[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 116 (Wednesday, July 29, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H9016-H9023]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 FISCAL SOLVENCY OF CERTAIN TRUST FUNDS

  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
pass the bill (H.R. 3357) to restore sums to the Highway Trust Fund and 
for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 3357

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

[[Page H9017]]

     SECTION 1. FUNDING OF THE HIGHWAY TRUST FUND.

       Subsection (f) of section 9503 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (relating to determination of trust fund balances 
     after September 30, 1998) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (2), and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Increase in fund balance.--Out of money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, there is hereby 
     appropriated (without fiscal year limitation) to the Highway 
     Trust Fund $7,000,000,000.''.

     SEC 2. ADVANCES TO THE UNEMPLOYMENT TRUST FUND AND OTHER 
                   FUNDS.

       The item relating to ``Department of Labor--Employment and 
     Training Administration--Advances to the Unemployment Trust 
     Fund and Other Funds'' in title I of division F of the 
     Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8; 123 Stat. 
     754) is amended by striking ``to remain available through 
     September 30, 2010'' and all that follows (before the heading 
     for the following item) and inserting `'such sums as may be 
     necessary''.

     SEC. 3. FHA MORTGAGE INSURANCE COMMITMENT AUTHORITY.

       The item relating to ``Federal Housing Administration--
     Mutual Mortgage Insurance Program Account'' in title II of 
     division I of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public 
     Law 111-8; 123 Stat. 966) is amended by striking 
     ``$315,000,000,000'' and inserting ``$400,000,000,000''.

     SEC. 4. GNMA MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES GUARANTEE COMMITMENT 
                   AUTHORITY.

       The item relating to ``Government National Mortgage 
     Association--Guarantees of Mortgage-Backed Securities Loan 
     Guarantee Program Account'' in title II of division I of the 
     Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8; 123 Stat. 
     967) is amended by striking ``$300,000,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$400,000,000,000''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Lewis) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.


                             General Leave

  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that 
Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on 
the bill H.R. 3357, as amended.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Georgia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, transportation is one of the most important issues in 
our country, so I am proud to have served on both the Ways and Means 
Committee and on what was then the Public Works and Transportation 
Committee.
  I would like to thank Chairman Rangel and Chairman Oberstar for their 
leadership on this important issue.
  The bipartisan bill before the House today will provide the necessary 
funds to keep important transportation projects operating in States 
around the country. As we all know, the Highway Trust Fund will run out 
of funding by September. We must act, and we must act now.
  In 1998, Congress passed a highway bill that took more than $8 
billion out of the trust fund and put it in the Treasury. In addition, 
Congress stopped the Highway Trust Fund from earning interest on its 
investment. If these steps had not been taken, the balance in the 
Highway Trust Fund would be nearly $20 billion more than it is now.

                              {time}  1545

  Last year we transferred $8 billion back, and the legislation we are 
considering today would transfer $7 billion more.
  I want to be clear, Mr. Speaker. No new money is spent under this 
bill. This bill should keep the Highway Trust Fund fully funded until 
2009. If we fail to act today, our people, our States, and our economy 
will be harmed. In Georgia, where unemployment is already above 10 
percent, we cannot afford to lose another 8,500 jobs because of failure 
to act.
  Last year, all sides understood how critical highway funding is to 
our economy. I hope the legislation we are considering today will enjoy 
similar bipartisan support. I urge all of my colleagues on both sides 
of the aisle to support this important legislation.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAMP. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. CAMP asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. CAMP. Last week, we appropriated an unlimited amount of general 
funds to the unemployment trust funds throughout fiscal year 2010, 
which starts in October, and today we're doing the same thing for the 
last 2 months of this year, ensuring these funds don't run out while 
Congress is on district work period. Both actions are needed because 
the Democrats' economic policy has resulted in record job loss, record 
deficits, and none of the job creation they promised.
  Democrats predicted unemployment would top out at 8 percent if the 
stimulus passed; instead, it's 9.5 percent and rising. In Michigan, 
it's above 15 percent. There are now a record 9.2 million collecting 
unemployment checks instead of paychecks. That's 1.1 million more than 
when the stimulus was passed. So if the stimulus is stimulating 
anything, it's record unemployment, not jobs.
  Where are the jobs? Americans can surely see the record unemployment, 
but they cannot see where the jobs are. That's because millions of jobs 
are disappearing, not being created. What's more, since President Obama 
was sworn in, the Nation's public debt and unemployment, combined, has 
risen by a shocking 40 percent. And that's before literally trillions 
of dollars in additional spending under the Democrats' stimulus, 
energy, and health plans, and whatever higher unemployment lies ahead.
  This bill reflects the continued failure of Democratic economic 
policy to save or create millions of jobs they promised that would flow 
quickly from their stimulus bill. More unemployment benefits instead of 
paychecks have led directly to more State insolvency and more Federal 
loans to those insolvent States. And that has drained the Federal 
bailout funds so much, it now needs its own bailout. That's what this 
bill does.
  We had a choice when it came to the stimulus last February. We could 
have chosen a better policy of stimulating private-sector growth 
creating twice the jobs at half the price. That was the Republican 
plan. Instead, Democrats insisted on their government focus plan, which 
has produced no jobs and a mountain of debt. Today, in my view, we 
don't really have a choice but to support this bill; otherwise, in the 
next 2 months, laid-off workers will not get the unemployment benefits 
they were promised. American workers should not be forced to pay for 
the mistakes and failures of the Democrats' so-called stimulus bill. So 
this bill is necessary.
  But in the longer run, we need to work together to create jobs so 
Americans can receive more paychecks, not more unemployment checks.
  I would also note, Mr. Speaker, that this bill provides an emergency 
transfer of $7 billion in the general fund revenue to prop up the 
Highway Trust Fund for the reminder of this fiscal year. This is not 
the first time Congress has had to fill a year-end shortfall in the 
trust fund to ensure that State highway projects can go forward. And 
unless we get serious about enacting long-term structural reforms as we 
move ahead with the next reauthorization bill, it surely won't be the 
last bill, either.
  I don't think anyone in this Chamber thinks that yet another short-
term general fund transfer is the ideal solution to these chronic 
shortfalls, and I certainly hope that going forward, the majority 
focuses its attention on long-term structural reforms and not just on 
higher and higher spending levels.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from Minnesota, the Chair of the Transportation 
Committee, Mr. Oberstar.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman for the time and his leadership 
on this issue and Mr. Neal, the Chair of the subcommittee, who spent a 
great amount of time in hearings last month and this month on the 
current status and future of the Highway Trust Fund.
  I would just like to underscore, in response to the gentleman from 
Michigan, we share the pain of the drop in VMT on the miles traveled 
throughout the Nation and the consequent loss of revenue in the Highway 
Trust Fund. It started in 2007, and by 2008 we had registered, for the 
first time in the history of the Highway Trust Fund and the interstate 
highway program, a drop of

[[Page H9018]]

60 billion vehicle miles traveled. That had never happened before in 
the history of the Highway Trust Fund because of the condition of the 
national economy.
  We are beginning to recover. We're beginning to see the statistics 
going in the right direction. VMT, reported by the Department of 
Transportation on a monthly basis, shows increases in January, 
February, March, April, and May. And all of the indicators, the rural 
interstate, the rural arterial, rural NHS, National Highway System 
rose, the urban interstate. All are a percentage, a small percentage, 
but percentage increases over the months a year ago.
  There are two indicators that are down. Urban arterial and various 
urban roads are down about a half percent and 1.3 percent, 
respectively. The trend is in the right direction. I regret, too, that 
we have to take this step. We should have spent this week passing the 
committee's bill for the future of surface transportation. We do have a 
bipartisan product.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. I yield the gentleman another 1 minute.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. And I welcome the support of the gentleman from 
Michigan for that initiative. It will address the long-term future, the 
6-year future of transportation. It will totally transform the 
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Federal 
Transit Administration, make it easier to move projects into operation, 
and much more that is in our 775-page bill. We will do that in 
September.
  This is an infusion, not an extension. We are not standing for the 
wish of the other body or of the administration for an extension of 
time. We're not going to let that happen. This committee has done and 
will continue to do its work in a partnership within our committee. And 
I hope the bill comes to the floor within the entire body.
  Meanwhile, this $7 billion infusion will carry the trust fund through 
the end of the fiscal year and into October against any unforeseen drop 
in VMT or loss in revenue into the trust fund. I think the trends are 
all in the right direction and that we are not going to be losing 
revenue.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3357, to restore 
sums to the Highway Trust Fund.
  This legislation, introduced by Chairman Rangel, Chairman Obey, and 
me, includes a provision restoring $7 billion to the Highway Account of 
the Highway Trust Fund to ensure that the U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT) can meet its existing commitments under the 
Federal-aid Highway program.
  According to DOT, the Highway Account of the Trust Fund may run out 
of cash as early as the beginning of September and may not have enough 
funding to fully reimburse States for their Federal highway 
investments.
  This situation makes clear that we have reached the logical 
conclusion of the course set by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). 
Unfortunately, the legacy that has been left for users is an over-
extended Trust Fund, uncertainty, and potential funding cuts.
  SAFETEA-LU intentionally put the Highway Trust Fund on the path to a 
zero cash balance. Recent declines in vehicle miles traveled due to 
high fuel prices and the weak economy have merely exacerbated a pre-
existing imbalance between Trust Fund revenues and expenditures that 
was created by SAFETEA-LU.
  The previous administration's unwillingness to make hard choices has 
left the 111th Congress, and particularly the Committee on Ways and 
Means and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, with the 
unenviable task of finding a way to finance the existing program level, 
in addition to much-needed increases in investment.
  Since taking office, the Obama administration has implemented a 
system to closely track actual Trust Fund revenues, outlays, and 
balances, and has been communicating with Congress the need to take 
steps to address this situation before we reach the crisis point.
  According to DOT, by September 4, the Highway Account will not have 
sufficient funds to fully reimburse States for highway projects (-$285 
million), and DOT will immediately begin rationing reimbursements to 
States, creating cash flow problems for States and significant 
uncertainty for the future of the program.
  By October 1, DOT estimates that, without action by Congress, the 
Highway Account balance will be -$1.9 billion.
  However, this shortfall amount is only an estimate and the estimate 
is subject to a series of revenue and outlay adjustments that occur in 
August and September that could cause negative adjustments to the Trust 
Fund balance, including: the ``true-up'' of the account in which the 
Trust Fund will have to reimburse the General Fund if previous payments 
of estimated fuel taxes into the Trust Fund are greater than the taxes 
actually owed; the annual mid-session review of the President's Budget 
which updates economic assumptions and can affect vehicle miles 
travelled estimates; the receipt of actual revenues and outlays that 
differ from DOT's current estimates; and the need to maintain a minimum 
balance in the Trust Fund to continue daily reimbursements for the 
States.
  In fact, last August, reconciling Trust Fund revenue receipts with 
prior revenue projections caused a downward adjustment in the Trust 
Fund balance of -$3.2 billion.
  While such a dramatic swing in Trust Fund revenues is unlikely under 
the procedures adopted by the current administration, restoring $7 
billion to the Highway Account of the Trust Fund will cover the 
projected shortfall and provide a cash balance to offset any additional 
shortfall if the DOT estimates are in error.
  Failure to act will mean that the Federal Government will be unable 
to pay all of the bills submitted by the States for reimbursement under 
the Federal-aid highway program. If that were to occur, under current 
law, the Federal Government will be required to pay interest on unpaid 
bills.
  In addition, many states would begin to experience immediate cash 
flow problems if they are not fully reimbursed for Federal-aid highway 
projects.
  We must enact this critical legislation this week to avoid slowdowns 
or reductions in infrastructure investment, and the loss of any more 
American construction jobs.
  Both the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on 
Taxation have determined that this proposal does not constitute a 
spending outlay, would not violate pay-go, and will have no revenue 
effect.
  Enactment of this legislation will ensure full funding of the highway 
investment levels authorized by current law, and prevent devastating 
slowdowns or cuts in each state's Federal highway funds.
  While H.R. 3357 is a short-term solution, it is essential that we 
resolve this immediate crisis. As we proceed with consideration of the 
``Surface Transportation Authorization Act of 2009'', we will continue 
to work with the Committee on Ways and Means to develop a sustainable 
financing proposal to address the future of surface transportation.
  I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), the distinguished 
Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, for his leadership in 
ensuring that these funds are provided to sustain the Highway Trust 
Fund.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 3357.
  Mr. CAMP. I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Mica).
  Mr. MICA. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I want to join my Democrat counterpart who leads the Transportation 
and Infrastructure Committee, Mr. Oberstar, in requesting the $7 
billion transfer. If we do not transfer these funds to keep the Highway 
Trust Fund secure through September 30, the consequences for the Nation 
at this time of economic difficulty would be an absolute disaster. In 
fact, we would close down probably every major highway transportation 
project in the Nation. That's how serious this is.
  Unfortunately, as the Republican leader of the Ways and Means 
Committee, Mr. Camp, said, we've been here and, unfortunately, had to 
do this before. This is the second bailout of the fund.
  Mr. Oberstar has been working nonstop for months even before this 
session of Congress to bring forth a responsible bill. We've tried to 
act in a bipartisan administration. The day that we were about to 
announce our policy and plans for reauthorization, the administration 
came in and undermined the whole effort with an 18-month extension.
  We need the transportation bill now. Unfortunately, we need this gap 
of money through September 30 or we will really see economic difficulty 
across this land. So this is a Band-Aid approach. I'm sorry that we 
have to do it. I know there are some Members that are concerned about 
this. We do need a long-term solution. We will work together to get 
that done. The minute this passes, we'll continue our efforts.
  But if we do not act, it will have devastating consequences in every 
one of the States across this Nation as far as closing down 
transportation projects

[[Page H9019]]

and closing down jobs at the most difficult time in the country's 
recent economic history.
  So I want a long-term solution. I join Mr. Oberstar in requesting 
that we pass this measure. And unfortunately, we are put in this 
position of being between a rock and a hard place.
  I would be glad to yield to the chairman.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Thank you for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment my colleague on the committee, Mr. 
Mica, for the splendid partnership we have had personally and staff-to-
staff in crafting this bill, and the gentleman has stated the case 
right on. And were it not for the intrusion of the administration, we 
would be on the floor this week with that 6-year authorization. And I 
thank the gentleman for that splendid partnership that we have had.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from Washington, the Chair of the Income Security 
Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee, Congressman McDermott.
  (Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, this legislation will allow the Federal 
unemployment trust funds to receive interest-bearing loans from the 
general Treasury. These loans will be repaid when the unemployment 
trust funds once again have adequate reserves.
  Currently, the single biggest draw on Federal trust funds are loans 
to States' unemployment programs. Eighteen States already have loan 
balances exceeding $12 billion, and more are expected to request 
assistance in the coming weeks and months. This recession, which 
started in December of 2007, has placed enormous strains on State 
unemployment programs. But truth be told, too many State programs had 
inadequate reserves to provide benefits even in a mild downturn. In the 
future, more should be done to promote long-term solvency for the 
unemployment system; however, right now, our mandate is to ensure that 
the States can continue to pay their unemployment benefits to those 
entitled to them.
  When economists and historians look back at this moment in history, I 
believe one of the things they will agree, what we did right was to 
reach out and help those Americans who lost their jobs through no fault 
of their own.
  Last June, we enacted the quickest ever extension of unemployment 
benefits relative to the start of the recession. In November, we 
further extended benefits to dislocated workers. And earlier this year, 
we enacted a historic package of unemployment insurance reforms as part 
of the Recovery Act, including maintaining the availability of extended 
benefits, increasing the weekly UI benefit amount, and providing grants 
to States that modernize their unemployment programs.
  Under these reforms, over half the States have enacted improvements 
to their unemployment programs such as improving coverage for low-wage 
and part-time workers. In addition, over 9 million UI recipients are 
receiving $100 more a month as we speak in order to help buy groceries 
and other necessities, and 3 billion unemployed workers are now 
receiving extended benefits.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Capuano). The time of the gentleman has 
expired.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. I yield an additional 1 minute.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Many of our economists, as well as the stock market, 
believe our economy is now turning the corner to more prosperous days. 
Helping the unemployed has been a crucial part of the path to that 
recovery. But millions of jobs will not be restored overnight. We will 
continue to ensure a real safety net for the jobless Americans, and I 
expect Congress will continue this work in the fall.

                              {time}  1600

  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart).
  Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the 
ranking member.
  Look, it is too bad that we have to be here now. This is another 
Band-Aid. It is a necessary Band-Aid, unfortunately, to fix the 
Transportation trust fund. But it is imperative that we fix this trust 
fund once and for all.
  Now, let me tell you, Chairman Oberstar has been working on a bill, a 
bipartisan bill. He has been working on it for a long, long time; and 
because of his leadership, his committee, along with Ranking Member 
Mica, are ready to go. They are ready to go. We are ready to go. I am 
privileged to be on that committee. They are ready to go right now.
  Again, it is unfortunate that we are not doing that, because we also 
can't afford to lose any more jobs. And there is one thing we all agree 
on, that one way to create jobs is through transportation 
infrastructure. Unfortunately, we are not doing that.
  It is pretty evident that the so-called stimulus bill has proven to 
be a dismal failure. That is why I introduced legislation to rescind 
the unspent stimulus money, so-called stimulus money, the 
nontransportation, unspent stimulus money, and put it into the DOT 
trust fund; to not continue to borrow more money and put more borrowing 
on our kids' and grandchildren's credit cards.
  But, unfortunately, we are not discussing that either here today. 
Instead, we continue to waste billions of dollars and more, frankly, on 
the so-called stimulus, which is nothing more than a sham. We need to 
invest it in real job creation, focus on real job creation; and among 
the things that create jobs is transportation and infrastructure.
  So, again, I hope that we finally get down to business. This is a 
Band-Aid. But we are ready to continue to work to fix this, to really 
fix it. One way to do it, while not indebting this country further, is 
to use those unspent stimulus moneys, to take away that sham and put it 
in transportation funding that will create jobs and help the country.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to 
the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal), the Chair of the Select 
Revenue Measures Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee.
  Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Lewis for 
bringing this legislation to the floor. I am in full support of this 
proposal, and I want to speak additionally in support of the transfer 
of the Highway Trust Fund as it appears before us.
  None of us would like to see pink slips issued around the country at 
vital road and bridge building projects, including about 4,000 jobs in 
Massachusetts. We are doing our best to create more of these jobs, not 
to end the current ones.
  Last week, my subcommittee, the Select Revenue Measures Subcommittee, 
held a 4-hour, four-panel hearing on long-term financing options for 
the Highway Trust Fund. The consistent statement we heard was that 
States are desperate for funding.
  We heard that roads and bridges are deteriorating at such a pace that 
current funding will not cover the maintenance, let alone the 
improvements that are needed. That is why our colleague, Mr. Oberstar, 
has pushed for a short-term patch while we continue to sort out the 
longer-term solutions for our transportation infrastructure. I am in 
support of the Oberstar position.
  I understand the hesitance of some our colleagues to talk about 
increasing fund revenues in this economy. I want to assure you, they 
will be at every groundbreaking and they will be at every ribbon 
cutting, even though they question the financing we propose down the 
road.
  But the reality of this situation is simple: we need to pay for these 
repairs. There were a variety of proposals discussed at our hearing, 
last week, good ones, by Republicans and Democrats. Good options were 
offered: tolls, vehicle miles traveled, excise taxes, the gas and 
diesel tax, among other ideas.
  I want to say of interest, the United States Chamber of Commerce last 
week proposed a 10 cent increase in the gasoline tax for many of these 
long-term needs. I think that in and of itself speaks to the bipartisan 
nature of what we are trying to do now, and I hope in about another 
month a long-term proposal as well.
  Now, whether these proposals are through triggers, indexing or 
commissions, we need to start working on the long-term plan in whatever 
politically feasible way we can find a way forward. Kicking the can 
down the road on infrastructure needs will not work. Our

[[Page H9020]]

highways, our roadways, our airports, our bridges and our railroads are 
all in need of an infusion of public support. We all ought to be able 
to agree on that basic responsibility as Members of this House.
  As one witness told us last week, the costs of delaying the longer-
term bill are higher than the costs to pass it. A reminder as well, 
there is an opportunity in this atmosphere with the downturn to get 
some great pricing, and we should take advantage of that as well.
  So I want to urge support of this proposal today, and I hope it takes 
us on to a longer-term solution.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Flake).
  Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Here we are again: the second bout of highway robbery, taking money 
back into the trust fund from the general Treasury. We are told, well, 
sometime back in 1998, some money was taken from the trust fund into 
the general fund, so this is just payback.
  How many times can we keep saying that? It may have made some sense 
the first time. It doesn't the second time. It won't the third or 
fourth time we do this. Yet we are told we are bemoaning the fact we 
don't have the reauthorization on the floor this week.
  Thank goodness we don't. If you think we overspent what we had in the 
trust fund before, we are really going to do it the next time. A bill 
has been proposed that has twice the spending we currently have in the 
Highway Trust Fund, without revenue to pay for it. We don't have the 
revenue to pay for the one we have got. How can we double it with no 
revenue source?
  Let's get serious about things here. If we really need a place for 
the money to come from, I would suggest, as the gentleman did before, 
take it from the stimulus. But part of the problem is that we are 
spending for things in this bill, or in the highway program, that are 
probably worth spending some of the things we have seen in the 
stimulus.
  In the current highway program that we are taking money from the 
general fund to now fund, there is $3 million for a parking garage in 
suburban Chicago; $1.6 million for a bike path in Wisconsin; $1.2 
million for improvements in the Blue Ridge Music Center in Virginia; $1 
million for improvements to the Police Touch Museum in Pennsylvania. 
Why don't we rescind some of these programs in the highway bill, and we 
won't have to take so much money from the general fund?
  We can't continue to do this, Mr. Speaker. We are spending money on a 
suspension bill. We are suspending the rules and passing a bill that is 
going to cost us $7 billion. I think the limit on suspension bills used 
to be something like $50 million. If it does more than that, you come 
under a general rule; $7 billion we are spending here, and it will go 
almost without dissent.
  And that is a shame, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to 
the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal).
  Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Speaker, I understand the desire of an individual or individuals 
to be professional scolds on any and every issue that comes to this 
floor. But the obligation that we have today is far greater than the 
examples that he cited.
  To argue that we ought to hold up a Federal highway bill that 
benefits this entire Nation because of a handful of initiatives he 
doesn't like, the truth is he won't vote for the final bill anyway, and 
time and again we have rejected the proposals that he has come forward 
with, largely because there was a process and procedure for vetting 
these differences. And when we buy into the end-game solution, that is 
part of our responsibility as Members of Congress.
  Let me close quickly on this note. One of the reasons that our 
highway system is the envy of the world is because we have not given in 
to the temptation to fall easy prey to demagoguery that surrounds some 
of these proposals. Scolding is one thing. Offering positive 
suggestions is quite another.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Flake).
  Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  You know, some of us did stand up and vote against the initial 
authorization back in 2005, I believe it was, because we were told by 
our Appropriations Committee chairman, we don't have the money to pay 
for this. We knew it. Everybody knew it. But the reason that passed, we 
all know, is because there were 6,300 earmarks in it. You spread enough 
of that around and people are going to vote for it. There were only 
eight votes against it here in the House, three in the Senate. And we 
will likely do the same again.
  At some point we have got to say, let's pay for it. And for a State 
like Arizona, let me tell you, where we give a dollar to Washington for 
this highway bill and only get about 92 cents back, it is not a very 
good deal. We would rather keep the tax money and spend it on our own. 
We could get a lot more infrastructure for that, and that is our 
complaint, more than anything.
  Money is sent here, then it comes back 92 cents on the dollar, and 
that that does come back is restricted in ways that diminish the value 
of the dollar, and then it is earmarked completely. It is simply not a 
good deal for people around the country. So we need a new model.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 2 
minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), a member of the 
Ways and Means Committee, who long has been active in highways, 
waterways and many environmental efforts.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the courtesy of my good friend 
permitting me to speak on behalf of this.
  I listened to my friend from Arizona. The fact is the last bill was 
paid for, but because of the Republican refusal to right-size the trust 
fund, it was scaled down. But it was paid for. It wasn't right-sized 
for America. Mr. Oberstar and the committee are working to try to do 
this.
  I hope this is the last time we come to the floor to deal with the 
short-term deficit in the Highway Trust Fund; but, unfortunately, we 
are going to come back again. Mr. Oberstar and his Chair, my good 
friend Mr. DeFazio, have been working for months on a new vision for 
transportation; and I hope we have that on the floor sooner rather than 
later.
  Along with this is the notion of how we squeeze more value out of 
each Federal dollar invested. That is part of the work of the new 
Department of Transportation. It is part of what the committee is 
working on, and we as Congress need to be involved with that.
  New vision, more value, but, frankly, we are going to need more 
money. We haven't raised the gas tax since 1993. There aren't the 
resources available to meet what we are seeing in every community 
across the country. That is why there is a consensus that is building, 
as Mr. Neal said, from the chamber of commerce, to the garden club, to 
the Sierra Club, unions, environmentalists, local government officials, 
Republican and Democrat alike, who say come forward with a long-term 
funding proposal.
  What we are going to have to do sometime this decade is increase the 
gas tax for inflation. What we are going to have to do sometime this 
decade is have a new mechanism in place that is a true user fee that 
will enable us to match the people who use the roads or the people who 
benefit with the financing.
  This is within our capacity. And this is one area where I hope that 
we can get past some of the partisan bickering.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Oregon has 
expired.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. I am pleased to yield to the gentleman an 
additional 1 minute.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, sir.
  I hope that every Member will take the time to go back to their 
districts this next month and talk to the local chamber of commerce, 
talk to local government, talk to local business people that are 
attempting to solve these problems, and find out the support there is 
for Congress to be able to move forward with a broader vision for 
finance. It is there, if we will do it. And if we do, it is going to 
have more long-term impact on the financial health of this country than 
anything else that we will do.
  I urge people to do their homework at home so they can come back and

[[Page H9021]]

support the financing that is necessary for the long-term vision that 
Mr. Oberstar and Mr. DeFazio will give us in the months ahead.

                              {time}  1615

  Mr. CAMP. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham).
  Mr. LATHAM. I thank the gentleman from Michigan for the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in reluctant support of this bill. I also rise to 
point out that what we're doing today, in considering the increase for 
the Highway Trust Fund, is exactly what I sought to do last week 
through an amendment presented to the Rules Committee. My amendment was 
aimed at employing a little common sense and transferring excessive 
resources in the rapid rail appropriations to the much-needed resource 
category in the Highway Trust Fund. I was seeking to transfer to the 
trust fund $3 billion of the $4 billion that is currently in the rapid 
rail appropriations in the House version of the FY 2010 transportation 
appropriations bill. That amendment would have left the $1 billion for 
rail that the President had requested. As things now stand, the $4 
billion on top of the $8 billion in the stimulus package remains in the 
rail account, and at least $2 billion of that is parked for a future 
infrastructure bank, which is only just an idea, no authorization, 
nothing. It may be at least a year, and probably much longer, before 
any of these funds can be spent; and the Highway Trust Fund needs money 
now, which is what I said last week.
  Had my amendment been made in order, it would have passed and been 
offset. Had it passed, we would be dealing with a much smaller amount 
today. Unfortunately, the Rules Committee didn't see fit to make the 
amendment in order and, in the process, make use of funding authority 
that will not be needed for some time. So once again, politics governed 
the process. It's very unfortunate. I think it is worth pointing out 
today to all the Members here that in a June 4 hearing this year, 
Secretary LaHood, in response to my question regarding offsets for the 
Highway Trust Fund bailout said, ``We have to pay for this. I mean, the 
administration is committed to paying for the $5 billion to $7 billion 
that is needed to plus up the trust fund in 2009, and it is about $8 
billion or $10 billion for 2010. We are committed to paying for it; and 
I hope sooner rather than later, we will be coming back to all of you 
and saying, here is how we think we should do it.''
  To my knowledge, in this bill there are no offsets. I know that 
technically this is an intergovernmental transfer, so there's no PAYGO 
and technically no scoring on this. But the money will soon be spent by 
the Treasury.
  Just so folks understand what is going on here with this shell game, 
I will give you an example. I'm the government. I've got $1 in this 
pocket--in this case, we're talking about 7 billion of these, which 
would go to the Moon--and what we're doing is saying that we are 
transferring this dollar from the right pocket to the left pocket, even 
though we know that it's already spent in the left pocket. But it 
doesn't cost anything. It's free money. Why don't we transfer $1 
trillion? It's all free, right? No offset. It's just from one pocket to 
another. The problem is, folks, we know this is being spent; and 
there's nothing in this pocket. We're borrowing from our kids and our 
grandchildren because there is nothing here. We're $2 trillion in 
deficit this one year and we're talking about, We don't have to pay for 
anything. It's all free money. In conclusion, I would just hope that we 
bring some sanity to this process.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from Oregon, Congressman DeFazio, the Chair of the 
Highways and Transit Subcommittee of the Transportation Committee.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the gentleman and my friend for the time. Five 
years ago, an obstinate penny-wise, pound-foolish Bush administration 
stonewalled a bipartisan proposal in Congress to increase trust fund 
revenues. They sent us on this path to insolvency. At the same time, 
they condemned us to a transportation system in America that is headed 
toward third-world status. On the National Highway System, 150,000 
bridges are either functionally obsolete or structurally deficient. 
That means they could fall down. Then we have 40 percent of the 
pavement on the National Highway System in fair or poor condition. 
Billions of gallons of fuel wasted in congestion and traffic, Americans 
wasting their lives sitting, frustrated. Businesses losing tens of 
billions of dollars because of delayed deliveries in a just-in-time 
competitive world economy.
  We need a 6-year investment in our transportation system with new 
policies and a new vision to move us toward a competitive 21st century 
transportation system, not living off the dregs of one that we built in 
the fifties. But on the way to that new future, we need this infusion 
of cash. The States are out there in good faith, putting millions of 
people to work, rebuilding as much as they can with inadequate 
resources. They're bringing in bills for over $1 billion a week. That's 
a lot of jobs, folks, out there in America going on today, rebuilding 
our infrastructure. We need to make good on those obligations with this 
infusion of money.
  I'm willing to pay for the enhanced investment in the coming 
legislation, and I'd urge my Republican colleagues to keep an open 
mind. They're either going to deny us the investment we need and 
condemn us to a transportation system that can't meet America's needs, 
or they're going to join us in a 6-year bill with adequate investment 
and funding, fully paid for, investing in the future of America.
  Mr. CAMP. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I would just say that the Obama administration famously predicted 
that its so-called stimulus plan would save or create 3.5 million jobs. 
The gentleman referred to millions of jobs being created repairing our 
infrastructure. However, the unemployment rate is now at 9.5 percent, 
well above the 8 percent the administration projected if the stimulus 
passed. That means 2.5 million more Americans are unemployed than the 
President promised. So not only have no jobs been created in the 
private sector, in just 4 months, 2 million private sector jobs have 
been destroyed. Meanwhile, jobs in government have grown slightly, 
according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
  At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, may inquire about how much time I 
have left?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Georgia has 3\1/2\ 
minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Michigan has 5 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. CAMP. I will say that we have no further speakers, and I believe 
the gentleman has the right to close.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. I thank the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. Speaker, having one speaker remaining, I would like to yield 2 
minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts, Congressman Olver from the 
Appropriations Committee.
  Mr. OLVER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  As I think we all know, with the collapse of the subprime market and 
the steep drop in private mortgages available, 25 percent of mortgages 
written today are backed by FHA. That's up from just 3 percent 2 years 
ago; and because Ginnie Mae securitizes FHA loans, their volume has 
increased threefold. With that increased demand, both FHA and Ginnie 
Mae will reach their loan ceilings in the next few weeks and will be 
forced to stop operating unless we act today. With the housing market 
just starting to show some signs of growth and home sales rising for 3 
straight months, a first since the year 2004, cutting out 25 percent of 
available mortgages would be a disaster, decimating the market and 
hurting million of prospective homeowners out shopping today. This bill 
ensures that FHA and Ginnie Mae can continue to play their important 
roles in the mortgage market.
  The bill also transfers funds to the Highway Trust Fund to keep it 
solvent through the end of the fiscal year. Without that transfer, the 
Department of Transportation will not be able to continue reimbursing 
States for their highway projects; and States would likely have to 
scale back on the work they are now doing and would be doing in August 
and September. There is no question that we will have to eventually do 
something to guarantee the long-term solvency of the Highway

[[Page H9022]]

Trust Fund; but we made infrastructure development an important part of 
the Economic Recovery Act; and it would be foolish and unwise for us to 
leave town without ensuring that States can continue with their highway 
projects as we are on recess in this next month. This needs to be done 
as quickly as possible. I would urge my colleagues to support this bill 
by voting ``yes.''
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers on my side, so I 
will yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I fully support H.R. 3357. In the 
future, the Ways and Means Committee will need to look at different 
funding proposals and administrative changes to keep the Highway Trust 
Fund running for the long term. Today we need to make sure it doesn't 
run out of money. This very simple bill does not cost a single dollar, 
and I urge all of my colleagues to support this commonsense, bipartisan 
piece of legislation.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, if there was ever a time when 
the American public needed to pay close attention to the spending 
decisions being made in Congress, it is now.
  It's ironic that in the week following the adoption of so-called 
``Pay-Go Rules,'' the House would be debating a measure to set aside 
more than $14 billion--without offsets--to pay for two so-called trust 
funds that have run dry. ``Pay as we Go'' has been replaced with 
``Spend as we Borrow.''
  Today, the House will vote to borrow another $7 billion--that's $7 
billion--out of the general fund to replenish the Highway Trust Fund 
which has become insolvent as a result of high gas prices and the 
sluggish economy. By this time next month, without a congressional 
bailout, the so-called Highway Trust Fund will be unable to reimburse 
states for their highway investments. It was only last year that 
Congress set aside $8 billion from the general fund to keep the highway 
fund solvent.
  Clearly, this band-aid approach to fixing this re-occurring problem 
is not working. One more time, the House is voting to bail out another 
sector of the economy with money it does not have. This is on the heels 
of the bank bailout. It's on the heels of the so-called ``Recovery 
Act'' which has succeeded in spending billions but has thus far failed 
to create jobs. It's on the heels of the bailout of automakers in 
Detroit. And it follows another year of astronomical spending increases 
for every major government program run out of Washington, DC.
  It was only last month that our former colleague, and the present 
Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, testified before the House 
Transportation Appropriations Committee. ``I want to assure you that we 
will soon have a plan to address the potential Trust Fund shortfall 
this summer,'' he said. ``We believe very strongly that any Trust fund 
fix must be paid for.''
  An effort was made by the THUD-Appropriations Ranking Member, Tom 
Latham of Iowa, to pay for a solution to the Highway Trust Fund 
shortfall. But, because my friend Mr. Latham is a Republican, his 
amendment was rejected on a party-line vote in the full Appropriations 
Committee. In a sign of just how desperate the majority party in the 
House has become, Mr. Latham wasn't even allowed to offer his amendment 
during consideration of the transportation funding bill last week.

  If the bailout of the Highway Trust Fund wasn't enough, Congress is 
also being called upon to replenish both the Unemployment Trust Fund 
and increase the limits for two mortgage lending programs under HUD. In 
the case of the unemployment trust fund, states have been hit with a 
double whammy of a halting economy and job losses causing more and more 
people to line up for unemployment benefits.
  Over $400 million was appropriated through the so-called Recovery Act 
to address this shortfall but those funds have now been depleted. And, 
to this point, the authorizing committees have failed to take any 
action to help those presently receiving benefits or newly unemployed.
  Mr. Speaker, with each passing day it's becoming increasingly clear 
that the public is growing ever more wary about the reliance of this 
Congress on government spending as a solution to every problem facing 
our country.
  As the Congress spends trillions on bailouts and borrowing--and our 
record national deficit increases by the day--the President's response 
thus far has been almost laughable. Yesterday, with much fan fare, the 
White House proposed saving taxpayers money by double-sided copying of 
government documents and eliminating unused government e-mail accounts 
and phone lines. These examples hardly qualify as profiles in courage.
  The President and this majority leadership have promised fiscal 
discipline and a return to economic prosperity. And yet, the record 
thus far shows nothing but one bailout after another and rising levels 
of government spending as far as the eye can see.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker: I rise in support of H.R. 3357, a 
bill that would ensure the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund has the 
resources it needs to help those who have been hit the hard by the 
economic recession and are jobless.
  However, I am concerned about a provision in this bill that would 
provide another General Fund transfer to the Highway Trust Fund and 
increase the deficit.
  I support a strong highway program. It's important to our nation's 
economy and to my home state of Wisconsin that we have world class 
roads that let goods and people get where they need to go safely and 
efficiently.
  The highway fund was intended to be user financed. Last year we 
transferred $8 billion from the General Fund to patch last year's 
shortfall. Earlier this year we provided $27 billion in stimulus funds 
from the General Fund for highways. Now the Highway Trust Fund would 
get another $7 billion under this legislation to pay its bills for the 
rest of Fiscal Year 2009.
  Despite claims to the contrary, the real world impact of these 
transfers is an increase in the deficit, which is already over $1 
trillion and is projected to reach $1.8 trillion by the end of this 
fiscal year under the President's budget.
  The Highway Trust Fund is broken and needs to be permanently fixed. I 
want to find a solution that supports critical highway spending but 
does so responsibly, without adding more debt and deficits.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill, H.R. 3357, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on suspending the rules and passing H.R. 3357, as amended, 
will be followed by 5-minute votes on motions to suspend the rules with 
regard to:
  H. Res. 496, by the yeas and nays;
  H.R. 3072, de novo;
  H. Res. 483, de novo.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 363, 
nays 68, not voting 2, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 659]

                               YEAS--363

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Adler (NJ)
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boccieri
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Bright
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cao
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Childers
     Chu
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Driehaus
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gonzalez
     Gordon (TN)
     Graves
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harman
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Heinrich
     Heller
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NY)

[[Page H9023]]


     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Marshall
     Massa
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMahon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Minnick
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (NY)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nye
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olson
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis (CO)
     Pomeroy
     Posey
     Price (NC)
     Putnam
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Taylor
     Teague
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     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 (OH)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--68

     Akin
     Bachus
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bilirakis
     Blackburn
     Boehner
     Brady (TX)
     Broun (GA)
     Burgess
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Carter
     Chaffetz
     Coffman (CO)
     Conaway
     Culberson
     Deal (GA)
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Flake
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Inglis
     Issa
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan (OH)
     Kingston
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     Lummis
     Mack
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Paul
     Pitts
     Price (GA)
     Radanovich
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Scalise
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Thornberry
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Bishop (UT)
     McCarthy (NY)

                              {time}  1649

  Messrs. BACHUS and COFFMAN of Colorado changed their vote from 
``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Messrs. YOUNG of Alaska, SPRATT, BURTON of Indiana, CRENSHAW, 
HOEKSTRA, and JONES changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and 
the bill, as amended, was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________