borrowed money. It is as though the new majority were paying off 
America's mortgage with a credit card. And everyone in America 
understands that this defies common sense. It defies all reason. No one 
in their private life would engage in conduct like this. And we, at a 
time of economic peril for the Nation, should not engage in it in 
Congress.
  We, in the minority, the fiscal conservatives, have not only fought 
as politely as thoughtfully and carefully as we can this spending, but 
today we're offering a clear choice to the Congress and the country. We 
fiscal conservatives are offering an alternative to freeze Federal 
spending for the remainder of the fiscal year with a continuing 
resolution. It's called freeze current spending. That's common sense. 
It's something everyone in America can understand, that at home, in our 
businesses, and certainly when it comes to protecting the Treasury of 
the United States of America, we must not spend more than we bring in.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds.
  Mr. CULBERSON. We cannot spend more as a Nation than we bring in in 
revenue. We're already on a national credit card. And no matter who I 
talk to, in an E-town hall meeting last night, people back home who 
have never been involved in politics before

[[Page H3063]]

are paying attention closely to this debate. And today we fiscal 
conservatives in the minority are offering a very simple, clear choice.
  Our alternative today, the motion to recommit, the vote that will be 
taken today, America, on the motion to recommit, a ``yes'' vote to 
recommit is a vote to keep spending flat for the rest of the fiscal 
year and exercise fiscal restraint. A ``no'' vote is to continue this 
unrestrained spending spree which will bankrupt our children.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 2 
minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway).
  Mr. CONAWAY. Madam Speaker, the President last week held a fiscal 
responsibility summit. A week before that he had come to these Chambers 
to call and implore us for fiscal responsibility. Then last Thursday he 
rolls out a budget that's anything but fiscally responsible.
  Following his speech the other night I was asked what I thought, what 
I wished he was going to say, actually before he spoke. What I wished 
he would have said is we've got some hard choices ahead of us, very 
difficult financial statements to be made; that we're going to start 
those with this statement: We're going to hold spending for the rest of 
fiscal 2009 to the numbers that were there in fiscal 2008. All of these 
new programs weren't in existence before we started. This Nation will 
get along without them if we don't have them in place.
  And so the President could have made a great statement toward 
beginning this hard, arduous, difficult task of beginning to spend less 
money out of this Federal Government than we are currently 
contemplating.
  I would call on my colleagues across the aisle to back the President 
up on his fiscal tough concepts and fiscal tough decisions that he 
wants to make by starting with this one. This is probably the easiest 
hard choice to make that we're going to have across these next months, 
and that is, let's just leave the rest of 2009 to spend at the exact 
levels we're spending right now. No increases from the $31 billion that 
are contemplated in this bill.
  The sad truth is the economic stimulus package that was passed 
includes additional monies to be spent on these exact line items. The 
numbers I saw was that, combined with this $30 billion, that increased 
a total of $301 billion of extra discretionary spending in Fiscal 2009 
as a result of the stimulus and as a result of this passage of this 
omnibus bill of the continuing resolution.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for the motion to recommit. Let's hold 
this spending at this year's levels. That's the easiest hard choice 
that we have to make. And there are lots of hard choices on the 
horizon. Let's start with that today and begin the process of reining 
in Federal spending with this vote.
  And I urge passage of the motion to recommit here shortly.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I have no additional 
speakers. I must say that, as I rise to at least close my side of this 
discussion, I know that my chairman has to be very, very frustrated to 
find ourselves this far into the next fiscal year's work, finally 
passing 9 out of 12 of our appropriations bills from last year, I mean, 
all lumped into a big package, none of which have had any hearings on 
the full committee.
  The Appropriations Committee members, Democrats and Republicans, 
presume themselves to have some individual expertise, but we never call 
upon them. We certainly wouldn't want to call on their fine staff to 
provide the sort of input that would reflect the finest of the 
Congress.
  I must say, I'm working very hard with my chairman to get us back on 
regular order for the 2010 appropriations bills that are going to be 
ahead of us. We're actually going to have subcommittee hearings, Madam 
Speaker. We actually are probably going to have full committee 
hearings. We're going to call upon Democrat Members to provide some 
input regarding what the details are of their bills. Interesting 
process to get back to that regular order.
  But having said that, Madam Speaker, we've taken much too much time 
and, because of that, I'm very happy to yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I don't know how many of us remember the old song, 
``Shine on Harvest Moon.'' I'm reminded this morning more of ``Whine on 
Harvest Moon'' when I hear some of the complaints lodged about budget 
practices by our friends on the other side of the aisle.

                              {time}  1115

  I also am tempted to ask where on Earth is Herbert Hoover, but then I 
come to the realization, which is obvious, that he is alive and well, 
and resides in the House Republican caucus.
  I find it strange to be lectured by folks on that side of the aisle, 
the folks who did such a ``brilliant'' job of running this institution 
and in running this economy and in running this country for the last 8 
years. I find it interesting to be lectured on fiscal responsibility by 
people who borrowed $1.2 trillion in order to pay for tax cuts, 
primarily for the wealthiest people in this country, all on borrowed 
money. I find it interesting to be lectured by people who managed to 
borrow almost $1 trillion so far to fund what I regard as the most 
avoidable and dumbest war in American history, in Iraq, who paid for 
the whole war on the cuff. I find it ironic to be lectured about 
earmarks by the party that spent twice as much money on earmarks as we 
are spending since we took over and reformed the earmarking process. I 
also find it interesting to be lectured about economics by the folks 
who presided over a government which, in the words of FDR, was frozen 
in the ice of its own indifference while 90 percent of all of the 
income growth in this country in the past 8 years went into the pockets 
of the wealthiest 10 percent of people in our society, leaving 
everybody else to struggle for table scraps.
  So I do find all of that interesting, but I don't find it 
particularly productive, and I think we ought to get back, not to what 
we don't like or do like about what has happened in this institution, 
but I think we ought to focus instead on what is happening outside this 
institution to average Americans all over the country.
  As has been noted several times this morning, the recent figures out 
of the Labor Department now indicate that unemployment has now risen 
above 8 percent. We're told by the most reputable economists in the 
country that it's liable to rise above 10 percent or even significantly 
worse. We see almost 700,000 new workers who are unemployed today in 
comparison to last month. We have lost 3 million jobs since the 
Democratic Party in the House tried to produce the first economic 
stimulus bill, modest though it was, in September of last year.
  We are now debating a bill which is $20 billion for education, for 
health care, for science, and the like, which is $20 billion above the 
budget request made by President Bush last year. That sounds like a lot 
of money until you compare it to the $200 billion that this economy has 
already lost because of its shrinkage just in the last 3 months of last 
year, and that $20 billion in increased government funding looks mighty 
small in comparison to the $200 billion more that we expect to have 
seen the economy shrink by in the first 3 months of this year, leaving 
a total hole in the economy for just that 6-month period of $400 
billion.
  We are trying in this bill to provide the funding, which was the base 
for the stimulus bill that we passed just 3 weeks ago in this place, 
and they are intimately related to each other. This is an integral part 
of what we did in the stimulus package, which is supported by the 
American people in the most recent polls by well over 60 percent of the 
American public. They understand, when the economy is contracting at a 
record rate, squeezing millions of Americans out of the circle of 
prosperity, that we've got to respond to try to reinflate that economy 
again, and so this bill plays a small but crucial role in doing that.
  Now, our friends on the other side of the aisle say we should just do 
a full year's CR. Well, if you do, you will come in virtually, 
identically, very close, at least, to President Bush's budget request 
for these programs. I don't think in a time of near economic collapse 
that we want to do that.
  I don't believe that we want to eliminate the funds in this bill that 
are meant to deal with the Social Security/

[[Page H3064]]

disability backlog. I don't believe that we want to see the Federal 
Housing Administration cease to have the ability to issue mortgage 
insurance in April, as would be the case if we simply provided funding 
at the level that our friends want us to provide under their motion to 
recommit. I don't believe that we should follow a course of action 
which would mean that we could provide no new targeted vouchers for 
disabled and homeless veterans. I don't believe that we should 
eliminate the $37 million that we have in this bill to enhance 
enforcement, oversight and investor protections at the Securities and 
Exchange Commission.
  Neither do I believe that we ought to cut these programs to the level 
supported and requested by President Bush last year. If we did that, we 
would be cutting the Job Corps by $46 million. We would be eliminating 
the employment service grants. We would be cutting senior jobs programs 
by $172 million. We would be eliminating vocational education. We would 
be terminating the Community Services Block Grant program and so many 
others.
  So I think the point is obvious. We really have operating here two 
different parties with two different visions for the future of this 
country, and we believe that when the private sector is essentially 
collapsing, as it is right now, that the government has an opportunity 
to step in and do what it can through fiscal policy and through 
supporting crucial programs, such as contained in the omnibus bill, so 
that we can counter the economic destruction that's going on in the 
private sector of the economy. That is what this bill tries to do.
  If Members are more comfortable with the idea that we should simply 
glide along, do nothing and stick to the way we did things last year, 
be my guest. I don't think that's going to help the economy very much. 
I don't think it's going to impress the American people very much.
  So I would urge the rejection of the motion to recommit when it's 
offered, and I would urge the passage of this resolution. In the end, 
the passage of this resolution is necessary in order to keep the 
government open, and that's what we ought to do today by passing this 
resolution.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House today, 
the joint resolution is considered read, and the previous question is 
ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint 
resolution.
  The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 
time, and was read the third time.


                           Motion to Recommit

  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit 
at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the joint 
resolution?
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I certainly am, Madam Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Lewis of California moves to recommit the joint 
     resolution H.J. Res. 38 to the Committee on Appropriations 
     with instructions to report the same back to the House 
     forthwith with the following amendments:
       Page 1, beginning on line 5, strike ``March 11, 2009'' and 
     insert ``September 30, 2009''.
       At the end of the joint resolution, add the following new 
     sections:
       Sec. 2. Section 122 of the Consolidated Appropriations 
     Resolution, 2009 (division A of Public Law 110-329) is 
     amended by striking ``$5,396,615,000'' and inserting 
     ``$5,595,754,000''.
       Sec. 3. Section 123 of the Consolidated Appropriations 
     Resolution, 2009 (division A of Public Law 110-329) is 
     amended by striking ``$1,245,920,000'' and inserting 
     ``$1,295,319,000''.
       Sec. 4. Section 158 of the Consolidated Appropriations 
     Resolution, 2009 (division A of Public Law 110-329) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Notwithstanding section 101, the maximum Pell Grant 
     for which a student shall be eligible during award year 2009-
     2010 shall be $4,860.''
       Sec. 5. The Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2009 
     (division A of Public Law 110-329) is amended by inserting 
     after section 174 the following new sections:
       ``Sec. 175. Notwithstanding sections 101 and 102 of this 
     joint resolution, amounts are provided for `Department of 
     Justice--Federal Bureau of Investigation--Salaries and 
     Expenses' at a rate for operations of $7,147,700,000.
       ``Sec. 176. Notwithstanding section 101 of this joint 
     resolution, amounts are provided for `Department of Justice--
     Drug Enforcement Administration--Salaries and Expenses' at a 
     rate for operations of $1,939,084,000.
       ``Sec. 177. Notwithstanding section 101 of this joint 
     resolution, amounts are provided for `Department of Justice--
     United States Attorneys--Salaries and Expenses' at a rate for 
     operations of $1,836,336,000.
       ``Sec. 178. Notwithstanding section 101 of this joint 
     resolution, amounts are provided for `Department of Justice--
     Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives--
     Salaries and Expenses' at a rate for operations of 
     $1,054,215,000.
       ``Sec. 179. Notwithstanding section 101 of this joint 
     resolution, amounts are provided for `United States Marshals 
     Service--Salaries and Expenses' at a rate for operations of 
     $950,000,000.
       ``Sec. 180. In addition to amounts otherwise provided by 
     section 101, an additional amount is provided for `Department 
     of Justice--State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance' for 
     the State Criminal Alien Program, as authorized by section 
     241(i)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C.1231(i)(5)), at a rate for operations of $420,000,000.
       ``Sec. 181. Notwithstanding section 101 of this joint 
     resolution, amounts are provided for `The Judiciary--Courts 
     of Appeals, District Courts, and other Judicial Services--
     Salaries and Expenses' at a rate for operations of 
     $4,801,369,000.

  Mr. OBEY (during the reading). Madam Speaker, I would ask unanimous 
consent that the reading be dispensed with.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California is recognized 
for 5 minutes in support of his motion.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Golly, Madam Speaker, I had really hoped we 
could read that entire thing, but on the other hand, I certainly 
wouldn't want to interfere with this speedy process we're going 
through.
  Madam Speaker, I do have a motion to recommit at the desk. I must say 
that, following that very small bill as described by my chairman, which 
is only $410 billion on top of $800 billion, it's a shame we can't 
quite spend enough of the folks' money.
  My chairman refers often to one who appears to be his favorite 
President, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who clearly, for all of 
us, demonstrated that throwing money at problems to try to solve them 
was not the answer to those problems.
  Anyway, Madam Speaker, going back to my motion to recommit, today we 
find ourselves in a difficult situation where we must vote on a CR to 
allow the government to operate while we wait for the Senate to pass 
this flawed omnibus appropriations bill.
  The quandary we face today is a symptom of the larger problem. When 
Congress engages in regular order where we consider and pass individual 
appropriations bills on time and under an open process, these massive 
omnibus bills and continuing resolutions are just simply not needed. 
However, we are between a rock and a hard place, and this motion to 
recommit is the best solution to that.
  Instead of punting for yet another few days, this motion takes care 
of the problem now by providing funding for the rest of the fiscal year 
at an adequate and restrained level while we consider the other huge 
packages that are coming forth from this leadership. This motion to 
recommit extends the current funding levels for all government agencies 
and programs with certain exceptions.
  I must mention as I talk about the exceptions: The other side, but 
particularly my chairman, loves to talk about cuts from cuts. The 
public should understand that those cuts really are talking about cuts 
from wished-for increases in spending from the previous fiscal year. In 
about 90 percent of the cases, that is the case.
  These exceptions include law enforcement programs in our package like 
the DEA, the FBI, U.S. Attorneys, the Judiciary, and the detention 
programs such as the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, which 
helps local communities with the costs associated with the 
incarceration of illegal aliens. These programs will receive limited 
and necessary increases to maintain public safety. This motion also 
allows the Pell Grant increase approved in the enacted stimulus bill to 
move forward into next year.
  Madam Speaker, a year-long continuing resolution with these 
exceptions is the best option. It will maintain critical government 
services at a

[[Page H3065]]

sufficient level while saving the taxpayers between $15 billion and $18 
billion compared with our Democratic leadership's 2009 spending plan. 
It is time to move forward with the work of this new Congress and, once 
and for all, close out 2009 and its appropriations process. This motion 
will allow us to do this immediately and responsibly and without 
massive spending increases that the taxpayers cannot afford.
  As we begin the work of the 2010 appropriations process, it is my 
hope and, I believe, the commitment from my leader that we can work 
together in a bipartisan way to complete our annual work on time and 
under regular order. That is even with subcommittee hearings--my 
goodness--and with full committee hearings. This includes asking the 
Democrat and Republican members of the Appropriations Committee to 
participate individually, even talking to their staffs once in a while 
in a professional way. That would be, indeed, a wonderful change to 
return to regular order.
  So, with that, Madam Speaker, I appreciate your accepting my motion 
to recommit.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1130

  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I yield to the distinguished majority 
leader.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  We have one option here because the government will shut down 
tomorrow by action of this Congress. And so our alternative is to keep 
the government operating, to defend our people in many ways, continue 
health care in many ways, to make sure that the services that are 
needed and available for our citizens remain so.
  The Senate has already deemed the gentleman from Wisconsin's motion 
to be passed. Why? Because they've gone home. They're not here.
  I urge every Member to reject this motion to recommit. Why? Because 
it will be objected to by at least one Senator, and therefore, the 
government will shut down.
  Pending before the Senate is an appropriation bill passed by this 
House to fund government and to apply the resources of our country to 
our country's priorities. The gentleman from California knows that we 
had to do that numerous times under his chairmanship. Sometimes we 
passed those bills in January, sometimes we passed them in February, 
having a very large number of bills because the regular order was not 
effected within the time frame set forth. He did not like that. I did 
not like it. We don't like it as a process. None of us like this 
process, and hopefully we will have the cooperation of both sides so 
that it is not affected again.
  But we have pending in the Senate a bill, the omnibus bill, and let 
me read to you the quote of the Republican leader of the United States 
Senate:
  ``If we want to do a bill immediately, again, my recommendation is 
the omnibus appropriations bill.'' Hear me. This is Senator Mitch 
McConnell, the Republican leader.
  ``These were nine bills that were not passed by October when they 
should have been passed.'' I agree with that.
  ``They are ready to go,'' he said. ``They've already been vetted by 
both sides,'' he said, ``would pass on an overwhelming, bipartisan 
basis,'' he said, ``and much of that spending, George''--he was 
speaking to George Stephanopoulos--``would be on things similar to what 
the President may be asking for in that package.''
  He was accurate then; he's accurate now. But unfortunately, the 
Senate did not effect the passage of this bill in a timely fashion, 
although they have had it for a significant period of time.
  And so the chairman of the Appropriations Committee is confronted 
with but one option because the option that is offered on the other 
side will not receive unanimous consent. And the Senate, as I said 
before, has gone home.
  And so I say to all of my colleagues on our side of the aisle, we 
need to pass this motion, and we need to reject the motion to recommit. 
And responsibly, there is not another option.
  So I ask all, on both sides of the aisle, to give us the opportunity 
to move forward, to keep the government open, and to continue the 
debate that the Senate apparently wants to continue to have. The 
minority does not have the votes in the Senate to do what they want to 
do. The majority will vote for the omnibus appropriations bill. This is 
not a question of whether the majority of the Senate is for it, it's a 
question of whether the minority will stop its passage.
  We can be here Saturday and Sunday and Monday and heaven knows how 
long, but it will not change the fact that confronts us.
  Reject this motion to recommit that will not be approved by the 
Senate, pass the short-term continuing resolution proposed by the 
chairman, and let us come back next week and work the will of this 
House and the Senate.
  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I urge opposition to the motion, and I urge 
passage of the resolution.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair 
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on 
the question of passage.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 160, 
noes 218, not voting 53, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 108]

                               AYES--160

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Chaffetz
     Childers
     Coble
     Cole
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Donnelly (IN)
     Dreier
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Fallin
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Guthrie
     Hall (TX)
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Jenkins
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Minnick
     Mitchell
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Nye
     Olson
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Petri
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radanovich
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden
     Wamp
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--218

     Ackerman
     Adler (NJ)
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berry
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Bright
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Driehaus
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Gonzalez
     Gordon (TN)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kanjorski

[[Page H3066]]


     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Marshall
     Massa
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McMahon
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis (CO)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Teague
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--53

     Abercrombie
     Barrett (SC)
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Boccieri
     Bono Mack
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cao
     Coffman (CO)
     Cuellar
     Davis (AL)
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     Dingell
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Fattah
     Gallegly
     Green, Gene
     Hall (NY)
     Harman
     Issa
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (IL)
     Jordan (OH)
     Kaptur
     Kilroy
     Lipinski
     Lofgren, Zoe
     McDermott
     McHugh
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Miller, Gary
     Neal (MA)
     Perriello
     Pitts
     Putnam
     Rangel
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Space
     Stark
     Sullivan
     Tiberi
     Wilson (OH)

                              {time}  1200

  Ms. WOOLSEY, Mr. McMAHON, Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN, Messrs. MURTHA, 
GUTIERREZ, Mrs. CAPPS and Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia changed their vote 
from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. MILLER of Florida changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the joint 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 328, 
noes 50, not voting 53, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 109]

                               AYES--328

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Adler (NJ)
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Austria
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blumenauer
     Boehner
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Bright
     Brown, Corrine
     Buchanan
     Butterfield
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Childers
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Conaway
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Driehaus
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Filner
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Gordon (TN)
     Granger
     Graves
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hall (TX)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Heinrich
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inglis
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Kucinich
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NY)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Marchant
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Marshall
     Massa
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McMahon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Minnick
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Nunes
     Nye
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olson
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis (CO)
     Pomeroy
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Speier
     Spratt
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Teague
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--50

     Akin
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Bonner
     Broun (GA)
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Carter
     Chaffetz
     Cole
     Davis (KY)
     Fallin
     Flake
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gingrey (GA)
     Herger
     Hunter
     Johnson, Sam
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     McHenry
     Moran (KS)
     Neugebauer
     Pascrell
     Paul
     Petri
     Poe (TX)
     Radanovich
     Royce
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Westmoreland

                             NOT VOTING--53

     Abercrombie
     Barrett (SC)
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Boccieri
     Bono Mack
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cao
     Coffman (CO)
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Davis (AL)
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     Dingell
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Fattah
     Gallegly
     Green, Gene
     Hall (NY)
     Harman
     Issa
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (IL)
     Jordan (OH)
     Kaptur
     Kilroy
     Lipinski
     Lofgren, Zoe
     McDermott
     McKeon
     Melancon
     Miller, Gary
     Neal (MA)
     Perriello
     Pitts
     Putnam
     Rangel
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Space
     Stark
     Sullivan
     Tiberi
     Wilson (OH)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes 
remaining on this vote.

                              {time}  1207

  Mr. PENCE changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the joint resolution was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________