[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 118 (Friday, July 31, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H9233-H9240]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS, FISCAL YEAR 2009

  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Speaker 
be authorized on this legislative day to entertain a motion to suspend 
the rules relating to H.R. 3435.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Colorado?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(H.R. 3435) making supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2009 for 
the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 3435

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes, namely:

                      DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

             National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

            consumer assistance to recycle and save program

                          (transfer of funds)

       For an additional amount for ``Consumer Assistance to 
     Recycle and Save Program'' to carry out the Consumer 
     Assistance to Recycle and Save Program established by the 
     Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save

[[Page H9234]]

     Act of 2009 (title XIII of Public Law 111-32), not to exceed 
     $2,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2010: 
     Provided, That such amount shall be available for such 
     purpose only to the extent directed by the President, and 
     shall be derived by transfer from the amount made available 
     for ``Department of Energy--Energy Programs--Title 17-
     Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program'' in title IV of 
     division A of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 
     2009 (Public Law 111-5): Provided further, That the amount 
     under this heading is designated as an emergency requirement 
     and necessary to meet emergency needs pursuant to sections 
     403 and 423(b) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), the 
     concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010.
       Sec. 2. Section 1302(g) of Public Law 111-32 is amended by 
     inserting the following new paragraph:
       (3) Review of Administration of the Program by Government 
     Accountability Office and Inspector General. Not later than 
     180 days after the termination date described in subsection 
     (c)(1)(A), the Government Accountability Office and the 
     Inspector General of the Department of Transportation shall 
     submit reports to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation of the Senate reviewing the 
     administration of the program.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.


                             General Leave

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 
5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 3435.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, late yesterday, it came to our attention that the cash 
for clunkers program, which went active just a few days ago, has proven 
even more wildly popular than its strongest supporters had predicted.
  Just last month, Congress passed the program, which provided up to 
$4,500 if you trade in your old gas guzzler for a new car that gets 
better mileage. That was done in the hopes of spurring some new car 
sales and encouraging people to be a little more environmentally 
friendly. We provided $1 billion in the supplemental to get it going, 
enough for about 250,000 sales.
  The program kicked off Monday, and it has already officially received 
40,000 requests for reimbursement, worth about $160 million in rebates. 
A survey done by the National Automobile Dealers Association this week 
suggested that at least 200,000 deals have been completed but not yet 
officially submitted. If that is true, and we are being told it 
probably is, then the entire $1 billion is just about exhausted. So we 
have before us a bill to provide stopgap funding for cash for clunkers 
by allowing the administration to transfer up to $2 billion from the 
Department of Energy's Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee program, 
which doesn't expect to award funding until late next year.
  Some would call this letting the markets work. Consumers have spoken 
with their wallets, and they are saying they like this program; and 
clearly it is doing what it was intended to do, to spur car sales in 
this sluggish economy.

                              {time}  1215

  This action will keep it going, hopefully; and I would urge support 
for the bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to point out the 
absurdity of the situation we find ourselves in today. In the 
majority's haste to slam legislation through the floor with almost no 
consideration at the committee level, with no time for consideration by 
the House membership in general, and with absolutely no ability for the 
Members of this body to amend bills on the floor, we are now seeing the 
effects of such shortsighted martial law tactics.
  Mr. Speaker, the Cash for Clunkers program was passed on the 
suspension calendar so no Members were able to offer amendments. The 
Senate had a comparable bill with some significant differences. The 
House and Senate bills should have gone to full and open conference so 
those differences could have been negotiated and a conference report 
then brought for a vote. Instead, the leadership of this body, without 
consultation or negotiation, stuck the House version of Cash for 
Clunkers on what was supposed to be a, quote, clean war supplemental, a 
bill only for the purpose of funding and supporting our troops and our 
efforts overseas in the war on terror. They had to do that because of 
the mess the majority created of the conferenced bill, and I use that 
term loosely, as most of the funding levels and programs were 
determined not in a conference but by the House leadership and by my 
chairman. But when it came to counting votes, the leadership and the 
chairman had to do some dancing and started loading up the war 
supplemental with extraneous and unrelated items, all of which needed 
to get more votes. Cash for Clunkers was one of those items.
  My colleagues in the Senate, Senator Feinstein, in particular, and 
Senator Collins, had some serious concerns with the House bill. Senator 
Feinstein tried to negotiate some changes to improve the program but 
was rebuffed, as I understand it, by my chairman. Basically they were 
told that it was his way or the highway. Here we are today--not one 
hearing on the Cash for Clunkers program in the Appropriations 
Committee, not one hearing on the needs of the program prior to 
receiving funds, not one hearing on how the first billion dollars has 
been spent, not one hearing on how much money the program will need to 
get through the fiscal year. Instead, we find ourselves on the 
suspension calendar for the second time in 3 days, bailing out another 
program, shoveling another $2 billion out the door this fiscal year 
after we've shoveled $14 billion out the door to bail out the highway 
programs and other related items.
  My colleagues are going to pat themselves on the back for finding an 
offset for this transfer; and for that I say two things: first, you 
should have been finding ways to offset spending all year; second, if 
there was an extra $2 billion in the stimulus program that was suitable 
for a different purpose, why did we spend the $2 billion in the first 
place? How many other billions of dollars are in the stimulus not being 
spent that we can return to our taxpayers?
  Now many of my colleagues will say, This is a great program, and it 
is necessary for the revitalization of the economy and the car 
industry. I'm not really going to argue with those goals. Those are 
good goals, and we are looking for solutions. However, are we sure this 
program is working like it's supposed to? I don't think so. How is it 
that we didn't hear of this funding problem until last night? And even 
then we were told there was roughly 24 hours before they were going to 
shut down the program. This program has only been up and running 1 
week. If that is how the government is going to handle billion-dollar 
programs affecting all Americans, I ask, Whatever will we do if the 
administration takes control of our health care system? I quote one car 
dealer from New York: ``If they can't administer a program like this, 
I'd be a little concerned about my health insurance.'' I say, amen.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  I'm not going to give any political speeches. We are simply trying to 
react to one program that the public has latched onto. The demand for 
this was so great that within 3 days of its inception, the funds were, 
apparently, totally used up. That indicates that we need to do 
something if we don't want the program to shut down 3 days after it 
begins. That's what we're trying to do today.
  With that, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Israel).
  Mr. ISRAEL. I thank the distinguished chairman for the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I was one of the original sponsors of the Cash for 
Clunkers bill. Many of us knew that it would work well. Few of us 
realized how well it would work. This program has been truly 
stimulative. Lots of people are questioning whether the Congress has 
passed anything that is stimulating the economy. This program has 
stimulated the economy. We have doubled car sales over the past 5 days. 
This is truly stimulative. It is creating jobs. It

[[Page H9235]]

is creating a surge for car dealers. The American consumer is satisfied 
with it, and we need to continue it. The American consumer has taken 
Cash for Clunkers on a test drive, and they want to continue driving 
Cash for Clunkers. They want to continue this program. In fact, not 
only should we continue it over the next 6 weeks by providing emergency 
funding, but we ought to improve it when we return in September. We 
should improve it by increasing the efficiency standards. We should 
improve it by making used cars eligible for the program. We should 
improve it through a long-term program because we have learned that the 
short-term program was so successful that we have exhausted the funds 
in only 5 days. This is an example of a bipartisan program that makes 
sense. We need to create a bridge of funding for the next 6 weeks, come 
back and extend it and improve it into the future.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlelady from Michigan (Mrs. Miller).
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I was very proud to be the Republican lead sponsor of 
the original legislation that we passed a number of months ago. Cash 
for Clunkers--what a fantastic success. This program has exceeded 
everybody's expectations; and now most of the naysayers are even 
admitting that it's the best $1 billion in economic stimulus funds that 
the Federal Government has ever spent.
  Here are a couple of today's quotes from those who are directly 
impacted. First of all, the CEO of one of our Nation's largest auto 
groups said, ``The most brilliantly conceived and most effective 
economic stimulus program ever put forward by the Federal Government.''
  Ford Motor Company says, ``Huge success.''
  This Congress appropriated $1 billion or November 1, whatever came 
first, and only several days into the program, we need more cash for 
the Cash for Clunkers. We can just think about the tremendous economic 
multiplier effect this is having. It is good for the auto dealers; it 
is good for the auto manufacturers; it is good for the suppliers; it is 
good for workers; it is good for the States, Mr. Speaker. Think about 
all of the revenue that is being generated by sales tax and licensing 
fees as well for this program. It is good for the environment. It's 
getting all of these old vehicles off the road, and it's absolutely 
great for consumers.
  Let me just read quickly. Here's one letter I got from a lady in 
Dearborn Heights, Michigan:
  Thank you for pushing through and helping to develop the Cash for 
Clunkers legislation. I am now the happy owner of an American-made 2010 
Ford Fusion that I will be picking up on July 30. It has been 12 years 
since I have been able to purchase a new vehicle. I was able to save 
over $7,000, before tax, on my Ford Fusion. My old vehicle was a 1995 
Ford Windstar with 150,000 miles.''
  She says, ``I'm so excited for me.''
  Well, we're excited too.
  Mr. Speaker, throughout our Nation's history--since we've had the 
automobile, actually--it has been automobile sales that have literally 
pulled our Nation out of recession; and this time it's going to be the 
same. I think we are seeing ourselves being placed on the road to 
economic recovery here, and this road is paved by the Cash for Clunkers 
program.
  I actually wrote a letter at the beginning of this week to the 
Speaker and to the House leadership, saying that we were going to run 
out of money, that we were going to need some more money for this 
program. Here we are on Friday of the first week. We absolutely need to 
do this, Mr. Speaker. We cannot leave for our August recess until we 
vote for this reprogramming of unspent economic stimulus funds for this 
program. We need to do it.
  One other thing, for those who keep saying that we need to get the 
government out of the automobile business, if you really want to get 
the government out of the pocket of General Motors or whatever, this is 
the way to do it, Mr. Speaker. I would urge my colleagues to support 
this bill. It is very, very important not just for the State of 
Michigan, this is a national economic program, the best thing we've 
ever done. More cash for Cash for Clunkers.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\3/4\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Levin).
  (Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. LEVIN. The public has spoken. Consumers have been going to 
dealerships. The White House is now active, and the issue is whether 
this House will respond. As I see it, and I think the public will see 
it, this is a test of whether Congress can shed its disagreements on 
other issues and respond to what the public, indeed, wants. The rush to 
use this program shows its need.
  I say to the gentleman from California and anybody else, what else do 
we need to see? This program is working. The White House has made clear 
that the dealers can go forward. This program is open until further 
notice, and dealers are urged not to rush too much but to do it right 
in the first place and get in line. So it's open until further notice. 
The question is whether this institution will shut it down or whether 
it will continue to open up the valves. It will be good for everybody. 
It will be good for the national economy. This isn't just an issue for 
Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana and Illinois but for the whole 
Nation. This is an issue of our national economic recovery, and anyone 
who votes ``no'' on this is saying ``no'' to an important boost to our 
economy at a critical time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes 
to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), the cochairman of the 
bipartisan Auto Caucus.
  Mr. UPTON. I thank my friend from California.
  I'm from the great State of Michigan where our unemployment is, 
sadly, at 15.2 percent, almost twice the national average. Last night 
we learned from the National Association of Auto Dealers that, in fact, 
in just 3 days this program has brought about almost a quarter of a 
million new car sales, yet the cash is going to run out literally in 
the next couple of days without an infusion. It's important that we're 
not taking new money. This is existing money. This bill moves existing 
money from other accounts, so it will not add to this year's deficit, 
but it is going to run out without this legislation.
  Here is today's USA Today, a full page ad by Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep, 
$4,500 back if you purchase a new vehicle, turn in your old one, and 
get something that's at least 10 miles per gallon better. A lot of our 
auto dealers can do it, whether it's the Big Three or the transplants 
too. Nationwide, one in 10 jobs are auto-related. In Michigan it's 
about one in four, one in five jobs. For the last 3 years, auto sales 
have declined by nearly 50 percent. There are 16 other countries that 
have done this. Whether it be Germany, South Korea, even Slovakia has 
done this. In all of those 16 countries, car sales have come back. This 
country lost one in five manufacturing jobs in the last 16 months. If 
we want to keep jobs here in this country, bring back some of those 
that we have lost, obviously it's got to be in the auto sector where 1 
in 10 jobs are auto-related. This bill sends those dominos the other 
way. It brings people back in the showroom. We've demonstrated that 
just this week. It brings back the call orders. We've heard from a 
number of dealers across Michigan that they're, frankly, running out of 
cars. Guess what they're going to do--they're going to order them back, 
and that's going to bring people back to work.
  Let me just end on this, wouldn't you rather have people working and 
paying taxes than being unemployed and receiving benefits which, in 
Michigan, are becoming exhausted? I ask my colleagues to vote for this 
bill.

                              {time}  1230

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell).
  (Mr. DINGELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend the leadership and to 
commend my dear friend, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, 
for his extraordinary leadership on this matter.
  The success of the CARS program in just a few short days has been 
extraordinary. The program has been doing so well, in fact, that the 
initial $1 billion

[[Page H9236]]

allocated for the program is already running low. This is a great 
problem to have in the midst of all the difficulties that we confront. 
It's a sign that the program is not only working well and the consumers 
are very interested, but it's also proving that CARS is providing a 
jolt, a meaningful upward jolt to our economic recovery efforts.
  This is a simple extension. It's an infusion of money in an area 
where it's needed and where it's working, and the legislation should 
not get bogged down by calls for changing the program. That would only 
serve to stall the extension and confuse consumers.
  We cannot and should not make changes in an extraordinarily 
successful program that has only been operating for a week. That would 
be irresponsible. I would add that the additional $2 billion for the 
program has already been appropriated under ARRA and will not cost the 
taxpayers an additional dime.
  I urge passage of the bill. I commend the leadership, and I thank my 
dear friend, the chairman of the committee, and the other members of 
the committee who have made it possible for us to consider this 
legislation so fast.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).
  Mr. HENSARLING. Cash for Clunkers, Mr. Speaker, obviously it's a 
popular program. It's a clever title. It pays people several thousand 
dollars to trade in their old cars if they will buy new cars. And yes, 
Mr. Speaker, people are hurting in the auto industry. There's no doubt 
about it. But I would also note that the taxpayers are hurting. $80 
billion to Chrysler and GM. And the auto industry does not have a 
monopoly on hard times in this economy.
  Recently, one of the largest poultry producers in America, Pilgrims 
Pride, just a few miles outside of my congressional district, they had 
to declare Chapter 11. Maybe we should have a Cash for Cluckers program 
and pay people to eat chicken. Then after that, we can have a program 
to pay people to buy TVs, and then a program to pay people to buy 
lumber. It would pass the test. It has a clever title. It would help a 
large industry. It would put free money in the hands of consumers.
  But this is not a humorous affair, Mr. Speaker, and it's not humorous 
because this is an extension of a program that has the government 
picking winners and losers. Why is the auto industry the winner? Why is 
the poultry industry the loser? This is one more step in enshrining us 
as a bailout Nation.
  Now, people say, Well, it's $2 billion that's coming out of the 
stimulus program. Well, I would tell my distinguished colleagues that 
that is still $2 billion that has to be borrowed from the Chinese, with 
the bill sent to our children and grandchildren, at a time when the 
deficit has hit $1 trillion for the first time in history. You cannot 
bail out, borrow and spend your way into economic prosperity. Instead, 
let's unleash the spirit of entrepreneurial capitalism. Let's help 
small businesses with tax relief. Let's grow our way out of this 
economic recession.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, when we passed the Cash for Clunkers 
legislation last month, I said it would provide a much needed boost to 
our auto industry and our manufacturing communities. After just 1 week, 
we see the great success of this program. I've been working closely 
with the White House, the auto task force and my Congressional 
colleagues to add additional funds to the program to keep it up and 
running. This program has been an unprecedented success, and there are 
no plans to suspend it. This program is a successful example of 
economic stimulus at work.
  To continue this positive program, I join my colleagues today to 
introduce legislation to redirect $2 billion from the economic stimulus 
bill to the Cash for Clunkers program. We are poised to pass this 
legislation through the House of Representatives today, and I urge my 
Senate colleagues to do the same as quickly as possible.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield, Mr. Speaker, 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra).
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the 
chairman of the committee and the ranking member of the Appropriations 
Committee for moving so expeditiously and getting this bill to the 
floor of the House this afternoon. The response from consumers to this 
program has been, as one of my dealers described it this week, he had 
chaos in his showroom. It accomplished what we wanted it to accomplish.
  I was skeptical when this program passed a while back, but it has 
delivered customers into the showroom and they are buying cars. And 
being from Michigan and experiencing a 15.2 percent unemployment rate, 
this is not going to only provide opportunities for employment in the 
people that assemble cars, but also for the suppliers and those types 
of things. And hopefully this can be a catalyst for a stronger economic 
recovery. It appears to be one of the programs in the stimulus packages 
that have passed this House that actually appears to be working.
  At the same time, while we are maybe euphoric about the parts of the 
program that are working, I think we also have to recognize that the 
back end of this program, the parts that are being handled by the 
Federal Government, have been a disaster for our dealers. I have yet to 
have one dealer who has sold a car that has gotten it approved by the 
Department of Transportation. The Federal Government can't process a 
simple rebate.
  I've got dealers that have submitted the paperwork three times and 
have gotten three rejections. The last one came back and it said, No 
reason for rejection. What is a dealer supposed to do? They've already 
destroyed the cars that have been traded in. They have sold the car. 
They're now on the hook and expecting a check for $3,500 to $4,500 from 
the Federal Government and they're not getting it.
  We need to get these backroom problems fixed to be able to call this 
program truly successful. It can't just be the front end. It has to be 
the entire process, from selling it to the customer to the dealer 
getting the money from the Federal Government. That all has to work 
seamlessly for this program to be an unqualified success.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute and 45 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton).
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this legislation 
that's going to provide an additional $2 billion for the CARS Act, a 
bill that I sponsored, sometimes referred to as Cash for Clunkers. But 
by any name, this bill has been, thus far, a tremendous success.
  It has helped consumers purchase cars that they couldn't have 
purchased in this economic downturn perhaps but which they needed. It's 
going to give them cars and fuel savings for a long time to come. It's 
helping our auto companies, our auto dealers, all of the jobs 
associated with that very vital and important industry in this country, 
to maintain itself, to continue and give it the chance to grow and 
restore.
  The program also, of course, is good for our environment because it's 
taking out those less fuel-efficient cars and getting them off the road 
and replacing them with more fuel-efficient cars.
  This is an unprecedented success, and my colleague is right. We must 
make sure that it works throughout the entire process. But we are well 
on our way, and I appreciate the leadership of the chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee, Secretary LaHood, the administration, who 
I've been working very closely with to make sure that we build on this 
success which is stimulating our economy, keeping people working, 
helping our environment, and helping our consumers when they really, 
really need it.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to say to the 
gentlelady who authored this bill, she has more influence with the 
Appropriations chairman than most people around here. He just picked 
that up for her and moved it along, expedited the process.
  I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Campbell).
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Speaker, the Cash for Clunkers program was 
inartfully drafted. It is more complex and cumbersome than it needs to 
be. The administration of it is not going very well at all, but it has 
worked. And, Mr. Speaker, we have passed a number of things in this 
Congress this year intended to stimulate the economy. The vast majority 
of them have

[[Page H9237]]

not had that effect, but this one has, and it has clearly worked.
  For the initial $1 billion to be exhausted, that means that roughly 
250,000 new vehicles must have been sold in just the last week or two 
in order to exhaust all of that money. That is clearing inventories in 
car dealerships, which means car dealers will be ordering more cars.
  When they order more cars, plants will begin to run again. Plants 
will open up. They will be producing more cars, and people will go back 
to work. There will be suppliers that will produce supplies, various 
parts for those cars, steel mills producing for those cars, and those 
people will go back to work. There will be trucks and trains that 
deliver those cars, and those people will go back to work.
  And Mr. Speaker, the $2 billion for this is coming out of the 
existing funding, so it is not increasing the debt or the deficit any 
more than what has already been there.
  Mr. Speaker, I support this bill. I support this effort. It is the 
one thing that we have done here in this Congress that is absolutely 
working. It is stimulating the economy. It is creating jobs, and we 
want it to create more.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
  Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. I thank the chairman very much, and I 
very much appreciate your very hard work on extending this program.
  This program is a win for consumers who are trading in old gas 
guzzlers for new hybrids, a win for the recovering economy, and a win 
for energy independence and the environment as the new vehicles are 
averaging 60 percent more fuel efficiency than the junkers being taken 
off the road.
  However, I am concerned that we are taking funding from the Renewable 
Energy Loan Guarantee Program and would express my strong belief that 
we must find a way of replenishing those funds as soon as possible.
  Mr. Chairman, could you work with me and other Members to ensure that 
the funds for this program will be replenished?
  Mr. OBEY. If the gentleman would yield, I share the gentleman's view 
that the Renewable Energy Loan Guarantee Program is of vital importance 
to creating a new, green economy. We have talked with the White House. 
We have talked with the Speaker, and I want to assure you that all of 
us certainly have every intention of restoring these funds.
  Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. I thank the chairman very much. I know 
that this has always been the highest priority for yourself, for 
Speaker Pelosi, and for the Obama administration, and I look forward to 
working with you in the future in order to make sure that we have a 
win-win here for renewable energy and for our fuel-efficient vehicles.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
  Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I won't take 2 
minutes.
  I just want to say, I thought I'd heard it all until I came to the 
floor today. Somebody said earlier, this bill's a success. Ford Motor 
Company loves it. I think that that's self-evident. But I think that 
there are taxpayers around the country who are wondering why we're 
taking $2 billion more from them to decide which industry here is going 
to get a break.
  We decided to give out free money, and now we're surprised when 
people take advantage of it and love the program. I mean, that's the 
nature of human nature. If you're given free money, you like it and you 
want more. And that's what this program is. Why are we deciding to aid 
this sector and not another?
  If you're Mr. or Mrs. Businessman across the country, you've got to 
be wondering if we have lost our minds here by saying that we're going 
to continue to give out more money just for this industry but not help 
the others. I don't understand this process and how we can bring this 
up this quickly. But an Appropriation Committee that can bring a 
Defense bill to the floor in 18 minutes for a markup that has more than 
1,100 earmarks, I guess, has no problem doing this.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 20 seconds.
  I just want to say, Mr. Speaker, that what we have heard several 
times here today about this action are complaints from the people who 
helped wreck America's economy and are now complaining because of the 
way this President and this Congress are trying to pull the country out 
of the ditch and restore economic growth. We've come to expect that, 
but that doesn't make it any more pleasant.
  I yield 1 minute to the distinguished Speaker of the House.

                              {time}  1245

  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
thank him for his very important and swift action to address the 
opportunity that was given to us this week.
  As you know, my colleagues, as part of the supplemental earlier this 
year, the Cash for Clunkers provision was provided in it. Many people 
had worked very, very hard on that for a long time, and we were able to 
have it pass on a bill that was going to be signed by the President.
  I want to acknowledge Congresswoman Sutton for her enthusiastic 
support and leadership; Congressman Inslee and Congressman Israel of 
New York, who all worked very hard on this; certainly the chairman 
emeritus of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Dingell; the current 
chairman, Mr. Waxman; and Mr. Markey as Chair of the Select Committee 
on Global Warming for his leadership on this issue for a long period of 
time.
  I mention all of them because this brings together so many elements 
of what we want to do to grow our economy, to help our workers, to 
protect our environment, and to do so in a very focused way that works, 
and that's what is interesting about this week.
  In about 6 days, it is estimated that 250,000 cars were sold. On both 
sides of the aisle, people acknowledge the effectiveness of this 
initiative, and that is why yesterday--and as we were seeing what was 
happening this week--the Obama administration asked us to help 
consumers who have yet to have the opportunity to take advantage of 
trading in their old cars for new energy-efficient models. When they do 
that, again, they strengthen the auto industry, strengthen our economy 
at large and help preserve our environment.
  What's interesting about it, and the point that has been made by many 
speakers already, is just that everything has performed beyond the 
requirements of the bill. The cars that have been purchased are much 
more fuel-efficient and the emissions standard much better than the 
bill even required, and that's good news.
  I do share the concern that has been put forth by Mr. Markey--and I 
don't know if Mr. Inslee has yet, but he will--about the source of the 
revenue, and that is the Innovative Technologies Loan Guarantee 
Program.
  In the recovery package in January, we voted for a $6 billion 
initiative. It was very important to have it at that level, and it's 
very important in terms of our renewables program--$6 billion--but the 
administration has just released a solicitation for about half of that 
money, for $3 billion in loans for renewable energy. The rest of the 
money would not be released until next year, until after January. So 
that gave us an opportunity, for the time being, to use $2 billion of 
that for this Cash for Clunkers expansion.
  Again, I am concerned about the fact that that money is taken from 
that account, but it has not cost any opportunities for the program, 
because the timing is such that that money would be spent next year.
  I do hope, whether it's in the continuing resolution or some other 
step along the way, that those funds will be restored, because it's not 
appropriate for us to take money to do one thing for fuel efficiency 
out of an account that is designed to do just that in looking into the 
future with further innovation. So I share the concerns expressed by 
Mr. Markey, and I appreciate the comments made by Mr. Obey in the 
colloquy that they had about restoring those funds.
  But, again, I think this is a pretty exciting day. As I said, we got 
the word just as this news was unfolding this week. Yesterday, it was 
determined that we could go forward. The Rules Committee under 
Congresswoman Slaughter responded very positively. The chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee, Mr. Obey, has been trying to find solutions 
for us, and the leadership of the Republican Party has been

[[Page H9238]]

very cooperative in how we could bring the bill to the floor.
  So this is a very positive, bipartisan initiative to help our auto 
industry, to help consumers grow our economy and to do it in an 
environmentally sound way. I think it is the perfect message for us to 
take home for August.
  Thank you all for your leadership in making this possible.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the time 
remaining on both sides?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 4 minutes 
remaining, and the gentleman from Wisconsin has 7\3/4\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank my friend from California for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, Cash for Clunkers has serious problems that are 
administrative problems. I have dealers in my district in northeast 
Georgia who probably are going to go bankrupt because of these 
problems. I hope, as we go forward, that we'll fix these administrative 
snafus that are in this problem.
  We're throwing money into another government program that has very 
serious problems where dealers can't get their money. I have one dealer 
who has paid out of his pocket for 50 cars but has only gotten money 
back for one. Now, that dealer, if he doesn't get paid back, is going 
to have very severe financial problems, and his employees are going to 
be put out of work if we don't fix this.
  Certainly, we've sold a lot of cars because of this program, but just 
throwing money into a program that has tremendous administrative, red 
tape problems and other problems is not going to be the long-term 
answer. I hope that the administration will straighten out these 
administration snafus and will get the money to our dealers, money that 
they desperately need.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Maffei).
  (Mr. MAFFEI asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Speaker, today, we are faced with a rare problem. We 
have a program that has proven to be working, and all we need to do is 
to keep it working. Getting gas-guzzling vehicles off the road and 
replaced with new fuel-efficient vehicles is helping our environment. 
It is putting money directly into the pockets of middle-income 
families. It is a ray of hope for auto dealers in this country, a ray 
of hope for the U.S. auto industry and a ray of hope for our economy.
  Finally we have a bailout, not for the big businesses, not for Wall 
Street, but a bailout for Main Street.
  As the lead sponsor of a bill to help protect the legal rights of 
auto dealers, I can tell you this is a godsend for the auto dealers in 
my district. Don't stall what's working. Give it a fill-up, and let's 
get Cash for Clunkers back on the road.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I will be the last speaker on 
our side, so I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Schauer).
  Mr. SCHAUER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your quick 
leadership on such an important issue.
  When I ran for Congress--and I'm from Michigan--I pledged that I 
would fight every day for people in businesses in my community who are 
being hurt by a brutal economy. The Cash for Clunkers program has 
breathed life into a very difficult economy in communities all around 
my district. Here is why this is important:
  I've talked to car dealers in my district. They can't keep cars on 
the lots. They will be ordering new cars from manufacturers in my State 
and from around the country. Suppliers who supply parts for those cars 
will be manufacturing more of them. This is very, very critical, and it 
has been very effective in turning around our economy in just a matter 
of days.
  Mr. Chairman, thank you for giving us the opportunity to continue 
this program and to continue to turn our economy around.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Inslee).
  (Mr. INSLEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I want to just make a point that this 
program has been spectacularly successful from an environmental 
perspective. It was originally criticized that we did not call for high 
enough efficiency improvement in these cars. The people have fixed this 
problem for us. We are seeing average increases of efficiency of 60 
percent--well, well above what was required by Congress.
  For one car company, 78 percent of the cars that they're buying are 
over 30 miles a gallon and 39 percent above 30 miles per gallon. The 
American people have seen spectacular improvements in efficiency and in 
environmental performance.
  I want to thank the Speaker and Mr. Obey for essentially assuring 
us--I'll take it as that, almost--that we, in fact, are going to 
replace this money. I hope it is in the CR. It is necessary to achieve 
our efficiency goals.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Donnelly).
  Mr. DONNELLY of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman 
for bringing this bill to the floor. This program has been an enormous 
success. It's good for our environment to have cars with better 
mileage. It's good for our families, who get to save some money when 
they make these big purchases. It's also very, very good for the 
workers of Indiana, who are back to work, building these cars.
  This is a win-win-win for our country. It's one of the great programs 
to create jobs, to help our environment and to help our families. We're 
very supportive, and we want to thank the chairman for bringing this 
program forward.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, it should be noted that the 
Speaker, when she was presenting her views to the membership, indicated 
that, one way or another, she'd find a way to get this money back into 
the bill somewhere down the line. Between now and then, it's pretty 
obvious that this bill could not have been on the floor today if it had 
not been for an emergency designation that would allow us to exercise 
ourselves in this fashion.
  I would remind ourselves one more time of the quote received from a 
car dealer in New York. Speaking of us, about how this bill was 
handled, he said, If they can't administer a program like this, I'd be 
a little concerned about my health insurance.
  With that, I join the gentleman one more time in saying, ``Amen.''
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield myself the remainder of the time.
  Mr. Speaker, today, the Commerce Department just issued figures which 
have indicated that the depth of the recession in the last quarter of 
last year was much more severe than anyone had estimated. This is the 
good news part of the day: They also tell us that, in the first quarter 
of this year, the shrinkage of the economy has now slowed considerably, 
which is a very hopeful sign, because the economy, evidently, performed 
significantly better than most of the economic experts had thought it 
would perform. We all welcome that news, but as you know, that is not 
good enough. We need to see more progress. Our dilemma is this:
  Ordinarily in a recession, when the country is losing jobs, the 
Federal Reserve lowers interest rates, and that helps the housing 
industry to move ahead. It helps the auto industry to sell cars. Our 
economy is normally led out of the recession by the housing industry 
and by the auto industry. This time around, the situation is very 
different, because those two sectors have been basket cases for the 
past year and a half.
  The first glimmer of hope we've seen in the auto industry is the news 
that we received yesterday from the Secretary of Transportation, Mr. 
LaHood, who informed us that, in just 3 days' time, when the program 
was started, as far as they can tell, it's already oversubscribed. That 
means the consumers like this program; it means they are reacting to 
it, and it means that it would be irresponsible of us not to try

[[Page H9239]]

to prevent the shutdown of this program just 3 days after it began.
  So we're here, trying to take advantage of one of the few bright 
spots in the economy to help move the economy forward. We still have a 
long way to go before good news shows up on the unemployment side of 
the ledger, but we'll take every bit of good news we can. Today, I 
think this is one piece of good news, and I think we need to respond to 
it.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Would the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBEY. I would be happy to yield very briefly to my friend.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I just want to say, Mr. Chairman, that, for 
some reason or another, the gentleman who is our Speaker pro tempore 
has drawn the short end of the stick this week. He has been doing 
wonderful work in moving the process along, and I think the body should 
recognize his work.
  Mr. OBEY. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Speaker, I would ask for an ``aye'' vote.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, while I strongly support the ``cash for 
clunkers'' concept, I voted against this legislation to provide the 
program with infusion of cash. The bill that was rushed to the Floor 
today tripled the program without any discussion of how it's working 
administratively or why the money ran out so quickly. I'm concerned 
that rushing ahead without better understanding these issues will 
create additional problems in the future. In addition, by bringing this 
legislation to the Floor so quickly, we have missed an opportunity to 
make improvements to the program.
  Cash for clunkers is a much better approach to help both consumers 
and the auto industry than simply bailing out the automakers by 
throwing money at them. With this program we are not only helping them 
to modernize their fleet, but we are taking some of the dirtiest, most 
polluting cars off the road.
  The fact that the program ran out of money within the course of a few 
days shows its popularity and its potential to help rescue and 
transform our nation's automakers. Consumers have clearly demonstrated 
that they want to purchase more fuel efficient vehicles. Action to 
extend the program would have been a good opportunity to strengthen and 
better target the provisions so they do more to improve fuel 
efficiency, reduce vehicle emissions and reduce our dependence on 
foreign oil.
  I am also concerned that in order to triple cash for clunkers, the 
bill takes money away from another important economic recovery program 
that supports renewable energy projects. We don't know the consequences 
of this action and how it will impact other Oregon priorities and job 
prospects in the renewables sector.
  Cash for clunkers is a program I support and I think it has an 
important role to play in our economic recovery. However, I don't want 
this rushed action to weaken both its effectiveness and long-term 
viability.
  Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3435.
  The CARS program has proven widely successful. Within five days of 
the program's official start for electronic submission of applications, 
there is concern that the original $1 billion in funding will soon be 
depleted.
  This means an estimated 250,000 new vehicles were sold since the 
start of the program. This is a great boost to our auto industry, with 
reports of dealerships being unable to keep current vehicles in stock 
due to the strong demand from consumers--a problem my local dealers 
welcome.
  Preliminary statistics on the program point to consumers gaining a 69 
percent improvement in fuel efficiency from their trade-in vehicles, 
with an average annual gasoline savings of $750.
  The goals of increasing fuel efficiency, reducing pollution, and 
providing a needed economic stimulus for our nation's auto industry 
have all been met by the program. An additional $2 billion, transferred 
from the economic stimulus bill, should provide enough funding for the 
program to sell an additional 500,000 vehicles.
  Even ineligible consumers are benefiting as more foot traffic from 
the program will boost automotive sales for dealerships across the 
country.
  A bipartisan group of Members and the White House are in agreement 
that this successful program must continue. Congress should pass H.R. 
3435 to provide $2 billion from economic stimulus funding to support 
this widely successful program. Consumers should continue to benefit 
from the program, and we must ensure the financial security of existing 
deals between consumers and car dealerships.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am concerned over the 
news reports that the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program, 
or the Car Allowance Rebate System has run out of money.
  This program took effect approximately one week ago, and American 
auto dealers have already sold 8,000 cars thanks to subsidies contained 
in the legislation. Equally impressive is the fact that appropriated 
funds have already been dispersed. This swift action by Congress and 
the Department of Transportation is extremely encouraging. This 
legislation has been having a stabilizing effect moving forward and 
delivers badly needed relief to the American auto industry.
  The Cars for Clunkers program is a part of the federal government's 
efforts to help local dealers who are suffering financially and 
shutting down because of the economy, and I am thrilled by the 
program's early success.
  We need to fully fund the House-passed authorized level of $4 billion 
before we leave for our August district work period.
  The government's new Cash for Clunkers program took effect 
approximately one week ago, and American auto dealers have already sold 
8,000 cars thanks to subsidies contained in the legislation. I am 
confident that this legislation will have a stabilizing effect moving 
forward and deliver badly needed relief to the American auto industry. 
Creation of the Cash for Clunkers program was not the first action 
Congress has taken this year to help struggling auto dealers. As we 
move forward with implementation of this new program, it is important 
that Congress make sure previously appropriated funds are used to help 
auto dealers on Main Street and not just manufacturers.
  As a senior member of the Transportation Committee, I work every day 
to help Americans who depend on the transportation industry for jobs 
and services. I firmly believe that every mode of transportation 
contributes to America in meaningful ways. However, no mode of 
transportation has shaped American life as profoundly as the 
automobile--and that is why Congress needs to do everything in its 
power to help struggling auto dealers across America.
  In good economic times, manufacturers established as many dealerships 
as possible in order to maximize profit. However, in today's recession, 
these same dealerships are being asked to sacrifice. And those 
responsible for the industry's collapse--namely the management of GM 
and Chrysler who insisted on building bigger, gas-guzzling 
automobiles--are the ones being propped up by federal bailout dollars. 
This is hardly fair, and Congress has a responsibility to exercise 
oversight and ensure dealers are not punished for management's 
mistakes.
  Most dealerships across America are seeing layoffs and some have been 
closed altogether. These dealers are the bedrock of our communities; 
they sponsor our children's sports teams and are known for 
participating in community organizations. Supporting upstanding auto 
dealers across America is not ``political pandering'' as your editorial 
suggested. Congress is simply taking action to protect hardworking 
Americans whose dealerships are being taken from them for no mistake of 
their own.
  When we committed taxpayer dollars to these companies, we accepted 
the responsibility to make sure those monies would help Americans on 
Main Street--that means dealerships and not just manufacturers. Dealers 
deserve to be protected by these funds, and Members of Congress should 
be committed to effective oversight.
  In a rare exhibit of bipartisanship, Democrats and Republicans are 
working together to save American auto dealers. Members of both parties 
agree that the closing of dealerships may violate state franchise laws 
designed to protect dealers from unfair and oppressive trade practices.
  The actions of Chrysler and GM simply ignore these protected rights. 
Dealers have lost their dealerships without due process or adequate 
compensation. Action by Congress could not only reinstate dealers but 
will also revitalize the communities that depend crucially on 
dealerships for jobs and services. Simply, auto dealers are part of the 
solution to manufacturers' problems, not a part of the problem.
  Most dealers would prefer to remain in the automobile business as GM 
or Chrysler franchisees, but today manufacturers are allowed to 
eliminate entire dealerships regardless of clear precedent that 
protects dealers' rights. Chrysler and GM are being allowed to operate 
as the ``exception to the rule.'' This is unfair to our communities 
that depend on auto dealers and represents a clear federal level 
assault on state franchise laws.
  Congress must take action to save our dealerships, communities, and 
American jobs.
  Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3435, the Consumer 
Assistance to Recycle and Save (CARS) Program, or the ``Cash for 
Clunkers'' initiative.
  This additional $2 billion in funding will help promote automotive 
sales and protect our environment. In the past week, it is estimated 
that 250,000 cars were sold. On both sides of the aisle, people 
acknowledged the effectiveness of this initiative. I am proud to 
support its extension.

[[Page H9240]]

  I also ask for special consideration and clarification on an 
important part of this bill. As it currently stands, if one spouse owns 
the title to a ``clunker'' and the other spouse holds the registration, 
that couple is not eligible to participate in the program. I believe 
that consideration to married couples should be afforded more 
flexibility and that regardless of the registration/title 
configuration, those married couples should be able to participate.
  Finally, this is a very positive, bipartisan initiative to help our 
auto industry, to help consumers, to grow our economy, and to do it in 
an environmentally sound way.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 3435.
  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. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 697, this 15-minute vote on the motion 
to suspend the rules will be followed by 5-minute votes on adoption of 
the Frank amendment, as modified, to H.R. 3269; adoption of the Garrett 
amendment to H.R. 3269.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 316, 
nays 109, answered ``present'' 2, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 682]

                               YEAS--316

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Adler (NJ)
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blunt
     Boccieri
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Bright
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cao
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Childers
     Chu
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Driehaus
     Duncan
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Gerlach
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gonzalez
     Gordon (TN)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Kucinich
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NY)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Massa
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMahon
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Minnick
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nye
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Putnam
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Taylor
     Teague
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wexler
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                               NAYS--109

     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachmann
     Baird
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Boozman
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Burgess
     Cantor
     Carter
     Chaffetz
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Dent
     Doggett
     Fallin
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Giffords
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan (OH)
     King (IA)
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Marshall
     McCarthy (CA)
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Mitchell
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy (NY)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Olson
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Peterson
     Polis (CO)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radanovich
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Sullivan
     Thornberry
     Tierney
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Young (AK)

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--2

     Buchanan
     Deal (GA)
       

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Gohmert
     Harper
     Linder
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul
     Salazar

                              {time}  1324

  Messrs. COFFMAN of Colorado, BLUMENAUER and BAIRD and Ms. JENKINS 
changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. BACHUS changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and 
the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________