[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 64 (Wednesday, April 29, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H4920-H4928]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  CONFERENCE REPORT ON S. CON. RES. 13, CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE 
                      BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Tauscher). Pursuant to section 2 of 
House Resolution 371, proceedings will now resume on the conference 
report to accompany the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 13) 
setting forth the congressional budget for the United States Government 
for fiscal year 2010, revising the appropriate budgetary levels for 
fiscal year 2009, and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels 
for fiscal years 2011 through 2014.
  The Clerk read the title of the Senate concurrent resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. When proceedings were postponed on Tuesday, 
April 28, 2009, 20 minutes of debate remained on the conference report.
  The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) has 10 minutes 
remaining and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan) has 10 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Madam Speaker, I get a little bit of a sense of deja vu this morning. 
We've kind of been around this vote a while. But we got some new news 
this morning that's troubling news. The economy in the first quarter of 
this year has declined by 6.1 percent, 6.1 percent negative economic 
growth, the worst drop in our economy now since the mid 1970s. And if 
you look at the data, it shows you that the American consumer is more 
or less hanging in there. It's the investment from businesses that has 
dried up. It is business investment that's not occurring in this 
economy that's creating this great recession leading to all these job 
losses.
  So as we look at this budget, I think a few new points ought to be 
brought to light since we have been around this budget quite a bit, 
which is, number one, looking at the economic data underneath this 
budget. It shows you that the debt and deficits that are currently 
projected in this budget are going to go much higher.
  If you take a look at the economic assumptions that the Office of 
Management and Budget uses, they're a whole lot rosier than what's 
occurring. If you look at their inflation projections, which inflation 
just came in at 2.9 percent this quarter, they're a whole lot rosier, 
meaning put reality into the

[[Page H4921]]

budget and the deficits and debts go even higher.
  We already see that the Congressional Budget Office is telling us, 
versus the President's budget numbers, were about $2.1 trillion deeper 
into deficits. Now with this new data, even more red ink.
  But worse yet, as I just described, the current bad economic numbers 
we got, business investment is down. That means businesses are not 
investing.
  So what does this budget do? It raises taxes on investment. It raises 
taxes on businesses.
  You've got to remember, Madam Speaker, that almost 70 percent of our 
jobs come from small businesses. More than half of those who pay those 
top tax rates are small businesses. It's those industrial companies 
that are in the business parks that ring the sides of our cities in 
Elkhorn and Janesville and Kenosha and Racine, Wisconsin. That's where 
most people get their jobs.
  So what does this bill do? It raises taxes on those small businesses. 
It actually raises their taxes such to the point where they pay a 
higher tax rate than the largest corporations in America.
  This budget also repeals tax deferral. Now, what does that mean? That 
means all of our big businesses that make things in America and sell 
them overseas, we're going to tax them twice and make our exports even 
less competitive. We're going to tax business investment. What does it 
do on capital gains and dividends, on the seed corn and seed capital 
that funds the innovations, that funds the entrepreneurial startups, 
that the small businesses go to to get their money to expand and invest 
and create jobs? It raises taxes on that as well.
  So we are raising taxes on the very things that give us business 
investment and give us jobs. We are raising taxes on the very things 
that make up our pensions, our 401(k)s, and our college savings plans. 
And we are raising these taxes $1.5 trillion a year in order to chase 
ever higher spending.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield myself an additional 30 seconds to say 
that we are raising taxes, the most we have ever done. I know the 
chairman will give us some convoluted explanation on how this is 
actually cutting taxes. Keeping taxes where they are on some tax 
policies is not cutting taxes; it's keeping taxes where they are. 
Making them go up means you're raising them to chase higher spending. 
The higher taxes in this bill never catch the higher spending; so we 
have a mountain of debt among the likes we have never seen before.
  That is why we have such a difference of opinion with this budget. 
That is why we offered a principled alternative to this budget, which 
is controlling spending, keeping taxes low, and getting our debt under 
control.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
majority leader, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
  (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the chairman for yielding. I thank the ranking 
member for his views.
  There is a disagreement, Madam Speaker. We have had a substantive 
disagreement for a long time. In fact, when I was elected to the 
Congress in 1981, we had a very substantive disagreement on what the 
economic policies would produce in terms of the supply-side economic 
theory. My view, which differs from Mr. Ryan's, is that it produced 
large deficits, and it produced large deficits in every year that it 
was practiced in the 29 years that I have been here. Only in the 8 
years where President Clinton had the veto pen and said no, we're not 
going to go down that road, did we produce surpluses. Now, they were 
produced in large part because of an economy that rose more rapidly 
than any of us expected because of the chip, the information technology 
explosion, all of which was to the best interest of our country. We had 
a $5.6 trillion surplus projected in 2001 by President Bush as a 
result. Unfortunately, we pursued a policy with which I disagreed and 
which I said would produce high deficits and would not help our 
economy. In fact, we produced high deficits, and our economy was in the 
worst shape that any President has inherited an economy since Franklin 
Roosevelt. President Obama was confronted with an economy that was in 
substantial decline.
  Today the House has the rare opportunity to set America on a 
responsible course for the future. I congratulate Mr. Spratt, I 
congratulate Mr. Boyd and Ms. DeLauro, members of the conference, for 
the courage and leadership they have displayed. Mr. Spratt has been, as 
always, extraordinarily informed and extraordinarily involved with all 
of our Members in trying to get to this point. The course that we set 
ourselves on, in my view, is one of lasting prosperity, and I urge my 
colleagues to seize this opportunity.
  Along with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, this budget is 
a key part of our response to this recession. We have the power to 
emerge from this recession a stronger Nation, one with a future of 
clean energy and energy independence and a workforce ready to compete 
with the best in the world and a reformed system of health care. This 
budget provides for those objectives. We also have a chance to vote for 
the principles of fiscal responsibility and put ourselves on a truly 
sustainable course.
  There is a real difference in this House, in the Senate, and in this 
country about what fiscal responsibility means. I believe it means we 
pay for what we buy rather than simply cutting our revenues, increasing 
our purchases, and hoping somehow something magical will happen to 
balance the budget. It has never happened in the 20 years that I have 
served with Republican Presidents pursuing that philosophy.
  On energy, the budget funds incentives for cutting-edge research and 
clean energy jobs, as well as an energy-efficient, money-saving, 
critically necessary smart grid.
  On education this budget builds upon the recovery plan with 
additional support for early childhood education, elementary and 
secondary school students, and efforts to help more Americans obtain a 
college degree. It expands access to education in the make-or-break 
years of early childhood--I think critical if we are going to be 
competitive in world markets. It increases Pell grants to help more 
students afford higher education and promotes job training and 
significant education reform.
  On health care this budget responds to the skyrocketing costs that 
are straining families and businesses across this Nation. Family 
premiums have more than doubled since the year 2000, and over the past 
5 years, our total health care spending has increased at more than 
twice the rate of inflation, consuming more and more of our economy and 
our budget each year. This budget fights that trend by making a 
significant down-payment on the reform, taking steps to lower health 
care costs, improve quality, and expand access. That is what America 
voted in 2008. That is the responsibility that we are carrying out.
  The budget also allows us to use reconciliation to provide for an up-
or-down vote on reforming health care, not as an option or first resort 
but as a fallback if partisanship blocks progress.
  Essentially we're saying the majority will make policy. It didn't 
take 60 percent to elect the President. It didn't take 60 percent to 
elect any of us to this body. The premise of our Founding Fathers was 
if a majority of Americans believe we ought to move in a direction, 
that's the direction we ought to move. That has proved a very 
successful policy for over two centuries. It is a policy that we are 
providing for here. It is a policy that was provided for by the 
Republicans when they were in charge time after time after time.
  As the bipartisan Concord Coalition points out: ``The budget 
reconciliation process was used in 1997, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003, and 
2005 to reduce taxes,'' as opposed to deficit reduction, which, of 
course, reconciliation is designed to address.
  Moreover, a case can be made that health care reform that includes 
spending restraints and squeezes inefficiencies out of the system is 
integral to reining in the rapid growth of health care costs, which is 
a major, a major driver of deficits.

[[Page H4922]]

  I want to stress that last point. It is essential that health care 
reform includes difficult choices to cut costs, which will eventually 
result in lower deficits. Why? Because of the $2.4 trillion that we 
spend on health care, half of that comes from the government, either 
Federal or State.
  All of these investments are vital to our future economic health and 
competitiveness. As President Obama recently pointed out: ``A cash-
strapped family may cut back on all kinds of luxuries but will insist 
on spending money to get their children through college.''
  Our country is in the same position. These tough times are no excuse 
to cut back on investments that will pay off many times over down the 
road.

                              {time}  1045

  Finally, this budget puts America back on the path of fiscal 
responsibility. It's no secret that past budgets have made easy choices 
and kicked the difficult ones down the road.
  Let me say, as I have said so many times before, it takes no courage 
whatsoever to cut taxes. None. Zero. What takes courage, political 
courage, if we want to buy things, is to pay for them. That's what 
takes courage. You can make one of two decisions: Don't buy and keep 
revenue stable, or buy and pay for so that your children aren't paying 
for it. Those are the decisions that I am prepared to make and, very 
frankly, have made over the last 40 years that I have been in office.
  This House needs to make those choices. That's why Allen Boyd, John 
Spratt and others have pursued so vigorously statutory PAYGO 
requirements. That's why I am in such support of them.
  In 1990, statutory PAYGO led to that surplus that I referred to. 
Jettisoning that in the early part of this decade led to the deficits 
that we have experienced.
  And why did you jettison PAYGO? Because you were unprepared to pay 
for the revenue losses that you voted for.
  But by passing this budget we will be leaving a different legacy, one 
that makes clear that our government must pay for what it buys. This 
budget cuts the deficit from 10.5 percent of GDP in 2009 to 3 percent 
of GDP in 2013--in other words, by nearly two-thirds. Those savings 
come from spending restraint and oversight that save taxpayer money. We 
must do that. We cannot pursue the policies that we have been pursuing. 
They are not sustainable.
  Most importantly, the House is strongly committed to statutory PAYGO. 
President Obama asked Congress, and again I quote, to develop a PAYGO 
law that would help return the Nation to a path of fiscal 
responsibility, and that is what we intend to do.
  That is what this budget does. The House will not consider any bills 
on middle-income tax cuts, the estate tax, AMT relief, or the 
sustainable growth rate in the Medicare program unless they include 
statutory PAYGO, they are fully offset, or statutory PAYGO has already 
been enacted. Everybody wants to deal with those four issues. Let us 
see if everybody is prepared in this generation to pay for them and not 
pass those costs on to the next generation.
  I urge my colleagues to approve this conference report, pass this 
budget and show our constituents that the priorities they voted for in 
2008 are ours as well.
  I again congratulate the chairman, the members of the conference 
committee and the members of the Budget Committee for their leadership 
and for their courage.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to our 
distinguished minority whip, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).
  Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman.
  Madam Speaker, I sit here and I listen to the majority leader, and it 
strikes me that in my four terms having served in this body, I do not 
think that there has ever been a time when there are two more divergent 
views of the direction in which we should take this country.
  The news today demonstrated that the last quarter we saw a 6.5 
percent shrinkage in the GDP in this country, two consecutive quarters 
of GDP shrinkage, more than any in 60 years. We've got serious, serious 
economic challenges facing us in America, Madam Speaker, and our 
priority should be to get this economy back on track, to get people 
back to work in America.
  Right now, 650,000 people lose their jobs every month. If you do the 
math, that is about 15 people a minute lose their jobs. That's real. 
When you lose your job, you don't have a vision of how you can even get 
through the month or put food on the table.
  That's where, Madam Speaker, I have difficulty with the budget being 
brought forward. Because if our primary responsibility here is to 
create an environment where the job creators can go back to work and 
put people back to work, this budget falls woefully short.
  How can you say that we are helping the small businesses of this 
country, the true economic engines of America, when we are taxing them 
and making it more difficult for them to maintain the jobs they have 
got and increase their payrolls?
  The other side may say, oh, there is only 3 percent of small business 
people that actually are impacted by higher taxes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.
  Mr. CANTOR. Well, 50 percent of the people that get a tax hike here 
are small business people. How can we expect our economy to rebound?
  Madam Speaker, this budget creates so much uncertainty on the part of 
investors, on the part of families, I don't see how we are going to 
work our way out of these economic doldrums.
  To say that the energy policy is going to create green jobs, that's 
great in theory. But I can tell you the cap-and-trade plan that's 
working its way through this House right now is going to result in a 
national energy tax imposing up to $3,000 per household every year. How 
can that help the working families of this country right now?
  Madam Speaker, we can do better. We can work together to achieve 
meaningful savings for the taxpayers. We can get off of this spending 
spree and refuse to put $70,000 per added debt on every man, woman and 
child in this country.
  Madam Speaker, we can do better. The Republicans stand ready to work 
with you in making sure that's the case.
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Boyd).
  (Mr. BOYD asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BOYD. Thank you, Chairman Spratt. I appreciate your work on 
getting us to this point.
  Ladies and gentlemen, you hear from the other side of this aisle 
criticism of this budget. I assume that means they believe we should go 
back to the policies that were followed in the last 8 years, and I want 
to review where those policies got us under the previous administration 
and the previous Republican-controlled Congress.
  Unemployment, when George W. Bush came into office, was less than 
half of what it is today at 8.5 percent. Job growth in the previous 8 
years under President Clinton had been approximately 250,000 new jobs 
created per month.
  This month, after 8 years of the policies that are espoused by the 
ranking member, Mr. Ryan, and the distinguished minority whip, Mr. 
Cantor, we are shrinking, losing 650,000 jobs on a monthly basis now.
  GDP growth. Under President Clinton, that average growth was 3.7 
percent annual rate. Now our economy is shrinking at the rate of 6.1 
percent on a monthly basis. Median income, median wages are down.
  Deficits. They speak for themselves. When President Bush took over, 
there was a surplus as far as the eye could see. Under the policies of 
the previous administration, now we have structural deficits as far as 
the eye can see. That is what President Obama has inherited.
  Health coverage. During the 8 years of the Bush administration, over 
5 million Americans lost their health coverage. That is at the very 
core of our economic problems, the health coverage problems in this 
Nation. Many would call it the misery index.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.

[[Page H4923]]

  Mr. SPRATT. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. BOYD. President Reagan talked about the misery index. I think if 
you look at all those economic indicators, there is not one economic 
indicator that shows that we are better off than we were 8 years ago.
  As a matter of fact, every economic indicator indicates that we are 
much worse off.
  Ladies and gentlemen, it's time for a new direction. We must restore 
fiscal responsibility into this budgeting process. That's one of the 
things that Chairman Spratt, Speaker Pelosi, and Majority Leader Hoyer 
have given us through this budget process, and I am very proud to 
support this budget conference report and ask you to do the same.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. SPRATT. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Andrews).
  (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ANDREWS. I thank my friend, the chairman, for yielding and 
congratulate him and thank him for his tremendous leadership in this 
effort.
  The minority whip said that the House faces a choice between two very 
distinctive strategies. He is absolutely right. The strategy that the 
minority would like to pursue is a strategy that has been tried and has 
failed. It has led us to the peril that we face today.
  The strategy that we would initiate is a return to principles that 
have succeeded. Following their strategy, for every one job their 
strategy has created, we have created 108. For every $1 of economic 
growth their strategy has created, ours has created $1.69.
  The middle-class family that began this decade saw its purchasing 
power decrease by $500 a year by the time the last President left 
office. During the 1990s, that same family saw its purchasing power 
increase by $5,000.
  The choice before the country is which strategy works. Ours does. 
Vote ``yes.''
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, how much time remains?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. There are 5\1/2\ minutes for the gentleman 
from South Carolina and 3\1/2\ minutes for the gentleman from 
Wisconsin.
  Mr. SPRATT. I yield myself 3\1/2\ minutes.
  Madam Speaker, we are here this morning to pick up where we left off 
yesterday, but really we are here to pick up the tab left over by the 
Bush administration.
  The Bush administration has left us with an economy in recession, a 
Nation $5 trillion deeper in debt, and a budget in deficit, deep 
deficit, $1.845 trillion according to the CBO.
  This is the hand dealt us. After 8 years of the Bush administration, 
we have to play the ball where it lies.
  After listening to the debate on the other side of the aisle, I think 
it would be helpful to start by pointing out what this budget is not. 
This is not a budget that increases spending. Total spending in 2009 
will be $3.9 trillion. If we pass this resolution, total spending in 
2010 will be $3.6 trillion. That's $300 billion less, not more. And all 
the initiatives we specify will be paid for.
  Despite what you have heard on the floor, this is not a budget 
resolution that increases taxes. It lowers taxes by $764 billion over 5 
years and by $1.7 trillion over 10 years. It renews the middle-income 
tax cuts. It extends the estate tax at the 2009 level. This is not 
about tax increases. It's about tax decreases.
  This is not a budget resolution that increases the deficit. Far from 
it. By 2014, this budget resolution will reduce the deficit from $1.845 
trillion this year to $525 billion next year. This is a deficit 
reduction budget.
  Let me also answer the extravagant claims made on the floor about how 
much debt accumulation will occur under this bill. Look at table 5 in 
your blue book here and look at the bottom line in debt net of 
financial assets. In the budget year, the first budget year, the debt 
net of financial assets is $8.072 trillion. In 2014 it's $10.642 
trillion.
  Now I am not here to tout a $2.5 trillion addition to our national 
debt, although it pales in comparison to what happened under Mr. Bush. 
But I am simply saying this is better by far than anything you have 
heard characterized on the House floor.
  Now the budget is about more than numbers. It's about values, visions 
and investments. And what we have to tout and talk about in offering 
this budget resolution to the House is what it will do for health care 
in our country, and particularly for the 46 million people who do not 
have coverage; what it will do for the educational system of this 
country if we can tell every child in America, yes, you can, you can 
get a higher education, Pell Grants will help you do so; what it will 
do to help build energy independence and reduce the carbon emissions in 
this country. We can have energy innovation.
  All of this is provided for in this bill. And I would emphasize all 
of it is provided for in deficit-neutral reserve funds which do not add 
to the bottom line the debt of the United States. This is what we are 
presenting here.
  Now the deficit before us is a structural deficit. It's part 
cyclical, but mostly structural. It's built into the budget that we 
have to deal with. After 8 years of the Bush administration, there is a 
massive mismatch between revenues and spending in the budget that 
creates the huge deficits we have got today.

                              {time}  1100

  We cannot turn this big battleship around overnight, but we can put 
it on the right path towards fiscal responsibility again. And that is 
exactly what this budget resolution does. That is why everybody in the 
House who believes in budget reduction, believes in fiscal 
responsibility, should vote for this budget resolution.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to our 
distinguished House 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, I rise in opposition to the budget 
conference report because it borrows too much, spends too much and 
taxes too much, and the American people know it.
  At a time when every American family is sitting down around kitchen 
tables making sacrifices and making the hard choices necessary to get 
through these difficult days, here in Washington, D.C., we see a 
Democratic majority and a new administration bring forward a budget 
that will double the national debt in 5 years and triple the national 
debt in 10, a $1.2 trillion deficit in 2010 and deficits of nearly $1 
trillion a year every year for the next 10 years.
  The distinguished majority leader spoke of ``political courage'' on 
the floor just moments ago, but let me say there are no profiles in 
courage in this budget. The truth is, the Democratic majority in this 
administration has brought to the floor the most fiscally irresponsible 
budget in American history.
  Congress should be doing what every American family is doing--cutting 
expenses and finding within themselves the faith, and, yes, the courage 
to get through these times with sacrifice. Instead, here in Washington, 
D.C., it is more government, more spending, more debt and more taxes.
  In just 100 days, a new administration and this Democratic majority 
have decided to continue and to greatly expand the mistakes of the 
past. But we can do better, and I believe, for the sake of our children 
and our grandchildren, we must do better.
  Let's reject this conference report and start over with a budget that 
will serve ourselves and our posterity with fiscal responsibility.
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, the gentleman from Indiana just said that we don't 
want to repeat the mistakes of the past. He is right. So this budget 
does not repeat those mistakes. It does not give massive tax reductions 
to the wealthiest people in the country and hope they do the right 
thing with the money. It does not ignore the health care, education and 
energy needs of our country for the long term and weaken our global 
position. Finally, it does not further the

[[Page H4924]]

path of deregulation of our markets, our financial system, which has 
led to the cataclysmic meltdown of the U.S. economy in recent weeks and 
months.
  No, this does not repeat the mistakes of the past. It is a new 
direction. It is a new opportunity. It is a new strategy that we 
believe will speak to the needs of the unemployed American, the 
American without health insurance, all of us who pay rising utility 
bills, and each of us who wants the finest quality education for our 
children.
  This is a change. It is what the people asked for in November, and, 
with the help of the majority, it is what we will deliver today.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Madam Speaker, this is a big moment. This is a big moment in our 
history that the historians will look back to as a key pivot in 
American history and the American experiment and the American project.
  What this budget does not do is it does not practice Clinton 
economics. It does not practice the kind of economics we have had in 
this country that gave us the longest peacetime expansion, the kind of 
economics that gave us unprecedented prosperity. Bill Clinton cut tax 
rates and controlled spending in a bipartisan budget agreement in 1997 
which paved the way for the surpluses that later occurred, which were 
projected, that went away. It was bipartisan.
  This is different. This is new. This budget takes a look at those 
mistakes made in the past that we are hearing all these criticisms of, 
too much spending, too much debt, and what does it do? It adds to it. 
Instead of controlling spending, as the critics have said we should 
have done, this has spending go out of control. Instead of controlling 
the debt, as the critics say should have occurred, debt goes out of 
control.
  I urge a rejection of this budget. Let's start over again and save 
this country and move us down the path of fiscal discipline, not fiscal 
recklessness.
  Madam Speaker, at this time I yield our final minute to our 
distinguished minority leader, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).
  Mr. BOEHNER. Madam Speaker, let me thank my colleague from Wisconsin 
for yielding, and thank him and all of our Republican members of the 
Budget Committee for their outstanding work.
  Let me also congratulate the chairman. I know how difficult it is to 
bring a budget to the floor of the House. It is no easy task. Even 
though I disagree with the product, I know the chairman has worked very 
diligently on this project, and I congratulate him.
  Our economy is in a difficult moment. We have got some of the highest 
unemployment we have seen in our country in 25 years. We have got 
economic dislocations underway. Banks aren't providing the credit that 
they once provided. As a result, there are a lot of people in America 
who are out of work, others worried about losing their job, and they 
are having to make difficult decisions on behalf of their families.
  I think the American people look to their Congress and wonder, what 
difficult decisions are being made in Washington, D.C.? What is it that 
Washington is doing that is going to make it better for my kids and 
their kids?
  What we see before us is a budget resolution that is nothing short of 
the most audacious move to a big socialist government in Washington, 
D.C., than anything I could have ever dreamed about before I ran for 
Congress, or, for that matter, any time over the last 18 years that I 
have been here.
  Budgets are supposed to be about tough decisions. There are no tough 
decisions in this budget, because when you look at the document, what 
it does is real simple: It spends an awful lot of money, it raises a 
lot of taxes, and it puts all of this debt on the backs of our kids and 
our grandkids.
  This is not the American way. The American way has been about a more 
limited government, a more limited role here in Washington, so we can 
allow American families and small businesses around our country to keep 
more of what they earn so they can reinvest it in themselves, reinvest 
it in their communities, and help our economy grow, providing 
opportunities for all Americans.
  We live in the greatest country in the world, a country where you can 
grow up and be anything you want to be and do anything that you want to 
do. There is no country on the face of the Earth that is as good as 
America. Why? Because we allow our citizens the opportunity to be all 
that they can be. But that won't happen when government gets too big 
and when government takes too much out of the pockets of our citizens 
and government takes more control over our society.
  Right here is the most expensive credit card in the history of the 
world. It is a voting card for a Member of Congress, and this voting 
card should be used responsibly on behalf of the American people. So 
far this year, a majority in this House have used this credit card 
irresponsibly. First, an $800 billion stimulus bill that was supposed 
to be about jobs, jobs, and jobs, and turned into nothing more than an 
$800 billion bill about spending, spending, and more spending and 
growing the size of government.
  Then we had an omnibus appropriations bill, $30 billion over budget, 
9,000 earmarks. How responsible was that to pass?
  Now we have an opportunity with this budget, a budget that spends too 
much, taxes too much and puts too much debt on the backs of our kids 
and grandkids. The American people expect us to use this credit card, 
this credit card that they gave us, they expect us to use this 
responsibly, and the responsible decision on this bill and on this 
budget is to vote ``no.''
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I yield my remaining time to the 
distinguished Speaker of this House, the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Pelosi).
  Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  It is indeed an honor to call Mr. Spratt ``colleague.'' We say that 
from time to time about our Members, but never is it truer than in the 
case of Chairman John Spratt of South Carolina. He is a gentleman who 
has brought the values of our country, the principles of our great 
democracy, to bear on writing a budget.
  Because of his leadership, today, for the first time in many, many 
years, we have a President's budget on the floor that is a statement of 
our national values. What is important to us as a Nation is reflected 
in this budget. It is a very happy day for our country, Mr. Spratt, 
because of your leadership.
  I thank all of the members of the Budget Committee for their hard 
work, expressing their views, coming forth with a budget that is a 
blueprint for the future. I also want to commend our conferees, 
Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro and Congressman Boyd, for assisting you in 
the conference process.
  Starting at the beginning of this year, this Congress passed a 
stimulus package to take our country in a new direction. Since that 
time, we have been on a sprint to create jobs, to lower the deficit, to 
cut taxes for the American people. This blueprint, this budget, is a 
bookend to that stimulus package. It is the foundation for how we go 
forward into the future.
  In the first 100 days, it enables us to make the claim with these two 
pieces of legislation and bills that have come in between, for example, 
the SCHIP, children's health insurance, 11 million children in America; 
the public lands bill, the biggest conservation bill in many, many 
years; and other initiatives contained in our agenda in the past few 
months, enables us to say that more has been done in this period of 
time for health care than in decades, since Medicare was passed in this 
Congress and signed into law. More has been done on education than in 
generations, since the GI Bill was passed during World War II, and even 
more than that. And in terms of energy, there is absolutely no contest. 
It is far out there in terms of breaking ground and reducing our 
dependence on foreign oil, creating new green jobs for a green future 
for America's economy, for honoring our moral responsibility to protect 
God's beautiful creation, and to keeping our environment clean and 
healthy for our children. These three, education, health care and 
energy, are what the business community and other sectors of our 
community tell us are the investments that we must make in order to 
turn our economy around.
  So here we are today with a budget before us that creates jobs, 
reduces taxes, and takes us over a path of lowering the deficit. It 
does so in the most

[[Page H4925]]

transparent way of any budget in our country's history, and certainly 
in this Congress' history. As it does so, as I say, it focuses on those 
three pillars of the Obama agenda: education, health care and energy.
  In terms of energy, in the first 100 days an article in Fortune 
magazine of April 29 states that this is ``the greenest budget ever. 
Obama's $3.55 trillion budget proposal is a one-two punch for 
cleantech. It boosts funding for renewables while slashing tax breaks 
for fossil fuels. Obama's wish list,'' now, this is another 
organization called Climate Progress, ``Climate Progress called the 
Obama wish list `the first sustainable budget in U.S. history.' It 
includes $15 billion per year for cleantech over a decade,'' and it 
goes on.
  This is in addition to the initiative that was passed earlier on in 
the recovery package known as the stimulus package. It is called 
``greener stimulus.'' ``Signed in February, the stimulus package is 
chock-full of cleantech goodies with $43 billion for grants for clean 
power, extensions of tax credits for solar, wind, geothermal and energy 
efficiency programs, smart grid funding, weatherization programs and a 
new tax credit for cleantech hardware manufacturing.''
  I mention that because we must see this budget in the context of the 
issues which we are trying to advance. Of themselves, they are worthy. 
They have their justification, as I mentioned in the case of energy. 
But they are also investments that will grow our economy and create 
jobs.
  When it comes to health care, another pillar of the Obama budget, as 
the President says, health care reform is entitlement reform. As we go 
forward with universal, quality, accessible health care for all 
Americans, which this budget will lead us to, we will be reducing the 
cost of health care for the American people, and in lowering those 
costs, we will lower the cost to our budget and the cost to the deficit 
of Medicare and Medicaid.
  This is not just about the personal health of the American people. 
That would be justification enough, the personal well-being of our 
country. And it is not only about health care, it is about the health 
of the American people. It is about prevention. It is about diet, not 
diabetes.

                              {time}  1115

  So we are moving in a path that lowers costs, makes America 
healthier, and in doing so, as I say, not only helps individuals with 
their health, personal well-being, but we are helping businesses to 
compete. Health care costs are a competitiveness issue, and if we're 
going to compete domestically and internationally, we must lower health 
care costs for businesses. It's about costs to our economy, of all of 
this money spent on health care and not having the commensurate health 
of America to go with it. And, again, it's about lowering the cost, 
reducing entitlement. Health care reform is entitlement reform.
  In terms of education, this budget calls for innovative approaches 
from early childhood to tax credits for costs of college, as well as 
increasing the funding for Pell Grants and making college more 
affordable. So, from earliest childhood to higher education, and then 
beyond, this budget is a path not only for, again, the self-fulfillment 
of the American people, but the innovation of America. Innovation 
begins in the classroom.
  So all three of these are measures which, again, are justified and 
necessary in their own right, but will reduce the deficit, will create 
jobs, and will do so in a new way, taking us in a new direction.
  So, having said that, this is a budget about the future. I was very 
tempted, when I saw the leader with his voting card, to bring a picture 
of my granddaughter, my new granddaughter, just a little over a month 
old, to the floor. Oh, we do have it here. I won't resist the 
temptation, for two reasons. First of all, I can't take my eyes off of 
her, and second of all, this is what our commitment is about. It's our 
commitment to the future, to these children.
  As we go forward, we must take the country in a new direction, and in 
doing so, reduce the deficit. We are not here to heap mountains of debt 
on our children and our grandchildren. That is what was done in the 
last 8 years in the Bush administration. This budget calls a halt to 
that and says no. It says no more debt.
  We're going in the opposite direction. We're reducing the deficit as 
we create good-paying jobs in our economy, as we cut taxes for the 
middle class in our country.
  This is a magnificent blueprint for the future. And again, I salute 
Chairman Spratt for his extraordinary leadership in bringing it to the 
floor today and urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes'' for a new 
direction for our country.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, the Conference Report on the Budget 
Resolution (S. Con. Res. 13) provides a solid foundation for the 
surface transportation authorization act. I thank Chairman Spratt and 
the Committee on the Budget for their leadership and vigorous support 
for transportation and infrastructure programs in the Conference on the 
Budget Resolution.
  If the funding levels included in the Budget Resolution Conference 
Report are applied over the six-year period from fiscal years 2010 to 
2015, the Resolution assumes a base allocation of $324 billion for 
highway, highway safety, and transit programs, including $312 billion 
of contract authority. Importantly, this allocation restores $82 
billion over the six-year period of highway contract authority that had 
been cut from the Congressional Budget Office baseline, which assumed 
fiscal year 2009 rescissions would recur in all future years. The 
Senate had adopted this lower, unadjusted baseline and I am very 
encouraged that the Conference adopted the House provision providing a 
baseline of $324 billion for the surface transportation authorization 
bill.
  In addition, the Resolution establishes a Reserve Fund to allow this 
base allocation of $324 billion to be adjusted upward as necessary to 
accommodate higher funding levels to the extent they can be supported 
by the Highway Trust Fund.
  The Resolution also assumes the Airport Improvement Program is funded 
at $4.0 billion in FY 2010, $4.1 billion in FY 2011, and $4.2 billion 
in FY 2012, consistent with H.R. 915, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 
2009, as ordered reported by the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure on March 5, 2009. This is an increase of $840 million 
over the baseline funding level for this program over the three-year 
period from FY 2010-2012.
  Finally, the Resolution rejects the Office of Management and Budget's 
proposal to change how programs funded by contract authority are 
treated for budget scoring purposes. This proposal, had it been 
adopted, would have converted the mandatory contract authority that 
currently funds our highway, highway safety, transit and airport grant 
programs to a simple authorization of appropriations for budget scoring 
purposes. I am pleased that the Budget Resolution continues to 
recognize the unique nature of trust-funded programs by rejecting this 
ill-advised proposal.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Conference Report 
on the Budget Resolution.
  Mr. BUYER. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the 
conference report on S. Con. Res. 13 the democrat budget for Fiscal 
Year 2010. This budget spends too much, borrows too much, and taxes too 
much.
  The overall democrat budget is not good for Americans, including 
veterans. The democrat budget contains the largest tax hike in American 
History, a $1.5 trillion tax hike, including a tax hike on veterans and 
their families, and veterans who own small businesses.
  While I am supportive of the increase that the President's budget 
proposes for veterans, the overall budget request is really nothing 
more than more of the same old Washington shell game. Instead of 
proposing an open and transparent budget, as President Obama and the 
Democrats had promised, this budget contains many of the same old tax 
hikes and gimmicks that hide the truth from the American people about 
our real fiscal situation and the impact this budget will have on our 
current economy and our children's and grandchildren's future.
  This budget also allows the use of the reconciliation process to 
force government-run health care down the throats of the American 
people without even considering how such a proposal could adversely 
affect the VA healthcare system. We don't need a government run health 
care system that takes life changing medical decisions out of the hands 
of doctors and patients and puts them in the hands of government 
bureaucrats, while dulling the innovative and radical research that has 
increased the quality of healthcare in America.
  Madam Speaker our nation's veterans deserve a budget that funds their 
priorities without causing harm to these same veterans with radical new 
taxes and a ballooning deficit, unfortunately this budget does not do 
this. I urge my colleagues to oppose the conference report on the 
democrat proposed budget.

[[Page H4926]]

  Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the fiscal 
year 2010 budget resolution. I know that today's proposal come as a 
result of much negotiation and discussion, and makes a number of 
difficult decisions about our financial future.
  To be frank, 2009 has opened with a number of different challenges 
Congress and the Administration must address. We continue to face 
turmoil in our financial markets, our domestic auto industry and small 
businesses are struggling to stay afloat, and we have witnessed a 
dramatic loss of jobs. Like Roosevelt before him, Obama is facing an 
economic downturn of enormous magnitude. Guiding our country and our 
economy through this will require our government to make difficult and 
innovative changes. This budget resolution lays out the guideline for 
how these changes will be made.
  As we begin to address health care reform, this budget resolution 
will provide the down payment to implement new changes to the way our 
health system cares for the sick. For the nearly 46 million Americans 
who are without health insurance, this budget resolution is a sign of 
our government's commitment to achieve reform that will ensure all 
Americans, regardless of their bank account, have access to quality and 
affordable health care. It also will ensure that our health system 
makes needed changes to reduce high administrative costs, and cut out 
fraud and abuse. Make no mistake; reforming our health care system is 
vital to the Nation's economic recovery efforts.
  This legislation also increases investments in renewable energy and 
energy efficiency by nearly 10 percent for 2010. These investments will 
allow our country to provide loans for renewable power generation, 
increase the energy efficiency of our federal buildings, modernize the 
electricity grid to make it more efficient and reliable, among other 
things. Such investments will help to encourage the creation of new 
``green'' jobs for workers who have been displaced, and more 
importantly, will help ensure that our energy needs are supplied by 
American innovation.
  I am also pleased to support the conference agreement's provisions 
for our veterans. The agreement honors our veterans by ensuring they 
have the proper medical care. Among other things, the bill provides 
$53.4 billion to the Department of Veterans' Affairs--an 11.7 percent 
increase for veterans' health care and other services, allows Congress 
to provide advance funding to the VA health care system, and expands 
enrollment eligibility for Priority 8 veterans.
  Most importantly, this budget makes a commitment to our children and 
their grandchildren by investing in a quality education that will 
prepare them for their future careers. We know now that in order to 
compete with our neighbors across the way our children need a high 
quality education and access to either higher education or training to 
prepare them to compete in a global economy. This budget will continue 
to raise the maximum Pell grant in order to ensure that its buying 
power increases and more low-income students will have access to the 
aid they need. In addition, the budget expands on the investments made 
in primary education and early childhood education ensuring that our 
schools are increasing student achievement and investing in high-
quality facilities.
  There is no doubt that these investments are costly, however, unlike 
the previous Administration, the Obama Administration and Congress have 
made a commitment to cut the federal deficit by nearly two-thirds in 
2013. As a parting gift, President Bush provided the Obama 
Administration a $1 trillion deficit. This is not a deficit that came 
about overnight; rather it is the result of poor fiscal planning from 
an Administration that inherited a $5.6 trillion surplus. Madam 
Speaker, I rise in support of today's budget resolution not because I 
believe it will bring our economy out of recession overnight, but 
because I believe it will go a long way towards helping American 
families and workers who need it. For many of those in the 15th 
District and across the country, this economy has left their bank 
accounts battered and their 401(k)s depleted. Many of these folks have 
nowhere else to turn. A vote for this budget is a vote for those in 
need.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Speaker, this budget agreement marks an 
important milestone on our road to economic recovery. It makes 
priority, forward-looking investments in the vital areas of education, 
health care and clean energy while providing $1.7 trillion in tax 
relief for middle class families. It's also fiscally responsible, 
slashing our federal budget deficit by two thirds by 2013.
  Madam Speaker, we didn't dig ourselves this ditch overnight and it's 
going to take some time to climb out of it. But with President Obama's 
leadership, we are now well on our way to creating the next era of 
genuine, broadly shared American prosperity.
  It starts with honest accounting. Rather than hiding the true cost of 
our military engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan or our domestic 
response to natural disasters off budget, this conference report builds 
them right into the agreement. Additionally, this budget reaffirms the 
House's continued commitment to fiscal discipline by requiring 
statutory PAYGO as a condition for other policy adjustments in order to 
enforce a realistic baseline.
  To build a rock solid foundation for economic growth, this agreement 
invests $100 billion in education--expanding early childhood 
development programs, improving K-12 and special education and 
increasing access to college. It creates a deficit-neutral reserve fund 
to finally provide high quality, affordable health care for every 
American. It increases federal funding for clean energy by 10%. And it 
provides middle class tax relief for millions of Americans.
  Finally, this budget takes the $1 trillion deficit President Obama 
inherited and cuts it by two thirds over the next four years.
  Madam Speaker, this is an honest, properly prioritized and fiscally 
responsible agreement. I urge my colleagues' support.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. Con. Res. 
13, the Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Conference Report.
  In order to rebuild our economy and achieve long-term fiscal 
sustainability, we must make strategic investments into our nation's 
health care, education, and energy programs, while simultaneously 
providing meaningful tax relief to families and businesses struggling 
to regain their economic footing. Each week, I hear from my 
constituents in Rhode Island about their challenges in today's economy, 
such as trying to save for their retirement, send their children to 
college, or protect their home from foreclosure. As a member of the 
Budget Committee, I believe this conference report reflects the crucial 
priorities that families face every day while adhering to an honest 
accounting of our fiscal challenges.
  S. Con. Res. 13 builds on the significant funding and tax incentives 
incorporated into the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act by 
increasing investments and job creation in clean energy technologies 
and overall energy efficiency. It supports health care reform that will 
lower costs, improve quality, and pave the way for coverage to help all 
Americans lacking proper health insurance. This budget honors the 
service of our nation's veterans with an increase of $5.6 billion for 
veterans' health care and other crucial support services. Finally, it 
recognizes the profound importance of education by increasing funding 
for programs like Title I, special education and Pell Grants for 
college.
  Just as important as our investment in job creation and economic 
recovery is the commitment to tax equity and fiscal responsibility. 
This budget provides $1.7 trillion in tax cuts for middle-income 
families, permanently extending the 2001 and 2003 income tax cuts for 
the vast majority of Americans. It also reduces the deficit by nearly 
two-thirds in four years, placing our country on the fiscally 
sustainable path necessary to regain our economic strength.
  It is time for policymakers at all levels and across the ideological 
spectrum to join together and offer a new vision and new solutions to 
rebuild our economy. I would like to thank Chairman Spratt for his 
leadership and dedication to working with Congress to ensure that this 
budget provides the framework necessary so that we may improve the 
health of our nation, reduce expenditures over the long term and 
ultimately regain the economic prosperity of our great nation.
  I ask my colleagues to support this resolution and urge its final 
passage.
  Mr. POSEY. Madam Speaker, I'm disappointed with the budget conference 
report before the House today. It's a $3.555 trillion budget and leaves 
a $1.233 trillion deficit for the year 2010. This budget increases 
taxes by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years and the Majority admits 
that the budget deficits never fall below $523 billion. This budget 
borrows from Americans of tomorrow to pay for the wants of this current 
generation. Over 10 years, the budget more than doubles the national 
debt.
  I hope the economy recovers for all Americans. But sadly, this budget 
plan takes us down a different path that will harm our long-term 
economy and will likely create sluggish economic growth. This budget is 
not the right prescription for what ails this economy. Our children and 
grandchildren deserve better.

[[Page H4927]]

  Congress needs to focus on creating the right kind of environment for 
job-creation, ensuring that businesses small, medium and large can grow 
and prosper. That means providing the right kinds of incentives for 
Americans to start a business, or for a business to grow and add jobs, 
or to provide benefits like health insurance. Sadly, this bill includes 
a budget process (known as reconciliation) to leave the door open for a 
plan to raise taxes on millions of small businesses and saddle them 
with billions of dollars in burdensome and costly ``cap and trade'' 
global warming taxes. American workers should be forewarned; the ``cap 
and trade'' tax will cost Americans millions of jobs.
  So I ask, under this budget `What's the incentive to do business here 
in America?' The U.S. has the second highest corporate income tax in 
the world which encourages employers to close up in America or at least 
do their expansions overseas rather than here at home. Cap and trade 
will add a further burden to businesses operating in the U.S.
  And while this budget hires new bureaucrats in Washington, it allows 
tens of thousands of highly skilled technicians and engineers at NASA 
to be laid-off with the end of the space shuttle. Their jobs will of 
course be outsourced to Russia because the budget fails to bring the 
next generation space craft online for quite some time. This is a 
travesty when you think about the millions of high tech American jobs 
that have been created as a result of our investment in space--
everything from cell phones, laptops and GPS to wireless technology and 
even Velcro. While the Budget gives lip service to additional funding 
for NASA and the Shuttle, the actual language in the budget does not 
provide actual dollars, would not add any additional Shuttle flights, 
and does nothing to close the human space flight gap.
  For two centuries, Americans have worked hard so their children could 
have better lives and greater opportunity. It seems to me what some 
want to do is reverse that order by having our children and 
grandchildren work hard so we don't have to make the hard choices now. 
This amounts to generational theft and it is wrong, plain and simple.
  You know, while families and small businesses are making sacrifices 
when it comes to their own budget, Washington continues to spend 
trillions in taxpayer dollars--money it doesn't even have--on bailouts 
and expansion of government programs. This has got to stop and the 
government has to learn to live within its own means just like everyone 
else.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this budget conference 
report and urge my colleagues to vote against this plan that will 
saddle the next generation with an unbearable debt and kill millions of 
jobs here in America.
  Mr. BACA. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support S. Con. Res. 
13, the FY2010 Congressional Budget Resolution Conference Report.
  Throughout our nation, Americans are suffering due to economic 
hardships caused by this recession.
  In my district--unemployment is at almost 13 percent.
  Parents are coming home from their last day of work, afraid and 
worried about how they will provide for their families.
  They are losing their health insurance and their hope in the American 
dream is faltering.
  If you vote for this budget resolution, you are voting for a 
solution. You are voting to help American families.
  The budget conference agreement makes strategic investments in 
education, health care reform, and energy independence that are 
necessary to restore our crumbling economy--and put the country in a 
position to remain globally competitive.
  This budget is instrumental in stabilizing our economy. It provides 
the resources necessary to help restore the standard of living for many 
American families.
  It also puts our nation back on the path of fiscal responsibility.
  The budget improves fiscal discipline by requiring statutory PAYGO as 
a condition for making current policy adjustments to the baseline for 
tax cuts and the Medicare physician payment system.
  I urge my colleagues to approve this conference report, and pass this 
responsible budget.
  Ms. LEE of California. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the 
Democratic budget. This budget makes the vital investments that America 
needs to stabilize the economy and lay the groundwork for a new 
environmentally sustainable and energy independent green economy.
  Let me thank the Chairman for his hard work on a budget that makes 
many hard choices and I thank him for his consideration of the budget 
priorities of the Congressional Black Caucus which augments and 
strengthens the President's budget.
  The Democratic budget contains many of the shared priorities with the 
CBC and makes targeted investments in strengthening education, 
healthcare, clean energy, transportation, and strengthens foreign aid 
during a critical downturn in the global economy.
  We must pass a budget that will continue the anti-poverty investments 
that we made in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
  It is critical during this economic crisis, which we inherited from 
the Bush Administration, that we pass a budget that will lift up the 
millions of Americans who have fallen into poverty.
  Our budget must continue our economic recovery and return our nation 
to the fiscal responsibility that we last saw with the budget surpluses 
under President Clinton.
  I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the Democratic budget.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the conference report.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the conference report.
  Pursuant to clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, this 15-minute vote on adoption of 
the conference report will be followed by 5-minute votes on the motion 
to suspend the rules on H. Res. 357, if ordered, and the motion to 
suspend the rules on H. Res. 109, if ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 233, 
nays 193, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 216]

                               YEAS--233

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Adler (NJ)
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boccieri
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     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
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Driehaus
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Giffords
     Gonzalez
     Gordon (TN)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kosmas
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Markey (MA)
     Massa
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McMahon
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis (CO)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     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
     Shuler
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wexler
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--193

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bright
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Cao
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Chaffetz
     Childers
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole

[[Page H4928]]


     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Fallin
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Graves
     Griffith
     Guthrie
     Hall (TX)
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan (OH)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Kratovil
     Kucinich
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey (CO)
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Minnick
     Mitchell
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Nye
     Olson
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Taylor
     Teague
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden
     Wamp
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Burgess
     Granger
     Hinojosa
     Jackson (IL)
     Lewis (GA)
     Perriello
     Stark

                              {time}  1148

  Mr. ISSA and Mrs. LUMMIS changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the conference report was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                          ____________________