[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 23 (Tuesday, February 23, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H693-H696]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2314, NATIVE HAWAIIAN GOVERNMENT
REORGANIZATION ACT OF 2009
Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 1083 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 1083
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it
shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R.
2314) to express the policy of the United States regarding
the United States relationship with Native Hawaiians and to
provide a process for the recognition by the United States of
the Native Hawaiian governing entity. All points of order
against consideration of the bill are waived except those
arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The bill shall be
considered as read. All points of order against provisions of
the bill are waived. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment
thereto to final passage without intervening motion except:
(1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the
chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural
Resources; (2) the amendment in the nature of a substitute
printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules
accompanying this resolution, if offered by Representative
Abercrombie of Hawaii or his designee, which shall be in
order without intervention of any point of order except those
arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI, shall be considered
as read, and shall be separately debatable for 30 minutes
equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an
opponent; (3) the amendments to the amendment in the nature
of a substitute printed in part B of the report of the
Committee on Rules, each of which may be offered only by a
Member designed in the report, shall be in order without
intervention of any point of order except those arising under
clause 10 of rule XXI, shall be considered as read, and shall
be separately debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and
controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and (4) one
motion to recommit with or without instructions.
Sec. 2. During consideration of an amendment printed in
part B of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying
this resolution, the Chair may postpone the question of
adoption as though under clause 8 of rule XX.
{time} 1615
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized
for 1 hour.
Mr. POLIS. For the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30
minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart). All time
yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
General Leave
Mr. POLIS. I also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5
legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House
Resolution 1083.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Colorado?
There was no objection.
Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, House Resolution 1083 provides for
consideration of H.R. 2314, the Native Hawaiian Government
Reorganization Act of 2009, under a structured rule. The rule provides
for 1 hour of debate in the House, controlled by the Committee on
Natural Resources. The rule waives all points of order against
consideration of the bill, except for clauses 9 and 10 of rule XXI. The
rule makes in order an amendment in the nature of a substitute by
Representative Abercrombie, which is debatable for 30 minutes. The rule
also makes in order two second-degree amendments to the substitute. The
amendments are to be offered by Representative Hastings of Washington
and by Representative Flake of Arizona. The amendments are each
debatable for 10 minutes. Finally, the rule provides one motion to
recommit, with or without instructions.
Madam Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Rahall and the hardworking
staff of the Natural Resources Committee for their dedication to the
health and welfare of the many native peoples of this country and
particularly for their work on this important legislation.
I also want to thank my colleagues from Hawaii, Congressman
Abercrombie and Congresswoman Hirono, for bringing this legislation
forward in the House, as well as the bill's original author, Senator
Akaka, for his tireless work on behalf of the people of Hawaii in the
Senate.
Our diversity is not only what makes us great but also what makes us
American. My home State of Colorado is a beautiful land with awe-
inspiring mountains and rugged landscapes, but the people are who make
it truly beautiful. Colorado's rich history and diverse culture is
interwoven with the Apache, Arapaho, Cheyenne, Pueblo, Shoshone, and
Ute peoples, who helped found our State and who continue to play such
an important role in our vibrant diversity today.
While Hawaiians celebrate the sun and while Coloradans treasure the
snow, the same connection between land and people can be found in the
unique beauty of Hawaii.
As we have seen in Colorado, with the Southern Ute and Ute Mountain
Ute and across the country, the U.S. has a longstanding policy of
providing its indigenous people--those who exercised sovereignty until
the United States expanded its borders into their homeland--with an
opportunity to organize, to protect and to perpetuate their cultures
and traditions and to look out for their interests. It is only right
that all indigenous people should have a right to determine how they
should interact with our government. This bill merely brings about
parity in the U.S. treatment of its indigenous people--American
Indians, Alaska natives and Native Hawaiians.
H.R. 2314 would establish a Native Hawaiian interim governing council
to develop elements of the organic governing documents and other
criteria for the Native Hawaiian governing entity. These documents
would detail the powers and authorities of the governing entity, but
they would also include membership criteria as well as requirements for
the election of government officials.
[[Page H694]]
The Secretary of the Interior would be required to certify that the
organic documents meet specified criteria and are consistent with
applicable Federal law and our Constitution. After this certification,
the government-to-government relationship with the Native Hawaiians
should be reaffirmed.
It is also worth mentioning that these were the conditions set
forward by the United States and that Hawaii agreed to in Statehood.
These conditions of Statehood were set forth in the Admissions Act,
signed August 21, 1959, which posed that the State of Hawaii would
assume administration of the congressionally established Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act trust, as well as ensure that former Hawaiian Government
public lands held in trust would be utilized for one of five purposes,
including the betterment of the conditions of Native Hawaiians.
Like American Indians, Native Hawaiians have no other homeland to
keep their culture alive. Like American Indians, disenfranchisement has
left Native Hawaiians at the bottom of national health, education and
economic rankings. Through all of this, however, Native Hawaiians
continue to maintain their cultural identity and dignity as a distinct
native community.
This bill would reaffirm the Federal delegation of authority to the
State of Hawaii, found in the State's Admissions Act, and would provide
Native Hawaiians with the tools and status needed to preserve their
vibrant culture and unique heritage for future generations.
Last year, Madam Speaker, Hawaii celebrated the 50th anniversary of
its Statehood. It is long past time that Congress grants the same
opportunity for self-determination to Native Hawaiians.
In 2000, the Hawaii Congressional Delegation offered the first Native
Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act. Since then, Congress has held
six joint hearings of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs and of the
House Natural Resources Committee, five of which were in Hawaii, with a
total of 12 congressional hearings within the last 9 years on the
issue. The House has passed this legislation twice, in the 106th and
110th Congresses.
While the bill has evolved over the years and has received input from
many stakeholders, it has maintained true to its intent to extend the
Federal policy of self-governance and self-determination to Native
Hawaiians for the purposes of a federally recognized government-to-
government relationship. This has received broad support from
organizations and people across the ideological spectrum and the State
of Hawaii.
As a Representative of Native Americans who live in Colorado's Second
Congressional District, I urge my colleagues in Congress to join me in
passing this rule to honor and respect, not just this generation, but
future generations of Native Hawaiians and to promote the diversity of
cultures everywhere that make our country so great. I ask you to end
half a century of neglect and to provide the Native Hawaiians with the
same representation provided to other native peoples across the
country.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I would like to thank my friend,
the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis) for the time, and I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
Last week, the Department of Labor, Madam Speaker, reported that
Americans filed 473,000 jobless claims in the week ending February 13.
That is an increase of 31,000 more claims than the previous week. It is
truly unfortunate that the number of jobless claims continues to rise 1
year after the passage of the massive so-called ``stimulus bill.''
Take, for example, the district that I am honored to represent.
According to Recovery.gov, the administration's stimulus Web site, the
stimulus bill spent $185 million to create 310 jobs. That was at a cost
of $600,000 per job.
Now, Madam Speaker, what worries me even more than the $1 trillion
so-called ``stimulus bill'' is the fact that it continues the process
of adding to our national debt at a time when we can least afford it.
It is expected that the deficit, in large part due to the waste of
money in the stimulus bill, is set to hit a record $1.6 trillion. The
U.S. economy is dangerously close to the catastrophic precipice of
uncontrollable debt. We must urgently alter Washington's fiscal course
before the American middle class, as we know it, is relegated to the
history books.
Why do I mention the stimulus and the state of our economy? To point
out that, while our economy continues to stumble and to stutter and as
jobless claims rise, the majority has decided to pass legislation that
would recognize Native Hawaiians as a sovereign governing entity. Now,
just 2 months ago, the distinguished Speaker declared that her party
should be judged on the issue of ``jobs, jobs, jobs.''
How does the bill before us today have anything to do with job
creation?
I understand that this is the last week in Congress for my good
friend, one of the most respected Members of this House, Representative
Abercrombie. I know I join all Members of the House in thanking him for
his great work as a Member of this House and also for his friendship.
As I say, I have great respect for him.
Last night, he testified before the Rules Committee about his work on
the underlying legislation. He told us that he first began working on
this issue when he was in the Hawaii legislature in 1974. It was very
clear from his testimony that this is a very important issue for him,
and I congratulate him for his hard work.
Yet there is an undeniable issue here that I have made reference to
that was pointed out in terms of its importance to the American people
by a recent opinion research poll which found that 84 percent of
Americans think that Congress has not done enough for the creation of
jobs. I think what the majority is doing today will simply reinforce
that belief by the American people.
Madam Speaker, I thank the majority for their uncharacteristic
generosity in allowing the House to debate both of the Republican
amendments submitted to the Rules Committee for consideration.
Unfortunately, over a year into this Congress, the purportedly most
open and bipartisan Congress in history, the majority has yet to allow
even one open rule. That's quite unfortunate, but yet it is business as
usual for the majority to continue to claim bipartisanship while
working to block full and open debate.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, again, I would like to establish that there
were exactly two amendments proposed to this piece of legislation, both
by members of the Republican Party, and both will be allowed for floor
consideration under this rule.
With that, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms.
Hirono).
Ms. HIRONO. Thank you very much.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule for H.R. 2314, the
Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act.
I appreciate the leadership of Chairwoman Slaughter, of Congressman
Polis and of the work of the Rules Committee in crafting a fair rule.
All amendments submitted to the Rules Committee were made in order,
including two amendments from the minority.
As coauthor of this bill, I am concerned about the impact and intent
of the Hastings and Flake amendments. However, the openness and
fairness of the rule is consistent with a bill that has been more than
10 years in the making.
There have been 12 congressional hearings on this bill, five of which
were held in Hawaii. It has been marked up by committees in both
Chambers. The House passed the bill twice--first in 2000 and again in
2007.
The rule also makes in order the Abercrombie substitute amendment,
which reflects a compromise between the Hawaii Congressional
Delegation, the State of Hawaii, the Obama administration, Indian
Country, and the Native Hawaiian community.
There have been many falsehoods and inaccurate statements made about
this bill over the years. One of the many misrepresentations is that
this bill is race-based legislation. Native Hawaiians are the native
indigenous people of Hawaii. They were in Hawaii as long ago as 300
B.C., long before Captain Cook's so-called ``discovery'' of the
Sandwich Isles, as he named this chain of islands.
[[Page H695]]
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that legislation enacted
to address the special needs and conditions of the native people of the
United States does not constitute discrimination on the basis of race
or ethnicity.
The sovereign status of Indian tribes recognized by the Constitution
was later extended to Alaska natives as indigenous people. On this same
basis, Congress has enacted legislation for the aboriginal, indigenous
people of Hawaii. The Constitution, including the Indian affairs
powers, extends to the original and all subsequently acquired territory
of the United States.
For example, in the Louisiana Purchase Treaty of 1803, President
Thomas Jefferson bound the United States to honor the treaties between
Spain, which held Louisiana prior to France, and Indian tribes until
such time as the United States entered into its own treaties with the
tribes.
In 1867, in the Treaty of Cession with Russia for what is now the
State of Alaska, the United States agreed to pass laws for the benefit
of Alaska natives just as it does for natives in the lower 48 States.
The Supreme Court ruled in Sandoval v. United States that the Indian
affairs power extends to all distinctly native communities within the
borders of the United States.
While Congress' authority is not without limit, it clearly can act on
behalf of ``distinctly Indian''--which means ``native''--communities.
Congress, so long as it is not arbitrary, may rationally act to benefit
the native people. Native Hawaiians are distinctly native. They have
their own sovereign nation. They have their own language, culture,
religion, traditional economy. They are the aboriginal, indigenous
people of Hawaii.
I urge my colleagues to support the passage of this rule.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I yield back the
balance of my time.
{time} 1630
Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, for more than 200 years, Congress, the
executive branch, and the Supreme Court have recognized certain legal
rights and protections for America's indigenous people. It's the moral
and legal responsibility of Congress to reaffirm a political
relationship with the native peoples of Hawaii, and H.R. 2314 will
achieve this purpose.
Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to pass this very fair rule that
includes both Republican amendments that were filed and to allow for
the further consideration of this bill on the floor of the House of
Representatives.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of H.R. 2314,
the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2009.
I want to thank my dear friend and colleague Congressman Neil
Abercrombie of Hawaii who introduced this legislation. As cochair of
the Native American Caucus, I have had the privilege of working
alongside him over the years to fight for a strong agenda for our
Native communities.
I applaud him for his work on this legislation that will finally
reaffirm the inherent sovereignty of the Native Hawaiian people. His
dedication over the years should be commended and his service and
friendship will be greatly missed.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation will once and for all clarify the
relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States Government.
Congress has passed over 150 statutes addressing the needs of Native
Hawaiians. In 1993, Congress passed an apology bill acknowledging the
role of the Unites States Government in the overthrow of the Hawaiian
Nation in 1893. That bill recognized that the Native Hawaiians never
directly relinquished their inherent sovereignty.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2314, will finally provide for the reorganization
of a Native Hawaiian Government and provides for Federal recognition of
the Native Hawaiians.
It is long past time that we clarify that status of Native Hawaiians
in this country. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this
important legislation for Native Hawaiians.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2314,
legislation that has been championed by the Senators from the State of
Hawaii in the other body and our colleagues in the House of
Representatives representing the Aloha State. Those of us who are
privileged to serve on the Committee on Natural Resources with our
colleague, the distinguished gentleman from Hawaii, Mr. Abercrombie,
have witnessed his tireless efforts on behalf of preserving Native
Hawaiian culture and in improving the federal relationship with the
Native Hawaiian people. His passion and deep resolve on the issues
important to his State and our country, as well as working class
families, is revered and respected. It is fitting that the House take
up this legislation during his final days of service in this Congress,
and I want to emphasize on behalf of the people of Guam, who I
represent, my support for its swift passage and enactment.
This is an indigenous peoples issue, and the indigenous peoples of
the offshore territories are especially sensitive to the situation at-
hand with regard to Native Hawaiians. Our governance system must be
devised and shaped to respect their culture and to allow for their
needs to be adequately addressed. I ask Members to recall the history
of the annexation of their islands under the U.S. Flag and the
overthrow of their Kingdom, for which Congress has previously
recognized and extended an apology. There are unique historical
circumstances which give rise to this debate and to this legislation.
We have heard today the passionate and thoughtfully expressed appeals
for our favorable action on the question of passage before us. We
should be moved not only by the gravity of this debate, but also by the
impartial review of the facts before us and because of what this means
for our country and our obligations as legislators.
The native people of the Hawaiian Islands deserve no less than our
resolve to accord them due legal rights and protections consistent with
our national trust and obligation to native peoples of the lands for
which the U.S. Flag now flies. Through passage of H.R. 2314 we will
affirm a political relationship between our national Government
directly with the native people of these beautiful islands. It is a
relationship whose formation in the construct proposed by the
legislation is entirely fitting and appropriate in the context of case
law and precedent. It is merely because of historical circumstances
that we are called to action now, 50 years after statehood. I support
the substitute amendment, and the purpose of the underlying bill. I
wish our colleague, Mr. Abercrombie, the best in all of his future
endeavors and thank him for his service in this institution and commend
him for his work on this important legislation. I urge passage of H.R.
2314.
Mr. HONDA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support for H.R.
2314, the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2009.
Passage of this legislation is a top priority of the Congressional
Asian Pacific American Caucus, which I currently chair.
I commend Representative Neil Abercrombie, sponsor of the bill, and
the House Committee on Natural Resources for recognizing the importance
of self-determination to the Native Hawaiian people.
In 1893, the monarchy of the Kingdom of Hawai'i was overthrown by
agents of the United States. This has created wounds and issues that
have never been addressed or resolved. The United States took an
important first step in reconciling this part of history by passing a
resolution which acknowledged the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai'i
and offered an apology to Native Hawaiians.
While these are laudable efforts, H.R. 2314 would continue the
reconciliation and healing process by providing Native Hawaiians the
same right of self governance and self determination that is afforded
to other indigenous peoples. Since Hawaii was annexed as a territory,
the United States has treated Native Hawaiians in a manner similar to
that of American Indians and Alaska Natives. This bill would formalize
that relationship and establish parity in federal policies towards all
of our indigenous peoples.
I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 2314 and afford Native
Hawaiians the opportunity for self determination and self governance.
Mr. POLIS. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the
previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. POLIS. Madam 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 adopting House Resolution 1083 will be followed by 5-
minute votes on motions to suspend the rules with regard to:
House Resolution 1066;
House Resolution 1059;
House Resolution 1039; and
House Resolution 1046.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 238,
nays 165, not voting 29, as follows:
[[Page H696]]
[Roll No. 51]
YEAS--238
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Adler (NJ)
Altmire
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boccieri
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Cao
Capuano
Cardoza
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Childers
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Giffords
Gonzalez
Gordon (TN)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson, E. B.
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Massa
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McMahon
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Spratt
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Whitfield
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
NAYS--165
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Boehner
Bonner
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Crenshaw
Davis (KY)
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
Fallin
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Griffith
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Himes
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Olson
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Putnam
Rehberg
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--29
Andrews
Barrett (SC)
Blunt
Bono Mack
Cantor
Capps
Carnahan
Costello
Culberson
Garamendi
Grijalva
Hinojosa
Hodes
Hoekstra
Johnson (GA)
Mack
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Payne
Price (GA)
Radanovich
Reichert
Ros-Lehtinen
Ryan (OH)
Sires
Speier
Stark
Wamp
Wilson (OH)
{time} 1657
Messrs. WILSON of South Carolina, SMITH of Nebraska, and NUNES
changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. HEINRICH changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________