[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 101 (Thursday, July 1, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H5358-H5407]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2010
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1500, I call up
the bill (H.R. 4899) making emergency supplemental appropriations for
disaster relief and summer jobs for the fiscal year ending September
30, 2010, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendments thereto,
and offer the motion.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the Senate
amendments.
The text of the Senate amendments is as follows:
Senate amendments:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:
That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in
the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes, namely:
[[Page H5359]]
TITLE I
CHAPTER 1
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Farm Service Agency
agricultural credit insurance fund program account
For an additional amount for gross obligations for the
principal amount of direct and guaranteed farm ownership (7
U.S.C. 1922 et seq.) and operating (7 U.S.C. 1941 et seq.)
loans, to be available from funds in the Agricultural Credit
Insurance Fund, as follows: guaranteed farm ownership loans,
$300,000,000; operating loans, $650,000,000, of which
$250,000,000 shall be for unsubsidized guaranteed loans,
$50,000,000 shall be for subsidized guaranteed loans, and
$350,000,000 shall be for direct loans.
For an additional amount for the cost of direct and
guaranteed loans, including the cost of modifying loans as
defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, as follows: guaranteed farm ownership loans,
$1,110,000; operating loans, $29,470,000, of which $5,850,000
shall be for unsubsidized guaranteed loans, $7,030,000 shall
be for subsidized guaranteed loans, and $16,590,000 shall be
for direct loans.
For an additional amount for administrative expenses
necessary to carry out the direct and guaranteed loan
programs, $1,000,000.
Emergency Forest Restoration Program
For implementation of the emergency forest restoration
program established under section 407 of the Agricultural
Credit Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2206) for expenses resulting
from natural disasters that occurred on or after January 1,
2010, and for other purposes, $18,000,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That the program: (1)
shall be carried out without regard to chapter 35 of title
44, United States Code (commonly known as the ``Paperwork
Reduction Act'') and the Statement of Policy of the Secretary
of Agriculture effective July 24, 1971 (36 Fed. Reg. 13804),
relating to notices of proposed rulemaking and public
participation in rulemaking; and (2) with rules issued
without a prior opportunity for notice and comment except, as
determined to be appropriate by the Farm Service Agency,
rules may be promulgated by an interim rule effective on
publication with an opportunity for notice and comment:
Provided further, That in carrying out this program, the
Secretary shall use the authority provided under section
808(2) of title 5, United States Code: Provided further, That
to reduce Federal costs in administering this heading, the
emergency forest restoration program shall be considered to
have met the requirements of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) for activities
similar in nature and quantity to those of the emergency
conservation program established under title IV of the
Agricultural Credit Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.).
Foreign Agricultural Service
food for peace title ii grants
For an additional amount for ``Food for Peace Title II
Grants'' for emergency relief and rehabilitation, and other
expenses related to Haiti following the earthquake of January
12, 2010, and for other disaster-response activities relating
to the earthquake, $150,000,000, to remain available until
expended.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Section 101. None of the funds appropriated or made
available by this or any other Act shall be used to pay the
salaries and expenses of personnel to carry out a biomass
crop assistance program as authorized by section 9011 of
Public Law 107-171 in excess of $552,000,000 in fiscal year
2010 or $432,000,000 in fiscal year 2011: Provided, That
section 3002 shall not apply to the amount under this
section.
Sec. 102. (a) Section 502(h)(8) of the Housing Act of 1949
(42 U.S.C. 1472(h)(8)) is amended to read as follows:
``(8) Fees.--Notwithstanding paragraph (14)(D), with
respect to a guaranteed loan issued or modified under this
subsection, the Secretary may collect from the lender--
``(A) at the time of issuance of the guarantee or
modification, a fee not to exceed 3.5 percent of the
principal obligation of the loan; and
``(B) an annual fee not to exceed 0.5 percent of the
outstanding principal balance of the loan for the life of the
loan.''.
(b) Section 739 of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriation
Act, 2001 (H.R. 5426 as enacted by Public Law 106-387, 115
Stat. 1549A-34) is repealed.
(c) For gross obligations for the principal amount of
guaranteed loans as authorized by title V of the Housing Act
of 1949, to be available from funds in the rural housing
insurance fund, an additional amount shall be for section 502
unsubsidized guaranteed loans sufficient to meet the
remaining fiscal year 2010 demand, provided that existing
program underwriting standards are maintained, and provided
further that the Secretary may waive fees described herein
for very low- and low-income borrowers, not to exceed
$697,000,000 in loan guarantees.
CHAPTER 2
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(rescission)
Of the funds made available under the heading ``National
Telecommunications and Information Administration'' for
Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Program in prior years,
$111,500,000 are rescinded.
Economic Development Administration
economic development assistance programs
Pursuant to section 703 of the Public Works and Economic
Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3233), for an additional amount
for ``Economic Development Assistance Programs'', for
necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long-term
recovery, and restoration of infrastructure in States that
experienced damage due to severe storms and flooding during
March 2010 through May 2010 for which the President declared
a major disaster covering an entire State or States with more
than 20 counties declared major disasters under title IV of
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act of 1974, $49,000,000, to remain available
until expended.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
operations, research, and facilities
For an additional amount for ``Operations, Research, and
Facilities'', $5,000,000, for necessary expenses related to
commercial fishery failures as determined by the Secretary of
Commerce in January 2010.
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Exploration
The matter contained in title III of division B of Public
Law 111-117 regarding ``National Aeronautics and Space
Administration Exploration'' is amended by inserting at the
end of the last proviso ``: Provided further, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law or regulation,
funds made available for Constellation in fiscal year 2010
for `National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Exploration' and from previous appropriations for `National
Aeronautics and Space Administration Exploration' shall be
available to fund continued performance of Constellation
contracts, and performance of such Constellation contracts
may not be terminated for convenience by the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration in fiscal year 2010''.
CHAPTER 3
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--MILITARY
MILITARY PERSONNEL
Military Personnel, Army
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Army'',
$1,429,809,000.
Military Personnel, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Navy'',
$40,478,000.
Military Personnel, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Marine
Corps'', $145,499,000.
Military Personnel, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Air
Force'', $94,068,000.
Reserve Personnel, Army
For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Army'',
$5,722,000.
Reserve Personnel, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Navy'',
$2,637,000.
Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Marine
Corps'', $34,758,000.
Reserve Personnel, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Air
Force'', $1,292,000.
National Guard Personnel, Army
For an additional amount for ``National Guard Personnel,
Army'', $33,184,000.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Operation and Maintenance, Army
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army'', $11,719,927,000, of which $218,300,000 shall be
available to restore amounts transferred from this account to
``Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid'' for
emergency relief activities related to Haiti following the
earthquake of January 12, 2010, and for other disaster-
response activities relating to the earthquake.
Operation and Maintenance, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Navy'', $2,735,194,000, of which $187,600,000 shall be
available to restore amounts transferred from this account to
``Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid'' for
emergency relief activities related to Haiti following the
earthquake of January 12, 2010, and for other disaster-
response activities relating to the earthquake.
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Marine Corps'', $829,326,000, of which $30,700,000 shall be
available to restore amounts transferred from this account to
``Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid'' for
emergency relief activities related to Haiti following the
earthquake of January 12, 2010, and for other disaster-
response activities relating to the earthquake.
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Air Force'', $3,835,095,000, of which $218,400,000 shall be
available to restore amounts transferred from this account to
``Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid'' for
emergency relief activities related to Haiti following the
earthquake of January 12, 2010, and for other disaster-
response activities relating to the earthquake.
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide'', $1,236,727,000: Provided, That up to
$50,000,000, to remain available until expended, shall be
available for transfer to the Port of Guam Improvement
Enterprise Fund established by section 3512 of the Duncan
Hunter National Defense Authorization
[[Page H5360]]
Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417): Provided
further, That funds transferred under the previous proviso
shall be merged with and available for obligation for the
same time period and for the same purposes as the
appropriation to which transferred: Provided further, That
these funds may be transferred by the Secretary of Defense
only if he determines such amounts are required to improve
facilities, relieve port congestion, and provide greater
access to port facilities: Provided further, That any amounts
transferred pursuant to the previous three provisos shall be
available to the Secretary of Transportation, acting through
the Administrator of the Maritime Administration, to carry
out under the Port of Guam Improvement Enterprise Program
planning, design, and construction of projects for the Port
of Guam to improve facilities, relieve port congestion, and
provide greater access to port facilities: Provided further,
That the transfer authority in this section is in addition to
any other transfer authority available to the Department of
Defense: Provided further, That the Secretary shall, not
fewer than five days prior to making transfers under this
authority, notify the congressional defense committees in
writing of the details of any such transfer.
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army Reserve'', $41,006,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Navy Reserve'', $75,878,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Marine Corps Reserve'', $857,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Air Force Reserve'', $124,039,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army National Guard'', $180,960,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Air National Guard'', $203,287,000.
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund
For an additional amount for ``Afghanistan Security Forces
Fund'', $2,604,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2011: Provided, That such funds shall be available to the
Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding any other provision of
law, for the purpose of allowing the Commander, Combined
Security Transition Command--Afghanistan, or the Secretary's
designee, to provide assistance, with the concurrence of the
Secretary of State, to the security forces of Afghanistan,
including the provision of equipment, supplies, services,
training, facility and infrastructure repair, renovation, and
construction, and funding: Provided further, That the
authority to provide assistance under this heading is in
addition to any other authority to provide assistance to
foreign nations: Provided further, That contributions of
funds for the purposes provided herein from any person,
foreign government, or international organization may be
credited to this Fund, to remain available until expended,
and used for such purposes: Provided further, That the
Secretary shall notify the congressional defense committees
in writing upon the receipt and upon the transfer of any
contribution, delineating the sources and amounts of the
funds received and the specific use of such contributions:
Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall, not
fewer than 15 days prior to making transfers from this
appropriation account, notify the congressional defense
committees in writing of the details of any such transfer.
Iraq Security Forces Fund
For the ``Iraq Security Forces Fund'', $1,000,000,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2011: Provided, That
such funds shall be available to the Secretary of Defense,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, for the purpose
of allowing the Commander, United States Forces--Iraq, or the
Secretary's designee, to provide assistance, with the
concurrence of the Secretary of State, to the security forces
of Iraq, including the provision of equipment, supplies,
services, training, facility and infrastructure repair, and
renovation: Provided further, That the authority to provide
assistance under this heading is in addition to any other
authority to provide assistance to foreign nations: Provided
further, That contributions of funds for the purposes
provided herein from any person, foreign government, or
international organization may be credited to this Fund, to
remain available until expended, and used for such purposes:
Provided further, That the Secretary shall notify the
congressional defense committees in writing upon the receipt
and upon the transfer of any contribution, delineating the
sources and amounts of the funds received and the specific
use of such contributions: Provided further, That the
Secretary of Defense shall, not fewer than 15 days prior to
making transfers from this appropriation account, notify the
congressional defense committees in writing of the details of
any such transfer.
PROCUREMENT
Aircraft Procurement, Army
For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement,
Army'', $219,470,000, to remain available until September 30,
2012.
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Weapons and
Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army'', $3,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2012.
Procurement of Ammunition, Army
For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Ammunition,
Army'', $17,055,000, to remain available until September 30,
2012.
Other Procurement, Army
For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Army'',
$2,065,006,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement,
Navy'', $296,000,000, to remain available until September 30,
2012.
Other Procurement, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Navy'',
$31,576,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.
Procurement, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Marine Corps'',
$162,927,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement, Air
Force'', $174,766,000, to remain available until September
30, 2012.
Other Procurement, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Air
Force'', $672,741,000, to remain available until September
30, 2012.
Procurement, Defense-Wide
For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'',
$189,276,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.
Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle Fund
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for the ``Mine Resistant Ambush
Protected Vehicle Fund'', $1,123,000,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2011: Provided, That such funds shall be
available to the Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding any
other provision of law, to procure, sustain, transport, and
field Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles: Provided
further, That the Secretary shall transfer such funds only to
appropriations for operations and maintenance; procurement;
research, development, test and evaluation; and defense
working capital funds to accomplish the purpose provided
herein: Provided further, That the funds transferred shall be
merged with and available for the same purposes and the same
time period as the appropriation to which they are
transferred: Provided further, That this transfer authority
is in addition to any other transfer authority available to
the Department of Defense: Provided further, That the
Secretary shall, not fewer than 10 days prior to making
transfers from this appropriation, notify the congressional
defense committees in writing of the details of any such
transfer.
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Navy'', $44,835,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2011.
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Air Force'', $163,775,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2011.
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'', $65,138,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2011.
REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS
Defense Working Capital Funds
For an additional amount for ``Defense Working Capital
Funds'', $1,134,887,000, to remain available until expended.
OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS
Defense Health Program
For an additional amount for ``Defense Health Program'',
$33,367,000 for operation and maintenance: Provided, That
language under this heading in title VI, division A of Public
Law 111-118 is amended by striking ``$15,093,539,000'' and
inserting in lieu thereof ``$15,121,714,000''.
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Drug Interdiction and
Counter-Drug Activities, Defense'', $94,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2011.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 301. Funds appropriated by this Act, or made
available by the transfer of funds in this Act, for
intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically
authorized by the Congress for purposes of section 504(a)(1)
of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 414(a)(1)):
Provided, That section 8079 of the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-118; 123 Stat. 3446)
is amended by striking ``fiscal year 2010 until'' and all
that follows and insert ``fiscal year 2010.''.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 302. Section 8005 of the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 2010 (division A of Public Law 111-118)
is amended by striking ``$4,000,000,000'' and inserting
``$4,500,000,000''.
Sec. 303. Funds made available in this chapter to the
Department of Defense for operation and
[[Page H5361]]
maintenance may be used to purchase items having an
investment unit cost of not more than $250,000: Provided,
That upon determination by the Secretary of Defense that such
action is necessary to meet the operational requirements of a
Commander of a Combatant Command engaged in contingency
operations overseas, such funds may be used to purchase items
having an investment item unit cost of not more than
$500,000.
Sec. 304. Of the funds obligated or expended by any
Federal agency in support of emergency humanitarian
assistance services at the request of or in coordination with
the Department of Defense, the Department of State, or the
U.S. Agency for International Development, on or after
January 12, 2010 and before February 12, 2010, in support of
the Haitian earthquake relief efforts not to exceed $500,000
are deemed to be specifically authorized by the Congress.
Sec. 305. Section 8011 of the title VIII, division A of
Public Law 111-118 is amended by striking ``within 30 days of
enactment of this Act'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``30
days prior to contract award''.
(rescissions)
Sec. 306. (a) Of the funds appropriated in Department of
Defense Appropriation Acts, the following funds are hereby
rescinded from the following accounts and programs in the
specified amounts:
``Other Procurement, Air Force, 2009/2011'', $5,000,000;
and
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, 2009/
2010'', $72,161,000.
(b) Section 3002 shall not apply to the amounts in this
section.
Sec. 307. None of the funds provided in this chapter may
be used to finance programs or activities denied by Congress
in fiscal years 2009 or 2010 appropriations to the Department
of Defense or to initiate a procurement or research,
development, test and evaluation new start program without
prior written notification to the congressional defense
committees.
high-value detainee interrogation group charter and report
Sec. 308. (a) Submission of Charter and Procedures.--Not
later than 30 days after the final approval of the charter
and procedures for the interagency body established to carry
out an interrogation pursuant to a recommendation of the
report of the Special Task Force on interrogation and
Transfer Policies submitted under section 5(g) of Executive
Order 13491 (commonly known as the High-Value Detainee
Interrogation Group), or not later than 30 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, whichever is later, the
Director of National Intelligence shall submit to the
congressional intelligence committees such charter and
procedures.
(b) Updates.--Not later than 30 days after the final
approval of any significant modification or revision to the
charter or procedures referred to in subsection (a), the
Director of National Intelligence shall submit to the
congressional intelligence committees any such modification
or revision.
(c) Lessons Learned.--Not later than 60 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Director of National
Intelligence shall submit to the congressional intelligence
committees a report setting forth an analysis and assessment
of the lessons learned as a result of the operations and
activities of the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group
since the establishment of that group.
(d) Submittal of Charter and Reports to Additional
Committees of Congress.--At the same time the Director of
National Intelligence submits the charter and procedures
referred to in subsection (a), any modification or revision
to the charter or procedures under subsection (b), and any
report under subsection (c) to the congressional intelligence
committees, the Director shall also submit such matter to--
(1) the Committees on Armed Services, Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs, the Judiciary, and Appropriations of
the Senate; and
(2) the Committees on Armed Services, Homeland Security,
the Judiciary, and Appropriations of the House of
Representatives.
CHAPTER 4
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Corps of Engineers--Civil
investigations
For an additional amount for ``Investigations'',
$5,400,000: Provided, That funds provided under this heading
in this chapter shall be used for studies in States affected
by severe storms and flooding: Provided further, That the
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works shall provide
a monthly report to the Committees on Appropriations of the
House of Representatives and the Senate detailing the
allocation and obligation of these funds, beginning not later
than 60 days after enactment of this Act.
mississippi river and tributaries
For an additional amount for ``Mississippi River and
Tributaries'' to dredge eligible projects in response to, and
repair damages to Federal projects caused by, natural
disasters, $18,600,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil
Works shall provide a monthly report to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate
detailing the allocation and obligation of these funds,
beginning not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act.
operation and maintenance
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance''
to dredge navigation projects in response to, and repair
damages to Corps projects caused by, natural disasters,
$173,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided,
That the Secretary of the Army is directed to use $44,000,000
of the amount provided under this heading for nondisaster
related emergency repairs to critical infrastructure:
Provided further, That the Assistant Secretary of the Army
for Civil Works shall provide a monthly report to the
Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives
and the Senate detailing the allocation and obligation of
these funds, beginning not later than 60 days after enactment
of this Act.
flood control and coastal emergencies
For an additional amount for ``Flood Control and Coastal
Emergencies'', as authorized by section 5 of the Act of
August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n), for necessary expenses
relating to natural disasters as authorized by law,
$20,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided,
That the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works
shall provide a monthly report to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate
detailing the allocation and obligation of these funds,
beginning not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
emergency drought relief
Sec. 401. For an additional amount for ``Water and Related
Resources'', $10,000,000, for drought emergency assistance:
Provided, That financial assistance may be provided under the
Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 (43
U.S.C. 2201 et seq.) and any other applicable Federal law
(including regulations) for the optimization and conservation
of project water supplies to assist drought-plagued areas of
the West.
Sec. 402. Funds made available in the Energy and Water
Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010
(Public Law 111-85), under the account ``Weapons Activities''
shall be available for the purchase of not to exceed one
aircraft.
reclassification of certain appropriations for the national nuclear
security administration
Sec. 403. (a) Fiscal Year 2009 Appropriations.--The matter
under the heading ``Weapons Activities'' under the heading
``National Nuclear Security Administration'' under the
heading ``Atomic Energy Defense Activities'' under the
heading ``Department of Energy'' under title III of division
C of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8;
123 Stat. 621) is amended by striking ``the 09-D-007 LANSCE
Refurbishment, PED,'' and inserting ``capital equipment
acquisition, installation, and associated design funds for
LANSCE,''.
(b) Fiscal Year 2010 Appropriations.--The amount
appropriated under the heading ``Weapons Activities'' under
the heading ``National Nuclear Security Administration''
under the heading ``Atomic Energy Defense Activities'' under
the heading ``Department of Energy'' under title III of the
Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-85; 123 Stat. 2866)
and made available for LANSCE Reinvestment, PED, Los Alamos
National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico, shall be made
available instead for capital equipment acquisition,
installation, and associated design funds for LANSCE, Los
Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico.
Sec. 404. (a) Section 104(c) of the Reclamation States
Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 (43 U.S.C. 2214(c)) is
amended by striking ``September 30, 2010'' and inserting
``September 30, 2012'' in lieu thereof.
(b) Section 301 of the Reclamation States Emergency Drought
Relief Act of 1991 (43 U.S.C. 2241) is amended by striking
``through 2010'' and inserting ``through 2012'' in lieu
thereof.
Sec. 405. (a) The Secretary of the Army shall not be
required to make a determination under the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470, et seq.) for the
project for flood control, Trinity River and tributaries,
Texas, authorized by section 2 of the Act entitled ``An Act
authorizing the construction, repair, and preservation of
certain public works on rivers and harbors, and for other
purposes'', approved March 2, 1945 [59 Stat. 18], as modified
by section 5141 of the Water Resources Development Act of
2007 [121 Stat. 1253].
(b) The Federal Highway Administration is exempt from the
requirements of 49 U.S.C. 303 and 23 U.S.C. 138 for any
highway project to be constructed in the vicinity of the
Dallas Floodway, Dallas, Texas.
Sec. 406. (a) The Secretary of the Army may use funds made
available under the heading ``operation and maintenance'' of
this chapter to place, at full Federal expense, dredged
material available from maintenance dredging of existing
Federal navigation channels located in the Gulf Coast region
to mitigate the impacts of the Deepwater Horizon Oil spill in
the Gulf of Mexico.
(b) The Secretary of the Army shall coordinate the
placement of dredged material with appropriate Federal and
Gulf Coast State agencies.
(c) The placement of dredged material pursuant to this
section shall not be subject to a least-cost-disposal
analysis or to the development of a Chief of Engineers
report.
(d) Nothing in this section shall affect the ability or
authority of the Federal Government to recover costs from an
entity determined to be a responsible party in connection
with the Deepwater Horizon Oil spill pursuant to the Oil
Pollution Act of 1990 or any other applicable Federal statute
for actions undertaken pursuant to this section.
CHAPTER 5
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Departmental Offices
salaries and expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'' for
necessary expenses for emergency
[[Page H5362]]
relief, rehabilitation, and reconstruction aid, and other
expenses related to Haiti following the earthquake of January
12, 2010, and for other disaster-response activities relating
to the earthquake, $690,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That funds appropriated in this paragraph
may be used to reimburse obligations incurred for the
purposes provided herein prior to enactment of this Act.
Office of Inspector General
salaries and expenses
(rescission)
Of the amounts made available for necessary expenses of the
Office of Inspector General under this heading in Public Law
111-117, $1,800,000 are rescinded: Provided, That section
3002 shall not apply to the amount under this heading.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Federal Funds
federal payment to the public defender service for the district of
columbia
(including rescission)
For an additional amount for ``Federal Payment to the
Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia'',
$700,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.
Of the funds provided under this heading for ``Federal
Payment to the District of Columbia Public Defender Service''
in title IV of division D of Public Law 111-8, $700,000 are
rescinded: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the
amounts under this heading.
INDEPENDENT AGENCY
Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission
salaries and expenses
For the necessary expenses of the Financial Crisis Inquiry
Commission established pursuant to section 5 of the Fraud
Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-21),
$1,800,000, to remain available until February 15, 2011:
Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount
under this heading.
CHAPTER 6
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
operating expenses
For an additional amount for ``Operating Expenses'' for
necessary expenses and other disaster-response activities
related to Haiti following the earthquake of January 12,
2010, $50,000,000, to remain available until September 30,
2012.
acquisition, construction, and improvements
For an additional amount for ``Acquisition, Construction,
and Improvements'', $15,500,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2014, for aircraft replacement.
Federal Emergency Management Agency
disaster relief
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Disaster Relief'',
$5,100,000,000, to remain available until expended, of which
$5,000,000 shall be transferred to the Department of Homeland
Security Office of the Inspector General for audits and
investigations related to disasters.
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
For an additional amount for ``United States Citizenship
and Immigration Services'' for necessary expenses and other
disaster response activities related to Haiti following the
earthquake of January 12, 2010, $10,600,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2011.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 601. Notwithstanding the 10 percent limitation
contained in section 503(c) of Public Law 111-83, for fiscal
year 2010, the Secretary of Homeland Security may transfer to
the fund established by 8 U.S.C. 1101 note, up to
$20,000,000, from appropriations available to the Department
of Homeland Security: Provided, That the Secretary shall
notify the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and
House of Representatives 5 days in advance of such transfer.
(rescissions)
Sec. 602. (a) The following unobligated balances made
available pursuant to section 505 of Public Law 110-329 are
rescinded: $2,200,000 from Coast Guard ``Operating
Expenses''; $1,800,000 from the ``Office of the Secretary and
Executive Management''; and $489,152 from ``Analysis and
Operations''.
(b) The third clause of the proviso directing the
expenditure of funds under the heading ``Alteration of
Bridges'' in the Department of Homeland Security
Appropriations Act, 2009, is repealed, and from available
balances made available for Coast Guard ``Alteration of
Bridges'', $5,910,848 are rescinded: Provided, That funds
rescinded pursuant to this subsection shall exclude balances
made available in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
(c) From the unobligated balances of appropriations made
available in Public Law 111-83 to the ``Office of the Federal
Coordinator for Gulf Coast Rebuilding'', $700,000 are
rescinded.
(d) Section 3002 shall not apply to the amounts in this
section.
Sec. 603. The Administrator of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency shall consider satisfied for Hurricane
Katrina the non-Federal match requirement for assistance
provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency pursuant
to section 404(a) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5170c(a).
Sec. 604. Funds appropriated in Public Law 111-83 under
the heading National Protection and Programs Directorate
``Infrastructure Protection and Information Security'' shall
be available for facility upgrades and related costs to
establish a United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team
Operations Support Center/Continuity of Operations
capability.
Sec. 605. Two C-130J aircraft funded elsewhere in this Act
shall be transferred to the Coast Guard.
Sec. 606. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
including any agreement, the Federal share of assistance,
including direct Federal assistance provided under sections
403, 406, and 407 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5140b, 5172, and
5173), for damages resulting from FEMA-3311-EM-RI, FEMA-1894-
DR, FEMA-1906-DR, FEMA-1909-DR, and all other areas
Presidentially declared a disaster, prior to or following
enactment, and resulting from the May 1 and 2, 2010 weather
events that elicited FEMA-1909-DR, shall not be less than 90
percent of the eligible costs under such sections.
Sec. 607. (a) Not later than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Assistant Secretary for the
Transportation Security Administration shall issue a security
directive that requires a commercial foreign air carrier who
operates flights in and out of the United States to check the
list of individuals that the Transportation Security
Administration has prohibited from flying not later than 30
minutes after such list is modified and provided to such air
carrier.
(b) The requirements of subsection (a) shall not apply to
commercial foreign air carriers that operate flights in and
out of the United States and that are enrolled in the Secure
Flight program or that are Advance Passenger Information
System Quick Query (AQQ) compliant.
CHAPTER 7
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Departmental Management
salaries and expenses
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Departmental Management''
for mine safety activities and legal services related to the
Department of Labor's caseload before the Federal Mine Safety
and Health Review Commission (``FMSHRC''), $18,200,000, which
shall remain available for obligation through the date that
is 12 months after the date of enactment of this Act:
Provided, That the Secretary of Labor may transfer such sums
as necessary to the ``Mine Safety and Health Administration''
for enforcement and mine safety activities, which may include
conference litigation functions related to the FMSHRC
caseload, investigation of the Upper Big Branch Mine
disaster, standards and rulemaking activities, emergency
response equipment purchases and upgrades, and organizational
improvements: Provided further, That the Committees on
Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives
are notified at least 15 days in advance of any transfer.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Office of the Secretary
public health and social services emergency fund
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Public Health and Social
Services Emergency Fund'' for necessary expenses for
emergency relief and reconstruction aid, and other expenses
related to Haiti following the earthquake of January 12,
2010, and for other disaster-response activities relating to
the earthquake, $220,000,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That these funds may be transferred by
the Secretary to accounts within the Department of Health and
Human Services, shall be merged with the appropriation to
which transferred, and shall be available only for the
purposes provided herein: Provided further, That none of the
funds provided in this paragraph may be transferred prior to
notification of the Committees on Appropriations of the House
of Representatives and the Senate: Provided further, That the
transfer authority provided in this paragraph is in addition
to any other transfer authority available in this or any
other Act: Provided further, That funds appropriated in this
paragraph may be used to reimburse agencies for obligations
incurred for the purposes provided herein prior to enactment
of this Act: Provided further, That funds may be used for the
non-Federal share of expenditures for medical assistance
furnished under title XIX of the Social Security Act, and for
child health assistance furnished under title XXI of such
Act, that are related to earthquake response activities:
Provided further, That funds may be used for services
performed by the National Disaster Medical System in
connection with such earthquake, for the return of evacuated
Haitian citizens to Haiti, and for grants to States and other
entities to reimburse payments made for otherwise
uncompensated health and human services furnished in
connection with individuals given permission by the United
States Government to come from Haiti to the United States
after such earthquake, and not eligible for assistance under
such titles: Provided further, That the limitation in
subsection (d) of section 1113 of the Social Security Act
shall not apply with respect to any repatriation assistance
provided in response to the Haiti earthquake of January 12,
2010: Provided further, That with respect to the previous
proviso, such additional repatriation assistance shall only
be available from the funds appropriated herein.
[[Page H5363]]
RELATED AGENCY
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
salaries and expenses
For an additional amount for ``Federal Mine Safety and
Health Review Commission, Salaries and Expenses''$3,800,000,
to remain available for obligation for 12 months after
enactment of this Act.
CHAPTER 8
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Payment to Widows and Heirs of Deceased Members of Congress
For a payment to Joyce Murtha, widow of John P. Murtha,
late a Representative from Pennsylvania, $174,000: Provided,
That section 3002 shall not apply to this appropriation.
CAPITOL POLICE
General Expenses
For an additional amount for ``Capitol Police, General
Expenses'' to purchase and install the indoor coverage
portion of the new radio system for the Capitol Police,
$12,956,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012:
Provided, That the Chief of the Capitol Police may not
obligate any of the funds appropriated under this heading
without approval of an obligation plan by the Committees on
Appropriations of the Senate and the House of
Representatives.
CHAPTER 9
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Military Construction, Army
For an additional amount for ``Military Construction,
Army'', $242,296,000, to remain available until September 30,
2012: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of
law, such funds may be obligated and expended to carry out
planning and design and military construction projects not
otherwise authorized by law.
Military Construction, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Military Construction, Air
Force'', $406,590,000, to remain available until September
30, 2012: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision
of law, such funds may be obligated and expended to carry out
planning and design and military construction projects not
otherwise authorized by law.
Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Family Housing Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force'', $7,953,000.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Veterans Benefits Administration
compensation and pensions
For an additional amount for ``Compensation and Pensions'',
$13,377,189,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount
under this heading.
GENERAL PROVISION--THIS CHAPTER
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 901. (a) Of the amounts made available to the
Department of Veterans Affairs under the ``Construction,
Major Projects'' account, in fiscal year 2010 or previous
fiscal years, up to $67,000,000 may be transferred to the
``Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund'' account or may
be retained in the ``Construction, Major Projects'' account
and used by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for such major
medical facility projects (as defined under section 8104(a)
of title 38, United States Code) that have been authorized by
law as the Secretary considers appropriate: Provided, That
any amount transferred from ``Construction, Major Projects''
shall be derived from unobligated balances that are a direct
result of bid savings: Provided further, That no amounts may
be transferred from amounts that were designated by Congress
as an emergency requirement pursuant to the Concurrent
Resolution on the Budget or the Balanced Budget and Emergency
Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended.
(b) Section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in this
section.
limitation on use of funds available to the department of veterans
affairs
Sec. 902. The amount made available to the Department of
Veterans Affairs by this chapter under the heading ``Veterans
Benefits Administration'' under the heading ``compensation
and pensions'' may not be obligated or expended until the
expiration of the period for Congressional disapproval under
chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred
to as the ``Congressional Review Act''), of the regulations
prescribed by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs pursuant to
section 1116 of title 38, United States Code, to establish a
service connection between exposure of veterans to Agent
Orange during service in the Republic of Vietnam during the
Vietnam era and hairy cell leukemia and other chronic B cell
leukemias, Parkinson's disease, and ischemic heart disease.
CHAPTER 10
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Administration of Foreign Affairs
diplomatic and consular programs
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Diplomatic and Consular
Programs'', $1,261,000,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2011: Provided, That the Secretary of State may
transfer up to $149,500,000 of the total funds made available
under this heading to any other appropriation of any
department or agency of the United States, upon concurrence
of the head of such department or agency and after
consultation with the Committees on Appropriations, to
support operations in and assistance for Afghanistan and
Pakistan and to carry out the provisions of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961.
For an additional amount for ``Diplomatic and Consular
Programs'' for necessary expenses for emergency relief,
rehabilitation, and reconstruction support, and other
expenses related to Haiti following the earthquake of January
12, 2010, $65,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2011: Provided, That funds appropriated in this paragraph
may be used to reimburse obligations incurred for the
purposes provided herein prior to enactment of this Act:
Provided further, That up to $3,700,000 of the funds made
available in this paragraph may be transferred to, and merged
with, funds made available under the heading ``Emergencies in
the Diplomatic and Consular Service'': Provided further, That
up to $290,000 of the funds made available in this paragraph
may be transferred to, and merged with, funds made available
under the heading ``Repatriation Loans Program Account''.
office of inspector general
For an additional amount for ``Office of Inspector
General'' for necessary expenses for oversight of operations
and programs in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq, $3,600,000,
to remain available until September 30, 2013.
embassy security, construction, and maintenance
For an additional amount for ``Embassy Security,
Construction, and Maintenance'' for necessary expenses for
emergency needs in Haiti following the earthquake of January
12, 2010, $79,000,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That funds appropriated in this paragraph may be
used to reimburse obligations incurred for the purposes
provided herein prior to enactment of this Act.
International Organizations
contributions for international peacekeeping activities
For an additional amount for ``Contributions for
International Peacekeeping Activities'' for necessary
expenses for emergency security related to Haiti following
the earthquake of January 12, 2010, $96,500,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2011: Provided, That funds
appropriated in this paragraph may be used to reimburse
obligations incurred for the purposes provided herein prior
to enactment of this Act.
RELATED AGENCY
Broadcasting Board of Governors
international broadcasting operations
For an additional amount for ``International Broadcasting
Operations'' for necessary expenses for emergency
broadcasting support and other expenses related to Haiti
following the earthquake of January 12, 2010, $3,000,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2011: Provided, That
funds appropriated in this paragraph may be used to reimburse
obligations incurred for the purposes provided herein prior
to enactment of this Act.
UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Funds Appropriated to the President
office of inspector general
For an additional amount for ``Office of Inspector
General'' for necessary expenses for oversight of operations
and programs in Afghanistan and Pakistan, $3,400,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2013.
For an additional amount for ``Office of Inspector
General'' for necessary expenses for oversight of emergency
relief, rehabilitation, and reconstruction aid, and other
expenses related to Haiti following the earthquake of January
12, 2010, $4,500,000, to remain available until September 30,
2012: Provided, That up to $1,500,000 of the funds
appropriated in this paragraph may be used to reimburse
obligations incurred for the purposes provided herein prior
to enactment of this Act.
BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE
Funds Appropriated to the President
global health and child survival
For an additional amount for ``Global Health and Child
Survival'' for necessary expenses for pandemic preparedness
and response, $45,000,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2011.
international disaster assistance
For an additional amount for ``International Disaster
Assistance'' for necessary expenses for emergency relief and
rehabilitation, and other expenses related to Haiti following
the earthquake of January 12, 2010, $460,000,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That funds appropriated
in this paragraph may be used to reimburse obligations
incurred for the purposes provided herein prior to enactment
of this Act.
Economic Support Fund
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Economic Support Fund'',
$1,620,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012,
of which not less than $1,309,000,000 shall be made available
for assistance for Afghanistan and not less than $259,000,000
shall be made available for assistance for Pakistan:
Provided, That funds appropriated under this heading in this
Act and in prior Acts making appropriations for the
Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs
that are made available for assistance for Afghanistan may be
made available, after consultation with the Committees on
Appropriations, for disarmament, demobilization and
reintegration activities, subject to the requirements of
section 904(e) in this chapter, and for a United States
contribution to an internationally managed fund to support
the reintegration into Afghan society of individuals who have
renounced violence against the Government of Afghanistan.
For an additional amount for ``Economic Support Fund'' for
necessary expenses for emergency relief, rehabilitation, and
reconstruction
[[Page H5364]]
aid, and other expenses related to Haiti following the
earthquake of January 12, 2010, $770,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2012: Provided, That of the
funds appropriated in this paragraph, up to $120,000,000 may
be transferred to the Department of the Treasury for United
States contributions to a multi-donor trust fund for
reconstruction and recovery efforts in Haiti: Provided
further, That of the funds appropriated in this paragraph, up
to $10,000,000 may be transferred to, and merged with, funds
made available under the heading ``United States Agency for
International Development, Funds Appropriated to the
President, Operating Expenses'' for administrative costs
relating to the purposes provided herein and to reimburse
obligations incurred for the purposes provided herein prior
to enactment of this Act: Provided further, That funds
appropriated in this paragraph may be transferred to, and
merged with, funds available under the heading ``Development
Credit Authority'' for the purposes provided herein: Provided
further, That such transfer authority is in addition to any
other transfer authority provided by this or any other Act:
Provided further, That funds made available to the
Comptroller General pursuant to title I, chapter 4 of Public
Law 106-31, to monitor the provision of assistance to address
the effects of hurricanes in Central America and the
Caribbean, shall also be available to the Comptroller General
to monitor relief, rehabilitation, and reconstruction aid,
and other expenses related to Haiti following the earthquake
of January 12, 2010, and shall remain available until
expended: Provided further, That funds appropriated in this
paragraph may be made available to the United States Agency
for International Development and the Department of State to
reimburse any accounts for obligations incurred for the
purpose provided herein prior to enactment of this Act.
For an additional amount for ``Economic Support Fund'' for
necessary expenses for assistance for Jordan, $100,000,000,
to remain available until September 30, 2012.
Department of State
migration and refugee assistance
For an additional amount for ``Migration and Refugee
Assistance'' for necessary expenses for assistance for
refugees and internally displaced persons, $165,000,000, to
remain available until expended.
Department of the Treasury
international affairs technical assistance
For an additional amount for ``International Affairs
Technical Assistance'' for necessary expenses for emergency
relief, rehabilitation, and reconstruction aid, and other
expenses related to Haiti following the earthquake of January
12, 2010, $7,100,000, to remain available until September 30,
2012: Provided, That of the funds appropriated in this
paragraph, up to $60,000 may be used to reimburse obligations
incurred for the purposes provided herein prior to enactment
of this Act.
INTERNATIONAL SECURITY ASSISTANCE
Department of State
international narcotics control and law enforcement
For an additional amount for ``International Narcotics
Control and Law Enforcement'', $1,034,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2012: Provided, That of the
funds appropriated under this heading, not less than
$650,000,000 shall be made available for assistance for Iraq
of which $450,000,000 is for one-time start up costs and
limited operational costs of the Iraqi police program, and
$200,000,000 is for implementation, management, security,
communications, and other expenses related to such program
and may be obligated only after the Secretary of State
determines and reports to the Committees on Appropriations
that the Government of Iraq supports and is cooperating with
such program: Provided further, That funds appropriated in
this chapter for assistance for Iraq shall not be subject to
the limitation on assistance in section 7042(b)(1) of
division F of Public Law 111-117: Provided further, That of
the funds appropriated in this paragraph, not less than
$169,000,000 shall be made available for assistance for
Afghanistan and not less than $40,000,000 shall be made
available for assistance for Pakistan: Provided further, That
of the funds appropriated under this heading, $175,000,000
shall be made available for assistance for Mexico for
judicial reform, institution building, anti-corruption, and
rule of law activities, and shall be available subject to
prior consultation with, and the regular notification
procedures of, the Committees on Appropriations.
For an additional amount for ``International Narcotics
Control and Law Enforcement'' for necessary expenses for
emergency relief, rehabilitation, and reconstruction aid, and
other expenses related to Haiti following the earthquake of
January 12, 2010, $147,660,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2012: Provided, That funds appropriated in this
paragraph may be used to reimburse obligations incurred for
the purposes provided herein prior to enactment of this Act.
Funds Appropriated to the President
foreign military financing program
For an additional amount for ``Foreign Military Financing
Program'', $100,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2012, of which not less than $50,000,000 shall be made
available for assistance for Pakistan and not less than
$50,000,000 shall be made available for assistance for
Jordan.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
extension of authorities
Sec. 1001. Funds appropriated in this chapter may be
obligated and expended notwithstanding section 10 of Public
Law 91-672 (22 U.S.C. 2412), section 15 of the State
Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 6212),
and section 504(a)(1) of the National Security Act of 1947
(50 U.S.C. 414(a)(1)).
allocations
Sec. 1002. (a) Funds appropriated in this chapter for the
following accounts shall be made available for programs and
countries in the amounts contained in the respective tables
included in the report accompanying this Act:
(1) ``Diplomatic and Consular Programs''.
(2) ``Economic Support Fund''.
(3) ``International Narcotics Control and Law
Enforcement''.
(b) For the purposes of implementing this section, and only
with respect to the tables included in the report
accompanying this Act, the Secretary of State and the
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development, as appropriate, may propose deviations to the
amounts referred in subsection (a), subject to the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations
and section 634A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.
spending plans and notification procedures
Sec. 1003. (a) Spending Plans.--Not later than 45 days
after enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State, in
consultation with the Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development, and the Broadcasting
Board of Governors, shall submit reports to the Committees on
Appropriations detailing planned uses of funds appropriated
in this chapter, except for funds appropriated under the
headings ``International Disaster Assistance'' and
``Migration and Refugee Assistance''.
(b) Obligation Reports.--The Secretary of State, in
consultation with the Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development, and the Broadcasting
Board of Governors, shall submit reports to the Committees on
Appropriations not later than 90 days after enactment of this
Act, and every 180 days thereafter until September 30, 2012,
on obligations, expenditures, and program outputs and
outcomes.
(c) Notification.--Funds made available in this chapter
shall be subject to the regular notification procedures of
the Committees on Appropriations and section 634A of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, except for funds appropriated
under the headings ``International Disaster Assistance'' and
``Migration and Refugee Assistance''.
afghanistan
Sec. 1004. (a) The terms and conditions of sections
1102(a), (b)(1), (c), and (d) of Public Law 111-32 shall
apply to funds appropriated in this chapter that are
available for assistance for Afghanistan.
(b) Funds appropriated in this chapter and in prior Acts
making appropriations for the Department of State, foreign
operations, and related programs under the headings
``Economic Support Fund'' and ``International Narcotics
Control and Law Enforcement'' that are available for
assistance for Afghanistan may be obligated only if the
Secretary of State reports to the Committees on
Appropriations that prior to the disbursement of funds,
representatives of the Afghan national, provincial or local
government, local communities and civil society
organizations, as appropriate, will be consulted and
participate in the design of programs, projects, and
activities, and following such disbursement will participate
in implementation and oversight, and progress will be
measured against specific benchmarks.
(c)(1) Funds appropriated in this chapter may be made
available for assistance for the Government of Afghanistan
only if the Secretary of State determines and reports to the
Committees on Appropriations that the Government of
Afghanistan is--
(A) cooperating with United States reconstruction and
reform efforts;
(B) demonstrating a commitment to accountability by
removing corrupt officials, implementing fiscal transparency
and other necessary reforms of government institutions, and
facilitating active public engagement in governance and
oversight of public resources; and
(C) respecting the internationally recognized human rights
of Afghan women.
(2) If at any time after making the determination required
in paragraph (1) the Secretary receives credible information
that the factual basis for such determination no longer
exists, the Secretary should suspend assistance and promptly
inform the relevant Afghan authorities that such assistance
is suspended until sufficient factual basis exists to support
the determination.
(d) Funds appropriated in this chapter and in prior Acts
that are available for assistance for Afghanistan may be made
available to support reconciliation with, or reintegration
of, former combatants only if the Secretary of State
determines and reports to the Committees on Appropriations
that--
(1) Afghan women are participating at national, provincial
and local levels of government in the design, policy
formulation and implementation of the reconciliation or
reintegration process, and women's internationally recognized
human rights are protected in such process; and
(2) such funds will not be used to support any pardon,
immunity from prosecution or amnesty, or any position in the
Government of Afghanistan or security forces, for any leader
of an armed group responsible for crimes against humanity,
war crimes, or other violations of internationally recognized
human rights.
(e) Funds appropriated in this chapter that are available
for assistance for Afghanistan may be made available to
support the work of the Independent Electoral Commission and
the Electoral Complaints Commission in Afghanistan
[[Page H5365]]
only if the Secretary of State determines and reports to the
Committees on Appropriations that--
(1) the Independent Electoral Commission has no members or
other employees who participated in, or helped to cover up,
acts of fraud in the 2009 elections for president in
Afghanistan, and the Electoral Complaints Commission is a
genuinely independent body with all the authorities that were
invested in it under Afghanistan law as of December 31, 2009,
and with no members appointed by the President of
Afghanistan; and
(2) the central Government of Afghanistan has taken steps
to ensure that women are able to exercise their rights to
political participation, whether as candidates or voters.
(f)(1) Not more than 45 days after enactment of this Act,
the Secretary of State, in consultation with the
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development, shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations
a strategy to address the needs and protect the rights of
Afghan women and girls, including planned expenditures of
funds appropriated in this chapter, and detailed plans for
implementing and monitoring such strategy.
(2) Such strategy shall be coordinated with and support the
goals and objectives of the National Action Plan for Women of
Afghanistan and the Afghan National Development Strategy and
shall include a defined scope and methodology to measure the
impact of such assistance.
(g)(1) Notwithstanding section 303 of the Federal Property
and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C. 253) and
requirements for awarding task orders under task and delivery
order contracts under section 303J of such Act (41 U.S.C.
253j), the Secretary of State may award task orders for
police training in Afghanistan under current Department of
State contracts for police training.
(2) Any task order awarded under paragraph (1) shall be for
a limited term and shall remain in performance only until a
successor contract or contracts awarded by the Department of
Defense using full and open competition have entered into
full performance after completion of any start-up or
transition periods.
pakistan
Sec. 1005. (a) Funds appropriated in this chapter and in
prior Acts making appropriations for the Department of State,
foreign operations, and related programs under the headings
``Foreign Military Financing Program'' and ``Pakistan
Counterinsurgency Capability Fund'' shall be made available--
(1) in a manner that promotes unimpeded access by
humanitarian organizations to detainees, internally displaced
persons, and other Pakistani civilians adversely affected by
the conflict; and
(2) in accordance with section 620J of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, and the Secretary of State shall
inform relevant Pakistani authorities of the requirements of
section 620J and of its application, and regularly monitor
units of Pakistani security forces that receive United States
assistance and the performance of such units.
(b)(1) Of the funds appropriated in this chapter under the
heading ``Economic Support Fund'' for assistance for
Pakistan, $5,000,000 shall be made available through the
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Department of
State, for human rights programs in Pakistan, including
training of government officials and security forces, and
assistance for human rights organizations.
(2) Not later than 90 days after enactment of this Act and
prior to the obligation of funds under this subsection, the
Secretary of State shall submit to the Committees on
Appropriations a human rights strategy in Pakistan including
the proposed uses of funds.
(c) Of the funds appropriated in this chapter under the
heading ``Economic Support Fund'' for assistance for
Pakistan, up to $1,500,000 should be made available to the
Department of State and the United States Agency for
International Development for the lease of aircraft to
implement programs and conduct oversight in northwestern
Pakistan, which shall be coordinated under the authority of
the United States Chief of Mission in Pakistan.
iraq
Sec. 1006. (a) The uses of aircraft in Iraq purchased or
leased with funds made available under the headings
``International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement'' and
``Diplomatic and Consular Affairs'' in this chapter and in
prior Acts making appropriations for the Department of State,
foreign operations, and related programs shall be coordinated
under the authority of the United States Chief of Mission in
Iraq.
(b) The terms and conditions of section 1106(b) of Public
Law 111-32 shall apply to funds made available in this
chapter for assistance for Iraq under the heading
``International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement''.
(c) Of the funds appropriated in this chapter and in prior
acts making appropriations for the Department of State,
foreign operations, and related programs under the headings
``Diplomatic and Consular Programs'' and ``Embassy Security,
Construction, and Maintenance'' for Afghanistan, Pakistan and
Iraq, up to $300,000,000 may, after consultation with the
Committees on Appropriations, be transferred between, and
merged with, such appropriations for activities related to
security for civilian led operations in such countries.
haiti
Sec. 1007. (a) Funds appropriated in this chapter and in
prior Acts making appropriations for the Department of State,
foreign operations, and related programs under the headings
``Economic Support Fund'' and ``International Narcotics
Control and Law Enforcement'' that are available for
assistance for Haiti may be obligated only if the Secretary
of State reports to the Committees on Appropriations that
prior to the disbursement of funds, representatives of the
Haitian national, provincial or local government, local
communities and civil society organizations, as appropriate,
will be consulted and participate in the design of programs,
projects, and activities, and following such disbursement
will participate in implementation and oversight, and
progress will be measured against specific benchmarks.
(b)(1) Funds appropriated in this chapter under the
headings ``Economic Support Fund'' and ``International
Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement'' may be made available
for assistance for the Government of Haiti only if the
Secretary of State determines and reports to the Committees
on Appropriations that the Government of Haiti is--
(A) cooperating with United States reconstruction and
reform efforts; and
(B) demonstrating a commitment to accountability by
removing corrupt officials, implementing fiscal transparency
and other necessary reforms of government institutions, and
facilitating active public engagement in governance and
oversight of public resources.
(2) If at any time after making the determination required
in paragraph (1) the Secretary receives credible information
that the factual basis for making such determination no
longer exists, the Secretary should suspend assistance and
promptly inform the relevant Haitian authorities that such
assistance is suspended until sufficient factual basis exists
to support the determination.
(c)(1) Funds appropriated in this chapter for bilateral
assistance for Haiti may be provided as direct budget support
to the central Government of Haiti only if the Secretary of
State reports to the Committees on Appropriations that the
Government of the United States and the Government of Haiti
have agreed, in writing, to clear and achievable goals and
objectives for the use of such funds, and have established
mechanisms within each implementing agency to ensure that
such funds are used for the purposes for which they were
intended.
(2) The Secretary should suspend any such direct budget
support to an implementing agency if the Secretary has
credible evidence of misuse of such funds by any such agency.
(3) Any such direct budget support shall be subject to
prior consultation with the Committees on Appropriations.
(d) Funds appropriated in this chapter that are made
available for assistance for Haiti shall be made available,
to the maximum extent practicable, in a manner that
emphasizes the participation and leadership of Haitian women
and directly improves the security, economic and social well-
being, and political status of Haitian women and girls.
(e) Funds appropriated in this chapter may be made
available for assistance for Haiti notwithstanding any other
provision of law, except for section 620J of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 and provisions of this chapter.
haiti debt relief
Sec. 1008. (a) For an additional amount for ``Contribution
to the Inter-American Development Bank'', ``Contribution to
the International Development Association'', and
``Contribution to the International Fund for Agricultural
Development'', to cancel Haiti's existing debts and
repayments on disbursements from loans committed prior to
January 12, 2010, and for the United States share of an
increase in the resources of the Fund for Special Operations
of the Inter-American Development Bank, to the extent
separately authorized in this chapter, in furtherance of
providing debt relief for Haiti in view of the Cancun
Declaration of March 21, 2010, a total of $212,000,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2012.
(b) Up to $40,000,000 of the amounts appropriated under the
heading ``Department of the Treasury, Debt Restructuring'' in
prior Acts making appropriations for the Department of State,
foreign operations, and related programs may be used to
cancel Haiti's existing debts and repayments on disbursements
from loans committed prior to January 12, 2010, to the Inter-
American Development Bank, the International Development
Association, and the International Fund for Agricultural
Development, and for the United States share of an increase
in the resources of the Fund for Special Operations of the
Inter-American Development Bank in furtherance of providing
debt relief to Haiti in view of the Cancun Declaration of
March 21, 2010.
haiti debt relief authority
Sec. 1009. The Inter-American Development Bank Act, Public
Law 86-147, as amended (22 U.S.C. 283 et seq.), is further
amended by adding at the end thereof the following new
section:
``SEC. 40. AUTHORITY TO VOTE FOR AND CONTRIBUTE TO AN
INCREASE IN RESOURCES OF THE FUND FOR SPECIAL
OPERATIONS; PROVIDING DEBT RELIEF TO HAITI.
``(a) Vote Authorized.--In accordance with section 5 of
this Act, the United States Governor of the Bank is
authorized to vote in favor of a resolution to increase the
resources of the Fund for Special Operations up to
$479,000,000, in furtherance of providing debt relief for
Haiti in view of the Cancun Declaration of March 21, 2010,
which provides that:
``(1) Haiti's debts to the Fund for Special Operations are
to be cancelled;
``(2) Haiti's remaining local currency conversion
obligations to the Fund for Special Operations are to be
cancelled;
``(3) undisbursed balances of existing loans of the Fund
for Special Operations to Haiti are to be converted to
grants; and
``(4) the Fund for Special Operations is to make available
significant and immediate grant financing to Haiti as well as
appropriate resources to other countries remaining as
borrowers within the Fund for Special Operations,
[[Page H5366]]
consistent with paragraph 6 of the Cancun Declaration of
March 21, 2010.
``(b) Contribution Authority.--To the extent and in the
amount provided in advance in appropriations Acts the United
States Governor of the Bank may, on behalf of the United
States and in accordance with section 5 of this Act,
contribute up to $252,000,000 to the Fund for Special
Operations, which will provide for debt relief of:
``(1) up to $240,000,000 to the Fund for Special
Operations;
``(2) up to $8,000,000 to the International Fund For
Agricultural Development (IFAD); and
``(3) up to $4,000,000 for the International Development
Association (IDA).
``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--To pay for the
contribution authorized under subsection (b), there are
authorized to be appropriated, without fiscal year
limitation, for payment by the Secretary of the Treasury
$212,000,000, for the United States contribution to the Fund
for Special Operations.''.
mexico
Sec. 1010. (a) For purposes of funds appropriated in this
chapter and in prior Acts making appropriations for the
Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs
under the heading ``International Narcotics Control and Law
Enforcement'' that are made available for assistance for
Mexico, the provisions of paragraphs (1) through (3) of
section 7045(e) of the Department of State, Foreign
Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2009
(division H of Public Law 111-8) shall apply and the report
required in paragraph (1) shall be based on a determination
by the Secretary of State of compliance with each of the
requirements in paragraph (1)(A) through (D).
(b) Funds appropriated in this chapter under the heading
``International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement'' that
are available for assistance for Mexico may be made available
only after the Secretary of State submits a report to the
Committees on Appropriations detailing a coordinated, multi-
year, interagency strategy to address the causes of drug-
related violence and other organized criminal activity in
Central and South America, Mexico, and the Caribbean, which
shall describe--
(1) the United States multi-year strategy for the region,
including a description of key challenges in the source,
transit, and demand zones; the key objectives of the
strategy; and a detailed description of outcome indicators
for measuring progress toward such objectives;
(2) the integration of diplomatic, administration of
justice, law enforcement, civil society, economic
development, demand reduction, and other assistance to
achieve such objectives;
(3) progress in phasing out law enforcement activities of
the militaries of each recipient country, as applicable; and
(4) governmental efforts to investigate and prosecute
violations of internationally recognized human rights.
(c) Of the funds appropriated in this chapter under the
heading ``Diplomatic and Consular Programs'', up to
$5,000,000 may be made available for armored vehicles and
other emergency diplomatic security support for United States
Government personnel in Mexico.
el salvador
Sec. 1011. Of the funds appropriated in this chapter under
the heading ``Economic Support Fund'', $25,000,000 shall be
made available for necessary expenses for emergency relief
and reconstruction assistance for El Salvador related to
Hurricane/Tropical Storm Ida.
democratic republic of the congo
Sec. 1012. Of the funds appropriated in this chapter under
the heading ``Economic Support Fund'', $15,000,000 shall be
made available for necessary expenses for emergency security
and humanitarian assistance for civilians, particularly women
and girls, in the eastern region of the Democratic Republic
of the Congo.
international scientific cooperation
Sec. 1013. Funds appropriated in prior Acts making
appropriations for the Department of State, foreign
operations, and related programs that are made available for
science and technology centers in the former Soviet Union may
be used to support productive, non-military projects that
engage scientists and engineers who have no weapons
background, but whose competence could otherwise be applied
to weapons development, provided such projects are executed
through existing science and technology centers and
notwithstanding sections 503 and 504 of the FREEDOM Support
Act (Public Law 102-511), and following consultation with the
Committees on Appropriations, the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs
of the House of Representatives.
international renewable energy agency
Sec. 1014. For fiscal year 2011 and thereafter, the
President is authorized to accept the statute of, and to
maintain membership of the United States in, the
International Renewable Energy Agency, and the United States'
assessed contributions to maintain such membership may be
paid from funds appropriated for ``Contributions to
International Organizations''.
office of inspector general personnel
Sec. 1015. (a) Funds appropriated in this chapter for the
United States Agency for International Development Office of
Inspector General (OIG) may be made available to contract
with United States citizens for personal services when the
Inspector General determines that the personnel resources of
the OIG are otherwise insufficient.
(1) Not more than 5 percent of the OIG personnel
(determined on a full-time equivalent basis), as of any given
date, are serving under personal services contracts.
(2) Contracts under this paragraph shall not exceed a term
of 2 years unless the Inspector General determines that
exceptional circumstances justify an extension of up to 1
additional year, and contractors under this paragraph shall
not be considered employees of the Federal Government for
purposes of title 5, United States Code, or members of the
Foreign Service for purposes of title 22, United States Code.
(b)(1) The Inspector General may waive subsections (a)
through (d) of section 8344, and subsections (a) through (e)
of section 8468 of title 5, United States Code, and
subsections (a) through (d) of section 4064 of title 22,
United States Code, on behalf of any re-employed annuitant
serving in a position within the OIG to facilitate the
assignment of persons to positions in Iraq, Pakistan,
Afghanistan, and Haiti or to positions vacated by members of
the Foreign Service assigned to those countries.
(2) The authority provided in paragraph (1) shall be
exercised on a case-by-case basis for positions for which
there is difficulty recruiting or retaining a qualified
employee or to address a temporary emergency hiring need,
individuals employed by the OIG under this paragraph shall
not be considered employees for purposes of subchapter III of
chapter 83 of title 5, United States Code, or chapter 84 of
such title, and the authorities of the Inspector General
under this paragraph shall terminate on October 1, 2012.
authority to reprogram funds
Sec. 1016. Of the funds appropriated by this chapter for
assistance for Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan, up to
$100,000,000 may be made available pursuant to the authority
of section 451 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as
amended, for assistance in the Middle East and South Asia
regions if the President finds, in addition to the
requirements of section 451 and certifies and reports to the
Committees on Appropriations, that exercising the authority
of this section is necessary to protect the national security
interests of the United States: Provided, That the Secretary
of State shall consult with the Committees on Appropriations
prior to the reprogramming of such funds, which shall be
subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That the
funding limitation otherwise applicable to section 451 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 shall not apply to this
section: Provided further, That the authority of this section
shall expire upon enactment of the Department of State,
Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act,
2011.
special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction
(including rescission)
Sec. 1017. (a) Of the funds appropriated under the heading
``Department of State, Administration of Foreign Affairs,
Office of Inspector General'' and authorized to be
transferred to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan
Reconstruction in title XI of Public Law 111-32, $7,200,000
are rescinded.
(b) For an additional amount for ``Department of State,
Administration of Foreign Affairs, Office of Inspector
General'' which shall be available for the Special Inspector
General for Afghanistan Reconstruction for reconstruction
oversight in Afghanistan, $7,200,000, and shall remain
available until September 30, 2011.
CHAPTER 11
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
highway traffic safety grants
(highway trust fund)
(including rescission)
Of the amounts provided for Safety Belt Performance Grants
in Public Law 111-117, $15,000,000 shall be available to pay
for expenses necessary to discharge the functions of the
Secretary, with respect to traffic and highway safety under
subtitle C of title X of Public Law 109-59 and chapter 301
and part C of subtitle VI of title 49, United States Code,
and for the planning or execution of programs authorized
under section 403 of title 23, United States Code: Provided,
That such funds shall be available until September 30, 2011,
and shall be in addition to the amount of any limitation
imposed on obligations in fiscal year 2011.
Of the amounts made available for Safety Belt Performance
Grants under section 406 of title 23, United States Code,
$25,000,000 in unobligated balances are permanently
rescinded: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the
amounts under this heading.
consumer assistance to recycle and save program
(rescission)
Of the amounts made available for the Consumer Assistance
to Recycle and Save Program, $44,000,000 in unobligated
balances are rescinded.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Community Planning and Development
community development fund
For an additional amount for the ``Community Development
Fund'', for necessary expenses related to disaster relief,
long-term recovery, and restoration of infrastructure,
housing, and economic revitalization in areas affected by
severe storms and flooding from March 2010 through May 2010
for which the President declared a major disaster covering an
entire State or States with more than 20 counties declared
major disasters under title IV of the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1974,
$100,000,000, to remain available until expended, for
activities authorized under title I of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-383):
Provided, That funds shall be awarded directly to
[[Page H5367]]
the State or unit of general local government at the
discretion of the Secretary: Provided further, That prior to
the obligation of funds a grantee shall submit a plan to the
Secretary detailing the proposed use of all funds, including
criteria for eligibility and how the use of these funds will
address long-term recovery and restoration of infrastructure:
Provided further, That funds provided under this heading may
be used by a State or locality as a matching requirement,
share, or contribution for any other Federal program:
Provided further, That such funds may not be used for
activities reimbursable by, or for which funds are made
available by, the Federal Emergency Management Agency or the
Army Corps of Engineers: Provided further, That funds
allocated under this heading shall not adversely affect the
amount of any formula assistance received by a State or
subdivision thereof under the Community Development Fund:
Provided further, That a State or subdivision thereof may use
up to 5 percent of its allocation for administrative costs:
Provided further, That in administering the funds under this
heading, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may
waive, or specify alternative requirements for, any provision
of any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers
in connection with the obligation by the Secretary or the use
by the recipient of these funds or guarantees (except for
requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimination,
labor standards, and the environment), upon a request by a
State or subdivision thereof explaining why such waiver is
required to facilitate the use of such funds or guarantees,
if the Secretary finds that such waiver would not be
inconsistent with the overall purpose of title I of the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974: Provided
further, That the Secretary shall publish in the Federal
Register any waiver of any statute or regulation that the
Secretary administers pursuant to title I of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974 no later than 5 days before
the effective date of such waiver: Provided further, That the
Secretary shall obligate to a State or subdivision thereof
not less than 50 percent of the funding provided under this
heading within 90 days after the enactment of this Act.
TITLE II
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Economic Development Administration
economic development assistance programs
For an additional amount, in addition to amounts provided
elsewhere in this Act, for ``Economic Development Assistance
Programs'', to carry out planning, technical assistance and
other assistance under section 209, and consistent with
section 703(b), of the Public Works and Economic Development
Act (42 U.S.C. 3149, 3233), in States affected by the
incidents related to the discharge of oil that began in 2010
in connection with the explosion on, and sinking of, the
mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater Horizon, $5,000,000,
to remain available until expended.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
operations, research, and facilities
For an additional amount, in addition to amounts provided
elsewhere in this Act, for ``Operations, Research, and
Facilities'', $13,000,000, to remain available until
expended, for responding to economic impacts on fishermen and
fishery-dependent businesses: Provided, That the amounts
appropriated herein are not available unless the Secretary of
Commerce determines that resources provided under other
authorities and appropriations including by the responsible
parties under the Oil Pollution Act, 33 U.S.C. 2701, et seq.,
are not sufficient to respond to economic impacts on
fishermen and fishery-dependent business following an
incident related to a spill of national significance declared
under the National Contingency Plan provided for under
section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605).
For an additional amount, in addition to amounts provided
elsewhere in this Act, for ``Operations, Research, and
Facilities'', for activities undertaken including scientific
investigations and sampling as a result of the incidents
related to the discharge of oil and the use of oil
dispersants that began in 2010 in connection with the
explosion on, and sinking of, the mobile offshore drilling
unit Deepwater Horizon, $7,000,000, to remain available until
expended. These activities may be funded through the
provision of grants to universities, colleges and other
research partners through extramural research funding.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
salaries and expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'',
Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human
Services, for food safety monitoring and response activities
in connection with the incidents related to the discharge of
oil that began in 2010 in connection with the explosion on,
and sinking of, the mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater
Horizon, $2,000,000, to remain available until expended.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Departmental Offices
Office of the Secretary
salaries and expenses
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for the ``Office of the Secretary,
Salaries and Expenses'' for increased inspections,
enforcement, investigations, environmental and engineering
studies, and other activities related to emergency offshore
oil spill incidents in the Gulf of Mexico, $29,000,000, to
remain available until expended: Provided, That such funds
may be transferred by the Secretary to any other account in
the Department of the Interior to carry out the purposes
provided herein.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Legal Activities
salaries and expenses, general legal activities
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses,
General Legal Activities'', $10,000,000, to remain available
until expended, for litigation expenses resulting from
incidents related to the discharge of oil that began in 2010
in connection with the explosion on, and sinking of, the
mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater Horizon.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Science and Technology
For an additional amount for ``Science and Technology'' for
a study on the potential human and environmental risks and
impacts of the release of crude oil and the application of
dispersants, surface washing agents, bioremediation agents,
and other mitigation measures listed in the National
Contingency Plan Product List (40 C.F.R. Part 300 Subpart J),
as appropriate, $2,000,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That the study shall be performed at the
direction of the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, in coordination with the Secretary of
Commerce and the Secretary of the Interior: Provided further,
That the study may be funded through the provision of grants
to universities and colleges through extramural research
funding.
GENERAL PROVISION--THIS TITLE
deepwater horizon
Sec. 2001. Section 6002(b) of the Oil Pollution Act of
1990 (33 U.S.C. 2752) is amended in the second sentence:
(1) by inserting ``: (1)'' before ``may obtain an advance''
and after ``the Coast Guard'';
(2) by striking ``advance. Amounts'' and inserting the
following: ``advance; (2) in the case of discharge of oil
that began in 2010 in connection with the explosion on, and
sinking of, the mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater
Horizon, may, without further appropriation, obtain one or
more advances from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund as
needed, up to a maximum of $100,000,000 for each advance, the
total amount of all advances not to exceed the amounts
available under section 9509(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 9509(c)(2)), and within 7 days of
each advance, shall notify Congress of the amount advanced
and the facts and circumstances necessitating the advance;
and (3) amounts''.
prohibition on fines and liability
Sec. 2002. None of the funds made available by this Act
shall be used to levy against any person any fine, or to hold
any person liable for construction or renovation work
performed by the person, in any State under the final rule
entitled ``Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program;
Lead Hazard Information Pamphlet; Notice of Availability;
Final Rule'' (73 Fed. Reg. 21692 (April 22, 2008)), and the
final rule entitled ``Lead; Amendment to the Opt-out and
Recordkeeping Provisions in the Renovation, Repair, and
Painting Program'' signed by the Administrator on April 22,
2010.
right-of-way
Sec. 2003. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
the Secretary of the Interior shall--
(1) not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, amend Right-of-Way Grants No. NVN-49781/IDI-26446/
NVN-85211/NVN-85210 of the Bureau of Land Management to shift
the 200-foot right-of-way for the 500-kilovolt transmission
line project to the alignment depicted on the maps entitled
``Southwest Intertie Project'' and dated December 10, 2009,
and May 21, 2010, and approve the construction, operation and
maintenance plans of the project; and
(2) not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, issue a notice to proceed with construction of the
project in accordance with the amended grants and approved
plans described in paragraph (1).
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of Energy may provide or facilitate federal
financing for the project described in subsection (a) under
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public
Law 111-5; 123 Stat. 115) or the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(42 U.S.C. 15801 et seq.), based on the comprehensive reviews
and consultations performed by the Secretary of the Interior.
funding for environmental and fisheries impacts
Sec. 2004. (1) Fisheries Disaster Relief.--For an
additional amount, in addition to other amounts provided in
this Act for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, $15,000,000 to be available to provide
fisheries disaster relief under section 312 of the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C.
1861a) related to a commercial fishery failure due to a
fishery resource disaster in the Gulf of Mexico that resulted
from the Deepwater Horizon oil discharge.
(2) Expanded stock assessment of fisheries.--For an
additional amount, in addition to other amounts provided in
this Act for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, $10,000,000 to conduct an expanded stock
assessment of the fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico. Such
expanded stock assessment shall include an assessment of the
commercial and recreational catch and biological sampling,
observer programs, data management and processing activities,
the conduct of assessments, and follow-up evaluations of such
fisheries.
(3) Ecosystem services impacts study.--For an additional
amount, in addition to other amounts provided for the
Department of Commerce, $1,000,000 to be available for the
National
[[Page H5368]]
Academy of Sciences to conduct a study of the long-term
ecosystem service impacts of the Deepwater Horizon oil
discharge. Such study shall assess long-term costs to the
public of lost water filtration, hunting, and fishing
(commercial and recreational), and other ecosystem services
associated with the Gulf of Mexico.
(4) In general.--Of the amounts appropriated or made
available under division B, title I of Public Law 111-117
that remain unobligated as of the date of the enactment of
this Act under Procurement, Acquisition, and Construction for
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
$26,000,000 of the amounts appropriated are hereby rescinded.
TITLE III
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT
availability of funds
Sec. 3001 No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current
fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
emergency designation
Sec. 3002. Unless otherwise specified, each amount in this
Act is designated as an emergency requirement and necessary
to meet emergency needs pursuant to sections 403(a) and
423(b) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010.
Sec. 3003. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
for fiscal year 2010 only, all funds received from sales,
bonuses, royalties, and rentals under the Geothermal Steam
Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 1001 et seq.) shall be
deposited in the Treasury, of which--
(1) 50 percent shall be used by the Secretary of the
Treasury to make payments to States within the boundaries of
which the leased land and geothermal resources are located;
(2) 25 percent shall be used by the Secretary of the
Treasury to make payments to the counties within the
boundaries of which the leased land or geothermal resources
are located; and
(3) 25 percent shall be deposited in miscellaneous
receipts.
(b) Section 3002 shall not apply to this section.
Sec. 3004. (a) Public Law 111-88, the Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010,
is amended under the heading ``Office of the Special Trustee
for American Indians'' by--
(1) striking ``$185,984,000'' and inserting
``$176,984,000''; and
(2) striking ``$56,536,000'' and inserting ``$47,536,000''.
(b) Section 3002 shall not apply to the amounts in this
section.
Sec. 3005. Section 502(c) of the Chesapeake Bay Initiative
Act of 1998 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; Public Law 105-312) is
amended by striking ``2008'' and inserting ``2011''.
Sec. 3006. For fiscal years 2010 and 2011--
(1) the National Park Service Recreation Fee Program
account may be available for the cost of adjustments and
changes within the original scope of contracts for National
Park Service projects funded by Public Law 111-5 and for
associated administrative costs when no funds are otherwise
available for such purposes;
(2) notwithstanding section 430 of division E of Public Law
111-8 and section 444 of Public Law 111-88, the Secretary of
the Interior may utilize unobligated balances for adjustments
and changes within the original scope of projects funded
through division A, title VII, of Public Law 111-5 and for
associated administrative costs when no funds are otherwise
available;
(3) the Secretary of the Interior shall ensure that any
unobligated balances utilized pursuant to paragraph (2) shall
be derived from the bureau and account for which the project
was funded in Public Law 111-5; and
(4) the Secretary of the Interior shall consult with the
Committees on Appropriations prior to making any charges
authorized by this section.
Sec. 3007. (a) Section 205(d) of the Federal Land
Transaction Facilitation Act (43 U.S.C. 2304(d)) is amended
by striking ``10 years'' and inserting ``11 years''.
(b) Section 3002 shall not apply to this section.
Sec. 3008. Of the amounts appropriated for the Edward
Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program under subpart
1 of part E of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe
Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3750 et seq.) under the
heading ``state and local law enforcement assistance'' under
the heading ``Office of Justice Programs'' under the heading
``State and Local Law Enforcement Activities'' under title II
of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8;
123 Stat. 579), at the discretion of the Attorney General,
the amounts to be made available to Genesee County, Michigan
for assistance for individuals transitioning from prison in
Genesee County, Michigan pursuant to the joint statement of
managers accompanying that Act may be made available to My
Brother's Keeper of Genesee County, Michigan to provide
assistance for individuals transitioning from prison in
Genesee County, Michigan.
Sec. 3009. Section 159(b)(2)(C) of title I of division A
of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 (49 U.S.C. 24305
note) is amended by striking clauses (i) and (ii) and
inserting the following:
``(i) requiring inspections of any container containing a
firearm or ammunition; and
``(ii) the temporary suspension of firearm carriage service
if credible intelligence information indicates a threat
related to the national rail system or specific routes or
trains.''.
public availability of contractor integrity and performance database
Sec. 3010. Section 872(e)(1) of the Clean Contracting Act
of 2008 (subtitle G of title VIII of Public Law 110-417; 41
U.S.C. 417b(e)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the
following: ``In addition, the Administrator shall post all
such information, excluding past performance reviews, on a
publicly available Internet website.''.
assessments on guantanamo bay detainees
Sec. 3011. (a) Submission of Information Related to
Disposition Decisions.--Not later than 45 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Director of National
Intelligence, in coordination with the participants of the
interagency review of Guantanamo Bay detainees conducted
pursuant to Executive Order 13492 (10 U.S.C. 801 note), shall
fully inform the congressional intelligence committees
concerning the basis for the disposition decisions reached by
the Guantanamo Review Task Force, and shall provide to the
congressional intelligence committees--
(1) the written threat analyses prepared on each detainee
by the Guantanamo Review Task Force established pursuant to
Executive Order 13492; and
(2) access to the intelligence information that formed the
basis of any such specific assessments or threat analyses.
(b) Future Submissions.--In addition to the analyses,
assessments, and information required under subsection (a)
and not later than 10 days after the date that a threat
assessment described in subsection (a) is disseminated, the
Director of National Intelligence shall provide to the
congressional intelligence committees--
(1) any new threat assessment prepared by any element of
the intelligence community of a Guantanamo Bay detainee who
remains in detention or is pending release or transfer; and
(2) access to the intelligence information that formed the
basis of such threat assessment.
(c) Congressional Intelligence Committees Defined.--In this
section, the term ``congressional intelligence committees''
has the meaning given that term in section 3(7) of the
National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(7)).
Sec. 3012. Of the amounts appropriated for the Edward
Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program under subpart
1 of part E of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe
Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3750 et seq.) under the
heading ``state and local law enforcement assistance'' under
the heading ``Office of Justice Programs'' under the heading
``State and Local Law Enforcement Activities'' under title II
of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8;
123 Stat. 579), at the discretion of the Attorney General,
the amounts to be made available to the Marcus Institute,
Atlanta, Georgia, to provide remediation for the potential
consequences of childhood abuse and neglect, pursuant to the
joint statement of managers accompanying that Act, may be
made available to the Georgia State University Center for
Healthy Development, Atlanta, Georgia.
coastal impact assistance
Sec. 3013. Section 31 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands
Act (43 U.S.C. 1356a) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(e) Emergency Funding.--
``(1) In general.--In response to a spill of national
significance under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C.
2701 et seq.), at the request of a producing State or coastal
political subdivision and notwithstanding the requirements of
part 12 of title 43, Code of Federal Regulations (or a
successor regulation), the Secretary may immediately disburse
funds allocated under this section for 1 or more individual
projects that are--
``(A) consistent with subsection (d); and
``(B) specifically designed to respond to the spill of
national significance.
``(2) Approval by secretary.--The Secretary may, in the
sole discretion of the Secretary, approve, on a project by
project basis, the immediate disbursal of the funds under
paragraph (1).
``(3) State requirements.--
``(A) Additional information.--If the Secretary approves a
project for funding under this subsection that is included in
a plan previously approved under subsection (c), not later
than 90 days after the date of the funding approval, the
producing State or coastal political subdivision shall submit
to the Secretary any additional information that the
Secretary determines to be necessary to ensure that the
project is in compliance with subsection (d).
``(B) Amendment to plan.--If the Secretary approves a
project for funding under this subsection that is not
included in a plan previously approved under subsection (c),
not later than 90 days after the date of the funding
approval, the producing State or coastal political
subdivision shall submit to the Secretary for approval an
amendment to the plan that includes any projects funded under
paragraph (1), as well as any information about such projects
that the Secretary determines to be necessary to ensure that
the project is in compliance with subsection (d).
``(C) Limitation.--If a producing State or coastal
political subdivision does not submit the additional
information or amendments to the plan required by this
paragraph, or if, based on the information submitted by the
Secretary determines that the project is not in compliance
with subsection (d), by the deadlines specified in this
paragraph, the Secretary shall not disburse any additional
funds to the producing State or the coastal political
subdivisions until the date on which the additional
information or amendment to the plan has been approved by the
Secretary.''.
This Act may be cited as the ``Supplemental Appropriations
Act, 2010''.
Amend the title so as to read: ``Making supplemental
appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010,
and for other purposes.''.
Motion to Concur
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the motion.
The text of the motion is as follows:
[[Page H5369]]
Mr. Obey moves that the House concur in the Senate
amendment to the text of H.R. 4899 with each of the five
amendments printed in House Report 111-522.
The text of the amendments is as follows:
Amendment No. 1
In the matter proposed to be inserted by the Senate
amendment to the text of the bill, insert before the short
title at the end the following:
TITLE V--OTHER PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Settlements and Other Program Provisions
SEC. 5001. APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR FINAL SETTLEMENT OF
CLAIMS FROM IN RE BLACK FARMERS DISCRIMINATION
LITIGATION.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Settlement agreement.--The term ``Settlement
Agreement'' means the settlement agreement dated February 18,
2010 (including any modifications agreed to by the parties
and approved by the court under that agreement) between
certain plaintiffs, by and through their counsel, and the
Secretary of Agriculture to resolve, fully and forever, the
claims raised or that could have been raised in the cases
consolidated in In re Black Farmers Discrimination
Litigation, No. 08-511 (D.D.C.), including Pigford claims
asserted under section 14012 of the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246; 122 Stat. 2209).
(2) Pigford claim.--The term ``Pigford claim'' has the
meaning given that term in section 14012(a)(3) of the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246; 122
Stat. 2210).
(b) Appropriation of Funds.--There is hereby appropriated
to the Secretary of Agriculture $1,150,000,000, to remain
available until expended, to carry out the terms of the
Settlement Agreement if the Settlement Agreement is approved
by a court order that is or becomes final and nonappealable.
The funds appropriated by this subsection are in addition to
the $100,000,000 of funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation
made available by section 14012(i) of the Food, Conservation,
and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246; 122 Stat. 2212)
and shall be available for obligation only after those
Commodity Credit Corporation funds are fully obligated. If
the Settlement Agreement is not approved as provided in this
subsection, the $100,000,000 of funds of the Commodity Credit
Corporation made available by section 14012(i) of the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 shall be the sole
funding available for Pigford claims.
(c) Use of Funds.--The use of the funds appropriated by
subsection (b) shall be subject to the express terms of the
Settlement Agreement.
(d) Treatment of Remaining Funds.--If any of the funds
appropriated by subsection (b) are not obligated and expended
to carry out the Settlement Agreement, the Secretary of
Agriculture shall return the unused funds to the Treasury and
may not make the unused funds available for any purpose
related to section 14012 of the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008, for any other settlement agreement
executed in In re Black Farmers Discrimination Litigation,
No. 08-511 (D.D.C.), or for any other purpose.
(e) Rules of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall
be construed as requiring the United States, any of its
officers or agencies, or any other party to enter into the
Settlement Agreement or any other settlement agreement.
Nothing in this section shall be construed as creating the
basis for a Pigford claim.
(f) Conforming Amendments.--Section 14012 of the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246; 122
Stat. 2209) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)(1)--
(A) by striking ``subsection (h)'' and inserting
``subsection (g)''; and
(B) by striking ``subsection (i)'' and inserting
``subsection (h)'';
(2) by striking subsection (e);
(3) in subsection (g), by striking ``subsection (f)'' and
inserting ``subsection (e)'';
(4) in subsection (i)--
(A) by striking ``(1) In general.--Of the funds'' and
inserting ``Of the funds''; and
(B) by striking paragraph (2);
(5) by striking subsection (j); and
(6) by redesignating subsections (f), (g), (h), (i), and
(k) as subsections (e), (f), (g), (h), and (i), respectively.
SEC. 5002. EMPLOYMENT FOR YOUTH.
There is appropriated, out of any funds in the Treasury not
otherwise appropriated, for an additional amount for
``Department of Labor--Employment and Training
Administration--Training and Employment Services'' for
activities under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998
(``WIA''), $1,000,000,000 shall be available for obligation
on the date of enactment of this Act for grants to States for
youth activities, including employment for youth: Provided,
That no portion of such funds shall be reserved to carry out
section 127(b)(1)(A) of the WIA: Provided further, That for
purposes of section 127(b)(1)(C)(iv) of the WIA, funds
available for youth activities shall be allotted as if the
total amount available for youth activities in the fiscal
year does not exceed $1,000,000,000: Provided further, That
with respect to the youth activities provided with such
funds, section 101(13)(A) of the WIA shall be applied by
substituting ``age 24'' for ``age 21'': Provided further,
That the work readiness performance indicator described in
section 136(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I) of the WIA shall be the only
measure of performance used to assess the effectiveness of
employment for youth provided with such funds: Provided
further, That an amount that is not more than 1 percent of
such amount may be used for the administration, management,
and oversight of the programs, activities, and grants carried
out with such funds, including the evaluation of the use of
such funds: Provided further, That funds available under the
preceding proviso, together with funds described in section
801(a) of division A of the American Recovery and
reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5), and funds
provided in such Act under the heading ``Department of Labor-
Departmental Management-Salaries and Expenses'', shall remain
available for obligation through September 30, 2011.
SEC. 5003. THE INDIVIDUAL INDIAN MONEY ACCOUNT LITIGATION
SETTLEMENT ACT OF 2010.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the
``Individual Indian Money Account Litigation Settlement Act
of 2010''.
(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Amended complaint.--The term ``Amended Complaint''
means the Amended Complaint attached to the Settlement.
(2) Land consolidation program.--The term ``Land
Consolidation Program'' means a program conducted in
accordance with the Settlement and the Indian Land
Consolidation Act (25 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.) under which the
Secretary may purchase fractional interests in trust or
restricted land.
(3) Litigation.--The term ``Litigation'' means the case
entitled Elouise Cobell et al. v. Ken Salazar et al., United
States District Court, District of Columbia, Civil Action No.
96-1285 (JR).
(4) Plaintiff.--The term ``Plaintiff'' means a member of
any class certified in the Litigation.
(5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
(6) Settlement.--The term ``Settlement'' means the Class
Action Settlement Agreement dated December 7, 2009, in the
Litigation, as modified by the parties to the Litigation.
(7) Trust administration class.--The term ``Trust
Administration Class'' means the Trust Administration Class
as defined in the Settlement.
(c) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to authorize
the Settlement.
(d) Authorization.--The Settlement is authorized, ratified,
and confirmed.
(e) Jurisdictional Provisions.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding the limitation of
jurisdiction of district courts contained in section
1346(a)(2) of title 28, United States Code, the United States
District Court for the District of Columbia shall have
jurisdiction over the claims asserted in the Amended
Complaint for purposes of the Settlement.
(2) Certification of trust administration class.--
(A) In general.--Notwithstanding the requirements of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court overseeing the
Litigation may certify the Trust Administration Class.
(B) Treatment.--On certification under subparagraph (A),
the Trust Administration Class shall be treated as a class
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) for purposes
of the Settlement.
(f) Trust Land Consolidation.--
(1) Trust land consolidation fund.--
(A) Establishment.--On final approval (as defined in the
Settlement) of the Settlement, there shall be established in
the Treasury of the United States a fund, to be known as the
``Trust Land Consolidation Fund''.
(B) Availability of amounts.--Amounts in the Trust Land
Consolidation Fund shall be made available to the Secretary
during the 10-year period beginning on the date of final
approval of the Settlement--
(i) to conduct the Land Consolidation Program; and
(ii) for other costs specified in the Settlement.
(C) Deposits.--
(i) In general.--On final approval (as defined in the
Settlement) of the Settlement, the Secretary of the Treasury
shall deposit in the Trust Land Consolidation Fund
$2,000,000,000 of the amounts appropriated by section 1304 of
title 31, United States Code.
(ii) Conditions met.--The conditions described in section
1304 of title 31, United States Code, shall be considered to
be met for purposes of clause (i).
(D) Transfers.--In a manner designed to encourage
participation in the Land Consolidation Program, the
Secretary may transfer, at the discretion of the Secretary,
not more than $60,000,000 of amounts in the Trust Land
Consolidation Fund to the Indian Education Scholarship
Holding Fund established under paragraph 2.
(2) Indian education scholarship holding fund.--
(A) Establishment.--On the final approval (as defined in
the Settlement) of the Settlement, there shall be established
in the Treasury of the United States a fund, to be known as
the ``Indian Education Scholarship Holding Fund''.
(B) Availability.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law governing competition, public notification, or Federal
procurement or assistance, amounts in the Indian Education
Scholarship Holding Fund shall be made available, without
further appropriation, to the Secretary to contribute to an
Indian Education Scholarship Fund, as described in the
Settlement, to provide scholarships for Native Americans.
[[Page H5370]]
(3) Acquisition of trust or restricted land.--The Secretary
may acquire, at the discretion of the Secretary and in
accordance with the Land Consolidation Program, any
fractional interest in trust or restricted land.
(4) Treatment of unlocatable plaintiffs.--A Plaintiff the
whereabouts of whom are unknown and who, after reasonable
efforts by the Secretary, cannot be located during the 5 year
period beginning on the date of final approval (as defined in
the Settlement) of the Settlement shall be considered to have
accepted an offer made pursuant to the Land Consolidation
Program.
(g) Taxation and Other Benefits.--
(1) Internal revenue code.--For purposes of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, amounts received by an individual
Indian as a lump sum or a periodic payment pursuant to the
Settlement--
(A) shall not be included in gross income; and
(B) shall not be taken into consideration for purposes of
applying any provision of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
that takes into account excludable income in computing
adjusted gross income or modified adjusted gross income,
including section 86 of that Code (relating to Social
Security and tier 1 railroad retirement benefits).
(2) Other benefits.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, for purposes of determining initial eligibility, ongoing
eligibility, or level of benefits under any Federal or
federally assisted program, amounts received by an individual
Indian as a lump sum or a periodic payment pursuant to the
Settlement shall not be treated for any household member,
during the 1-year period beginning on the date of receipt--
(A) as income for the month during which the amounts were
received; or
(B) as a resource.
SEC. 5004. EXTENSION AND FLEXIBILITY FOR CERTAIN ALLOCATED
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS.
(a) Modification of Allocation Rules.--Section 411(d) of
the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2010 (Public Law
111-147; 124 Stat. 80) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)--
(i) by striking ``1301, 1302,''; and
(ii) by striking ``1198, 1204,''; and
(B) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in the matter preceding clause (i) by striking
``apportioned under sections 104(b) and 144 of title 23,
United States Code,'' and inserting ``specified in section
105(a)(2) of title 23, United States Code (except the high
priority projects program),''; and
(ii) in clause (ii) by striking ``apportioned under such
sections of such Code'' and inserting ``specified in such
section 105(a)(2) (except the high priority projects
program)'';
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)--
(i) by striking ``1301, 1302,''; and
(ii) by striking ``1198, 1204,''; and
(B) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in the matter preceding clause (i) by striking
``apportioned under sections 104(b) and 144 of title 23,
United States Code,'' and inserting ``specified in section
105(a)(2) of title 23, United States Code (except the high
priority projects program),''; and
(ii) in clause (ii) by striking ``apportioned under such
sections of such Code'' and inserting ``specified in such
section 105(a)(2) (except the high priority projects
program)''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) Projects of national and regional significance and
national corridor infrastructure improvement programs.--
``(A) Redistribution among states.--Notwithstanding
sections 1301(m) and 1302(e) of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1202
and 1205), the Secretary shall apportion funds authorized to
be appropriated under subsection (b) for the projects of
national and regional significance program and the national
corridor infrastructure improvement program among all States
such that each State's share of the funds so apportioned is
equal to the State's share for fiscal year 2009 of funds
apportioned or allocated for the programs specified in
section 105(a)(2) of title 23, United States Code.
``(B) Distribution among programs.--Funds apportioned to a
State pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be--
``(i) made available to the State for the programs
specified in section 105(a)(2) of title 23, United States
Code (except the high priority projects program), and in the
same proportion for each such program that--
``(I) the amount apportioned to the State for that program
for fiscal year 2009; bears to
``(II) the amount apportioned to the State for fiscal year
2009 for all such programs; and
``(ii) administered in the same manner and with the same
period of availability as funding is administered under
programs identified in clause (i).''.
(b) Expenditure Authority From Highway Trust Fund.--
Paragraph (1) of section 9503(c) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 is amended by striking ``Surface Transportation
Extension Act of 2010'' and inserting ``Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2010''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect upon the date of enactment of the Surface
Transportation Extension Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-147; 124
Stat. 78 et seq.) and shall be treated as being included in
that Act at the time of the enactment of that Act.
(d) Savings Clause.--
(1) In general.--For fiscal year 2010 and for the period
beginning on October 1, 2010, and ending on December 31,
2010, the amount of funds apportioned to each State under
section 411(d) of the Surface Transportation Extension Act of
2010 (Public Law 111-147) that is determined by the amount
that the State received or was authorized to receive for
fiscal year 2009 to carry out the projects of national and
regional significance program and national corridor
infrastructure improvement program shall be the greater of--
(A) the amount that the State was authorized to receive
under section 411(d) of the Surface Transportation Extension
Act of 2010 with respect to each such program according to
the provisions of that Act, as in effect on the day before
the date of enactment of this Act; or
(B) the amount that the State is authorized to receive
under section 411(d) of the Surface Transportation Extension
Act of 2010 with respect to each such program pursuant to the
provisions of that Act, as amended by the amendments made by
this section.
(2) Obligation authority.--For fiscal year 2010, the amount
of obligation authority distributed to each State shall be
the greater of--
(A) the amount that the State was authorized to receive
pursuant to section 120(a)(4)(A) (as it pertains to the
Appalachian Development Highway System program) of title I of
division A of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010
(Public Law 111-117) and sections 120(a)(4)(B) and 120(a)(6)
of such title, as of the day before the date of enactment of
this Act; or
(B) the amount that the State is authorized to receive
pursuant to section 120(a)(4)(A) (as it pertains to the
Appalachian Development Highway System program) of title I of
division A of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010
(Public Law 111-117) and sections 120(a)(4)(B) and 120(a)(6)
of such title, as of the date of enactment of this Act.
(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than
the Mass Transit Account) such sums as may be necessary to
carry out this subsection.
(4) Increase in obligation limitation.--The limitation
under the heading ``Federal-aid Highways (Limitation on
Obligations) (Highway Trust Fund)'' in Public Law 111-117 is
increased by such sums as may be necessary to carry out this
subsection.
(5) Contract authority.--Funds made available to carry out
this subsection shall be available for obligation and
administered in the same manner as if such funds were
apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code.
(6) Amounts.--The dollar amount specified in section
105(d)(1) of title 23, United States Code, the dollar amount
specified in section 120(a)(4)(B) of title I of division A of
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-
117), and the dollar amount specified in section 120(b)(10)
of such title shall each be increased as necessary to carry
out this subsection.
Subtitle B--Revenue Provisions
SEC. 5101. REQUIRED MINIMUM 10-YEAR TERM, ETC., FOR GRANTOR
RETAINED ANNUITY TRUSTS.
(a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 2702 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (1), (2) and (3) as
subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), respectively, and by moving
such subparagraphs (as so redesignated) 2 ems to the right,
(2) by striking ``For purposes of'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--For purposes of'', and
(3) by striking ``paragraph (1) or (2)'' in paragraph
(1)(C) (as so redesignated) and inserting ``subparagraph (A)
or (B)'', and
(4) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) Additional requirements with respect to grantor
retained annuities.--For purposes of subsection (a), in the
case of an interest described in paragraph (1)(A) (determined
without regard to this paragraph) which is retained by the
transferor, such interest shall be treated as described in
such paragraph only if--
``(A) the right to receive the fixed amounts referred to in
such paragraph is for a term of not less than 10 years,
``(B) such fixed amounts, when determined on an annual
basis, do not decrease relative to any prior year during the
first 10 years of the term referred to in subparagraph (A),
and
``(C) the remainder interest has a value greater than zero
determined as of the time of the transfer.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to transfers made after the date of the enactment
of this Act.
SEC. 5102. CRUDE TALL OIL INELIGIBLE FOR CELLULOSIC BIOFUEL
PRODUCER CREDIT.
(a) In General.--Clause (iii) of section 40(b)(6)(E) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``or'' at the end of subclause (I),
(2) by striking the period at the end of subclause (II) and
inserting ``, or'',
(3) by adding at the end the following new subclause:
``(III) such fuel has an acid number greater than 25.'',
and
(4) by striking ``unprocessed'' in the heading and
inserting ``certain''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to fuels sold or used on or after January 1,
2010.
[[Page H5371]]
SEC. 5103. TIME FOR PAYMENT OF CORPORATE ESTIMATED TAXES.
The percentage under paragraph (2) of section 561 of the
Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act in effect on the
date of the enactment of this Act is increased by 5.25
percentage points.
Subtitle C--Budgetary Provisions
SEC. 5201. BUDGETARY PROVISIONS.
(a) Statutory Paygo.--The budgetary effects of this Act,
for the purpose of complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-
Go-Act of 2010, shall be determined by reference to the
latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO
Legislation'' for this Act, jointly submitted for printing in
the Congressional Record by the Chairmen of the House and
Senate Budget Committees, provided that such statement has
been submitted prior to the vote on passage in the House
acting first on this conference report or amendment between
the Houses.
(b) Exclusion From Paygo.--
(1) Savings in this Act that would be subject to inclusion
in the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go scorecards are providing an
offset to increased discretionary spending. As such, they
should not be available on the scorecards maintained by the
Office of Management and Budget to provide offsets for future
legislation.
(2) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget
shall not include any net savings resulting from the changes
in direct spending or revenues contained in this Act on the
scorecards required to be maintained by OMB under the
Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.
Amendment No. 2
Page 90, after line 18, insert the following:
TITLE IV
CHAPTER 1
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
ENERGY PROGRAMS
Title 17 Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program
Subject to section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, commitments to guarantee loans under title XVII of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005, shall not exceed a total principal
amount of $18,000,000,000 for eligible projects, to remain
available until committed, of which $9,000,000,000 shall be
for nuclear power facilities and $9,000,000,000 shall be for
renewable energy system and efficient end-use energy
technology projects: Provided, That these amounts are in
addition to authorities provided in any other Act: Provided
further, That for amounts collected pursuant to section
1702(b)(2) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the source of
such payment received from borrowers is not a loan or other
debt obligation that is guaranteed by the Federal Government:
Provided further, That none of the loan guarantee authority
made available in this paragraph shall be available for
commitments to guarantee loans for any projects where funds,
personnel, or property (tangible or intangible) of any
Federal agency, instrumentality, personnel, or affiliated
entity are expected to be used (directly or indirectly)
through acquisitions, contracts, demonstrations, exchanges,
grants, incentives, leases, procurements, sales, other
transaction authority, or other arrangements, to support the
project or to obtain goods or services from the project:
Provided further, That the previous proviso shall not be
interpreted as precluding the use of the loan guarantee
authority in this paragraph for commitments to guarantee
loans for projects as a result of such projects benefitting
from (1) otherwise allowable Federal income tax benefits; (2)
being located on Federal land pursuant to a lease or right-
of-way agreement for which all consideration for all uses is
(A) paid exclusively in cash, (B) deposited in the Treasury
as offsetting receipts, and (C) equal to the fair market
value as determined by the head of the relevant Federal
agency; (3) Federal insurance programs, including under
section 170 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2210;
commonly known as the ``Price-Anderson Act''); or (4) for
electric generation projects, use of transmission facilities
owned or operated by a Federal Power Marketing Administration
or the Tennessee Valley Authority that have been authorized,
approved, and financed independent of the project receiving
the guarantee: Provided further, That none of the loan
guarantee authority made available in this paragraph shall be
available for any project unless the Director of the Office
of Management and Budget has certified in advance in writing
that the loan guarantee and the project comply with the
provisions under this paragraph: Provided further, That none
of the loan guarantee authority made available in this
paragraph may be used to make a final or conditional loan
guarantee award unless the Secretary of Energy provides
notification of the award, including the proposed subsidy
cost, to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and
the House of Representatives at least 3 full business days in
advance of such award: Provided further, That section 3002
shall not apply to the amounts under this heading.
Departmental Administration
For necessary expenses of the National Commission on the BP
Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling established
by, and in order to carry out activities under, Executive
Order 13543, $12,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2011: Provided, That funds appropriated in this paragraph
may be used to reimburse obligations incurred for the
purposes provided herein prior to enactment of this Act.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
salaries and expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'',
$356,900,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012,
of which $78,000,000 shall be for costs to maintain U.S.
Customs and Border Protection Officer staffing on the
Southwest Border of the United States, $58,000,000 shall be
for hiring additional U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Officers for deployment at ports of entry on the Southwest
Border of the United States, $208,400,000 shall be for hiring
additional Border Patrol agents for deployment to the
Southwest Border of the United States, $2,500,000 shall be
for forward operating bases on the Southwest Border of the
United States, and $10,000,000 shall be to support integrity
and background investigation programs.
border security fencing, infrastructure, and technology
For an additional amount for ``Border Security Fencing,
Infrastructure, and Technology,'' $14,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2011, for costs of designing,
building, and deploying tactical communications for support
of enforcement activities on the Southwest Border of the
United States.
air and marine interdiction, operations, maintenance, and procurement
For an additional amount for ``Air and Marine Interdiction,
Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement'', $32,000,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2012, for costs of
acquisition and deployment of unmanned aircraft systems.
construction and facilities management
For an additional amount for ``Construction and Facilities
Management'', $9,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2011, for costs to construct up to three forward
operating bases for use by the Border Patrol to carry out
enforcement activities on the Southwest Border of the United
States.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
salaries and expenses
For an additional amount for `Salaries and Expenses',
$30,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011,
for law enforcement activities targeted at reducing the
threat of violence along the Southwest Border of the United
States.
Federal Emergency Management Agency
state and local programs
For an additional amount for ``State and Local Programs'',
$50,000,000 to remain available until September 30, 2011, for
Operation Stonegarden.
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
salaries and expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'',
$8,100,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011, for
costs to provide basic training for new U.S. Customs and
Border Protection Officers and Border Patrol agents.
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Education Jobs Fund
For necessary expenses for an Education Jobs Fund,
$10,000,000,000: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply
to $1,300,000,000 of the amount under this heading: Provided
further, That the amount under this heading shall be
administered under the terms and conditions of sections 14001
through 14013 and title XV of division A of the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5)
except as follows:
(1) Allocation of funds.--
(A) Funds appropriated under this heading shall be
available only for allocation by the Secretary of Education
(in this heading referred to as the ``Secretary'') in
accordance with subsections (a), (b), (d), (e), and (f) of
section 14001 of division A of Public Law 111-5 and
subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, except that the amount
reserved under such subsection (b) shall not exceed
$1,000,000 and such subsection (f) shall be applied by
substituting ``one year'' for ``two years''.
(B) Prior to allocating funds to States under section
14001(d) of division A of Public Law 111-5, the Secretary
shall allocate 0.5 percent to the Secretary of the Interior
for schools operated or funded by the Bureau of Indian
Affairs on the basis of the schools' respective needs for
activities consistent with this heading under such terms and
conditions as the Secretary of the Interior may determine.
(2) Reservation.--A State that receives an allocation of
funds appropriated under this heading may reserve not more
than 2 percent for the administrative costs of carrying out
its responsibilities with respect to those funds.
(3) Awards to local educational agencies.--
(A) Except as specified in paragraph (2), an allocation of
funds to a State shall be used only for awards to local
educational agencies for the support of elementary and
secondary education in accordance with paragraph (5) for the
2010-2011 school year (or, in the case of reallocations made
under section 14001(f) of division A of Public Law 111-5, for
the 2010-2011 or the 2011-2012 school year).
(B) Funds used to support elementary and secondary
education shall be distributed through a State's primary
elementary and secondary funding formulae or based on local
educational agencies' relative shares of
[[Page H5372]]
funds under part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for the most
recent fiscal year for which data are available.
(C) Subsections (a) and (b) of section 14002 of division A
of Public Law 111-5 shall not apply to funds appropriated
under this heading.
(4) Compliance with education reform assurances.--For
purposes of awarding funds appropriated under this heading,
any State that has an approved application for Phase II of
the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund that was submitted in
accordance with the application notice published in the
Federal Register on November 17, 2009 (74 Fed. Reg. 59142)
shall be deemed to be in compliance with subsection (b) and
paragraphs (2) through (5) of subsection (d) of section 14005
of division A of Public Law 111-5.
(5) Requirement to use funds to retain or create education
jobs.--Notwithstanding section 14003(a) of division A of
Public Law 111-5, funds awarded to local educational agencies
under paragraph (3)--
(A) may be used only for compensation and benefits and
other expenses, such as support services, necessary to retain
existing employees, to recall or rehire former employees, and
to hire new employees, in order to provide early childhood,
elementary, or secondary educational and related services;
and
(B) may not be used for ``general administrative expenses''
or for ``other support services expenditures'' as those terms
were defined by the National Center for Education Statistics
in its Common Core of Data as of the date of enactment of
this Act.
(6) Prohibition on use of funds for rainy-day funds or debt
retirement.--A State that receives an allocation may not use
such funds, directly or indirectly, to--
(A) establish, restore, or supplement a rainy-day fund;
(B) supplant State funds in a manner that has the effect of
establishing, restoring, or supplementing a rainy-day fund;
(C) reduce or retire debt obligations incurred by the
State; or
(D) supplant State funds in a manner that has the effect of
reducing or retiring debt obligations incurred by the State.
(7) Deadline for award.--The Secretary shall award funds
appropriated under this heading not later than 45 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act to States that have
submitted applications meeting the requirements applicable to
funds under this heading. The Secretary shall not require
information in applications beyond what is necessary to
determine compliance with applicable provisions of law.
(8) Alternate distribution of funds.--If, within 30 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act, a Governor has
not submitted an approvable application, the Secretary shall
provide for funds allocated to that State to be distributed
to another entity or other entities in the State
(notwithstanding section 14001(e) of division A of Public Law
111-5) for support of elementary and secondary education,
under such terms and conditions as the Secretary may
establish, provided that all terms and conditions that apply
to funds appropriated under this heading shall apply to such
funds distributed to such entity or entities. No distribution
shall be made to a State under this paragraph, however,
unless the Secretary has determined (on the basis of such
information as may be available) that the requirements of
clauses (i), (ii), or (iii) of paragraph 10(A) are likely to
be met, notwithstanding the lack of an application from the
Governor of that State.
(9) Local educational agency application.--Section 442 of
the General Education Provisions Act shall not apply to a
local educational agency that has previously submitted an
application to the State under title XIV of division A of
Public Law 111-5. The assurances provided under that
application shall continue to apply to funds awarded under
this heading.
(10) Maintenance of effort.--
(A) Except as provided in paragraph (8), the Secretary
shall not allocate funds to a State under paragraph (1)
unless the Governor of the State provides an assurance to the
Secretary that--
(i) for State fiscal year 2011, the State will maintain
State support for elementary and secondary education (in the
aggregate or on the basis of expenditures per pupil) and for
public institutions of higher education (not including
support for capital projects or for research and development
or tuition and fees paid by students) at not less than the
level of such support for each of the two categories,
respectively, for State fiscal year 2009;
(ii) for State fiscal year 2011, the State will maintain
State support for elementary and secondary education and for
public institutions of higher education (not including
support for capital projects or for research and development
or tuition and fees paid by students) at a percentage of the
total revenues available to the State that is equal to or
greater than the percentage provided for each of the two
categories, respectively, for State fiscal year 2010; or
(iii) in the case of a State in which State tax collections
for calendar year 2009 were less than State tax collections
for calendar year 2006, for State fiscal year 2011 the State
will maintain State support for elementary and secondary
education (in the aggregate) and for public institutions of
higher education (not including support for capital projects
or for research and development or tuition and fees paid by
students)--
(I) at not less than the level of such support for each of
the two categories, respectively, for State fiscal year 2006;
or
(II) at a percentage of the total revenues available to the
State that is equal to or greater than the percentage
provided for each of the two categories, respectively, for
State fiscal year 2006.
(B) Section 14005(d)(1) and subsections (a) through (c) of
section 14012 of division A of Public Law 111-5 shall not
apply to funds appropriated under this heading.
(11) Additional requirements for the state of texas.--The
following requirements shall apply to the State of Texas:
(A) Notwithstanding paragraph (3)(B), funds used to support
elementary and secondary education shall be distributed based
on local educational agencies' relative shares of funds under
part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for the most recent
fiscal year which data are available. Funds distributed
pursuant to this paragraph shall be used to supplement and
not supplant State formula funding that is distributed on a
similar basis to part A of title I of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.).
(B) The Secretary shall not allocate funds to the State of
Texas under paragraph (1) unless the Governor of the State
provides an assurance to the Secretary that the State will
for fiscal years 2011, 2012, and 2013 maintain State support
for elementary and secondary education at a percentage of the
total revenues available to the State that is equal to or
greater than the percentage provided for such purpose for
fiscal year 2011 prior to the enactment of this Act.
(C) Notwithstanding paragraph (8), no distribution shall be
made to the State of Texas or local education agencies
therein unless the Governor of Texas makes an assurance to
the Secretary that the requirements in paragraphs (11)(A) and
(11)(B) will be met, notwithstanding the lack of an
application from the Governor of Texas.
Student Financial Assistance
For an additional amount for ``Student Financial
Assistance'', $4,950,000,000, to remain available through
September 30, 2011, to carry out subpart 1 of part A of title
IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965: Provided, That
section 3002 shall not apply to the amount under this
heading.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Military Construction, Army
For an additional amount for ``Military Construction,
Army'', $16,500,000, to remain available until September 30,
2011, for a soldier readiness processing center: Provided,
That notwithstanding any other provision of law, such funds
may be obligated and expended to carry out planning and
design and military construction projects not otherwise
authorized by law: Provided further, That section 3002 shall
not apply to the amount under this heading.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 4101. For an additional amount for the emergency food
assistance program as authorized by section 27(a) of the Food
and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2036(a)) and section
204(a)(1) of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (7
U.S.C. 7508(a)(1)), $50,000,000: Provided, That section 3002
shall not apply to the amount in this section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4102. There is rescinded from accounts under the
heading ``Department of Agriculture--Natural Resources
Conservation Service'', $69,900,000, to be derived from the
unobligated balances of funds that were provided for such
accounts in prior appropriation Acts (other than Public Law
111-5) and that were designated by the Congress in such Acts
as an emergency requirement pursuant to a concurrent
resolution on the budget or the Balanced Budget and Emergency
Deficit Control Act of 1985.
(rescission)
Sec. 4103. There is rescinded from accounts under the
heading ``Department of Agriculture--Rural Development'',
$122,000,000, to be derived from the unobligated balances of
funds that were provided for such accounts in prior
appropriation Acts (other than Public Law 111-5) and that
were designated by the Congress in such Acts as an emergency
requirement pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the budget
or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
1985.
(rescission)
Sec. 4104. Of the funds made available for ``Department of
Agriculture--Rural Utilities Service--Distance Learning,
Telemedicine, and Broadband Program'' in title I of division
A of Public Law 111-5 (123 Stat. 118), $300,000,000 is
rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4105. There is rescinded from accounts under the
heading ``Department of Agriculture--Food and Nutrition
Service--Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women,
Infants, and Children (WIC)'', $361,825,000, to be derived
from unobligated balances available from amounts placed in
reserve in title I of division A of Public Law 111-5 (123
Stat. 115).
(rescission)
Sec. 4106. Of the unobligated balances available for
``Department of Agriculture--Food and Nutrition Service--
Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants,
and Children (WIC)'' as authorized by section 17 of the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786), $125,000,000 is
rescinded: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the
amount in this section.
[[Page H5373]]
(rescission)
Sec. 4107. Of the funds appropriated under the heading
``Department of Commerce--National Institute of Standards and
Technology--Construction of Research Facilities'' in title II
of division A of Public Law 111-5 (123 Stat. 129) $15,000,000
is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4108. Of the funds made available for ``Department of
Commerce--National Telecommunications and Information
Administration--Broadband Technology Opportunities Program''
in title II of division A of Public Law 111-5, $302,000,000
is rescinded.
Sec. 4109. For an additional amount for the Department of
Justice for necessary expenses for increased law enforcement
activities related to Southwest border enforcement,
$201,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011:
Provided, That funds shall be distributed to the following
accounts and in the following specified amounts:
(1) ``Administrative Review and Appeals'', $2,118,000;
(2) ``Detention Trustee'', $7,000,000;
(3) ``Legal Activities, Salaries and Expenses, General
Legal Activities'', $3,862,000;
(4) ``Legal Activities, Salaries and Expenses, United
States Attorneys'', $9,198,000;
(5) ``United States Marshals Service, Salaries and
Expenses'', $29,651,000;
(6) ``United States Marshals Service, Construction'',
$8,000,000;
(7) ``Interagency Law Enforcement, Interagency Crime and
Drug Enforcement'', $21,000,000;
(8) ``Federal Bureau of Investigation, Salaries and
Expenses'', $25,262,000;
(9) ``Drug Enforcement Administration, Salaries and
Expenses'', $35,805,000;
(10) ``Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives,
Salaries and Expenses'', $39,104,000; and
(11) ``Federal Prison System, Salaries and Expenses'',
$20,000,000.
Sec. 4110. Section 8005 of the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 2010 (division A of Public Law 111-118)
is amended by striking the dollar amount specified in such
section and inserting ``$6,000,000,000'': Provided, That
section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in this section:
Provided further, That the amendment made by this section
shall apply in lieu of any amendment made by another
provision of this Act to such dollar amount.
Sec. 4111. With respect to the multiyear procurement of F/
A-18E, F/A-18F, and EA-18G aircraft--
(1) section 8011 of division A of Public Law 111-118 is
amended by striking ``within 30 days of enactment of this
Act'' and inserting ``30 days prior to contract award'';
(2) the term ``March 1 of the year in which the Secretary
requests legislative authority to enter into such contract,''
in section 2306b(i)(1) of title 10, United States Code, and
section 128(a)(2) of Public Law 111-84, shall be deemed to be
a reference to September 1, 2010;
(3) the Secretary of Defense may submit the report
identified in section 2306b(l)(4) of title 10, United States
Code, to the congressional defense committees on or before
September 1, 2010; and
(4) the authority provided in section 8011 of Public Law
111-118 and section 128(a) of Public Law 111-84, as amended
by this section, shall satisfy, with respect to the
procurement of F/A-18E, F/A-18F, and EA-18G aircraft, the
requirements of sections 2306b(i)(3) and 2306b(l)(3) of title
10, United States Code, that a multiyear contract be
authorized by law in an appropriations Act and an Act other
than an appropriations Act.
Sec. 4112. For all major defense acquisition programs for
which the Department of Defense plans to proceed to source
selection during the current fiscal year and fiscal year
2011, the Secretary of Defense shall perform an assessment of
such programs and the proposals of all bidders to determine
whether or not the costs are realistic and reasonable with
respect to expected industry development and production
costs: Provided, That the assessments shall address whether
the programs and proposals of all bidders are at fair market
value: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall
provide an assessment of the programs and proposals of all
bidders to determine the number of jobs, including an
estimate of development and direct manufacturing jobs,
supported or lost in the United States of America: Provided
further, That jobs supported or lost shall be measured as
full time equivalent personnel: Provided further, That the
Secretary of Defense shall provide a report, in consultation
with the Secretary of Labor, containing the results of these
assessments to the congressional defense committees not later
than 60 days after enactment of this Act and on a quarterly
basis thereafter.
(including rescission)
Sec. 4113. (a) In addition to the amounts provided
elsewhere in this Act, there is appropriated $300,000,000 for
an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide'', to remain available until expended. Such
funds may be available for the Office of Economic Adjustment,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, for
transportation infrastructure improvements associated with
medical facilities related to recommendations of the Defense
Base Closure and Realignment Commission.
(b) Of the funds appropriated for ``Defense Health
Program'' in title VI of division A of Public Law 111-118,
$300,000,000 is rescinded, to be derived from amounts for
operation and maintenance.
(c) Section 3002 shall not apply to the amounts in this
section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4114. (a) Of the funds appropriated in Department of
Defense Appropriations Acts, the following funds are
rescinded from the following accounts in the specified
amounts:
``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, 2006/2010'',
$107,000,000;
``Aircraft Procurement, Army, 2008/2010'', $21,000,000;
``Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army,
2008/2010'', $21,000,000;
``Procurement of Ammunition, Army, 2008/2010'',
$17,000,000;
``Other Procurement, Army, 2008/2010'', $75,000,000;
``Aircraft Procurement, Navy, 2008/2010'', $166,000,000;
``Weapons Procurement, Navy, 2008/2010'', $26,000,000;
``Other Procurement, Navy, 2008/2010'', $42,000,000;
``Procurement, Marine Corps, 2008/2010'', $13,000,000;
``Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2008/2010'',
$102,000,000;
``Missile Procurement, Air Force, 2008/2010'', $28,000,000;
``Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force, 2008/2010'',
$7,000,000;
``Other Procurement, Air Force, 2008/2010'', $130,000,000;
``Procurement, Defense-Wide, 2008/2010'', $33,000,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, 2009/
2010'', $76,000,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, 2009/
2010'', $131,000,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force,
2009/2010'', $164,000,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide,
2009/2010'', $137,000,000;
``Operation, Test and Evaluation, Defense, 2009/2010'',
$1,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Army, 2010'', $154,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Navy, 2010'', $155,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps, 2010'',
$25,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, 2010'',
$155,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, 2010'',
$126,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve, 2010'',
$12,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve, 2010'',
$6,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve, 2010'',
$1,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve, 2010'',
$14,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard, 2010'',
$28,000,000; and
``Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard, 2010'',
$27,000,000.
(b) Section 3002 shall not apply to amounts in this
section.
(rescissions)
Sec. 4115. (a) Of the funds appropriated in the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5), the
following funds are rescinded from the following accounts in
the specified amounts:
``Operation and Maintenance, Army, 2009/2010'',
$113,500,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Navy, 2009/2010'',
$34,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps, 2009/2010'',
$7,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, 2009/2010'',
$61,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve, 2009/2010'',
$3,500,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve, 2009/2010'',
$8,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve, 2009/
2010'', $1,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve, 2009/
2010'', $2,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard, 2009/
2010'', $1,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard, 2009/
2010'', $2,500,000; and
``Defense Health Program, 2009/2010'', $27,000,000.
(b) Of the funds appropriated in the Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-252), the following
funds are rescinded from the following account in the
specified amount:
``Procurement, Marine Corps, 2008/2010'', $177,180,000.
(including transfer of funds and rescissions)
Sec. 4116. (a) In addition to amounts provided elsewhere in
this Act, there is appropriated $163,000,000 for an
additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-
Wide'', to remain available until expended: Provided, That
such funds shall only be available to the Secretary of
Defense, acting through the Office of Economic Adjustment of
the Department of Defense, or for transfer to the Secretary
of Education, notwithstanding any other provision of law, to
make grants, conclude cooperative agreements, or supplement
other Federal funds to construct, renovate, repair, or expand
elementary and secondary public schools on military
installations in order to address capacity or facility
condition deficiencies at such schools: Provided further,
That in making such funds available, the Office of Economic
Adjustment or the Secretary of Education shall give priority
consideration to those military installations with schools
having the most serious capacity or facility condition
deficiencies as determined by the Secretary of Defense.
[[Page H5374]]
(b)(1) Of the funds appropriated for ``Procurement of
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army'' in title III of
division A of public Law 111-118, $116,000,000 is rescinded.
(2) Of the funds appropriated under the heading ``Operation
and Maintenance, Army'' in title II of division A of Public
Law 111-118, $100,000,000 is rescinded.
(3) Of the funds appropriated for ``Other Procurement,
Army'' in title III of division C of Public Law 110-329,
$87,000,000 is rescinded.
(c) Section 3002 shall not apply to amounts in this
section.
Sec. 4117. (a) Specific Appropriation or Contribution.--
Section 1702 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C.
16512) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
``(b) Specific Appropriation or Contribution.--
``(1) In general.--No guarantee shall be made unless--
``(A) an appropriation for the cost of the guarantee has
been made;
``(B) the Secretary has received from the borrower a
payment in full for the cost of the guarantee and deposited
the payment into the Treasury; or
``(C) a combination of one or more appropriations under
subparagraph (A) and one or more payments from the borrower
under subparagraph (B) has been made that is sufficient to
cover the cost of the guarantee.
``(2) Limitation.--The source of payments received from a
borrower under paragraph (1)(B) or (C) shall not be a loan or
other debt obligation that is made or guaranteed by the
Federal Government.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(l) Credit Report.--If, in the opinion of the Secretary,
a third-party credit rating of the applicant or project is
not necessary for the Secretary to begin review of an
application, the project costs are not projected to exceed
$100,000,000, and the applicant agrees to accept the credit
rating assigned to the applicant by the Secretary, the
Secretary may waive an otherwise applicable requirement
(including any requirement described in part 609 of title 10,
Code of Federal Regulations) to provide a third-party credit
report with an application, provided that the Secretary
requires a third party credit report prior to issuance of a
conditional commitment for a guarantee.
``(m) Multiple Sites.--Notwithstanding any contrary
requirement (including any provision under part 609 of title
10, Code of Federal Regulations) an eligible project may be
located on two or more non-contiguous sites in the United
States.''.
(b) Applications for Multiple Eligible Projects.--Section
1705 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16516) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
``(e) Multiple Applications.--Notwithstanding any contrary
requirement (including any provision under part 609.3(a) of
title 10, Code of Federal Regulations), a project applicant
or sponsor of an eligible project may submit an application
for more than one eligible project under this section.''.
(c) Energy Efficiency Loan Guarantees.--Section 1705(a) of
the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16516(a)) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Efficient end-use energy technologies.
``(5) Combined heat and power or industrial waste energy
recovery projects.''.
(d) Administrative Costs.--Section 136 of the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. 17013) is
amended by striking subsection (f) and inserting the
following:
``(f) Fees.--The Secretary is authorized to charge and
collect fees from applicants for or recipients of an award or
loan to cover administrative costs. For any given loan or
award, such fees shall not exceed $100,000 or 10 basis points
of the loan or award. In addition to the foregoing fees, the
Secretary may require applicants for and recipients of an
award or loan under this section to pay directly, or through
the payment of fees to be used by the Secretary to pay, all
fees and expenses of agents, consultants, and professional
advisors retained by the Secretary in connection with
activities authorized under this section.''.
(rescissions)
Sec. 4118. There are rescinded the following amounts from
the specified accounts:
(1) $35,000,000, to be derived from unobligated balances
made available under ``Mississippi River and Tributaries'' in
Public Law 110-329.
(2) $4,874,037, to be derived from unobligated balances
made available under ``Flood Control and Coastal
Emergencies'' in Public Law 109-234.
(3) $5,005,400, to be derived from unobligated balances
made available under ``Flood Control and Coastal
Emergencies'' in title V of Public Law 110-28.
(4) $2,199,629, to be derived from unobligated balances
made available under ``Construction'' in Public Law 109-148.
(rescissions)
Sec. 4119. (a) There are rescinded the following amounts
from the specified accounts:
(1) $150,000,000, to be derived from unobligated balances
of funds made available under the heading ``Corps of
Engineers, Civil--Construction'' in prior appropriations Acts
(other than Public Law 111-5) for projects and activities
authorized under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of
1948, section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986, and section 206 of the Water Resources Act of 1996.
(2) $40,000,000, to be derived from unobligated balances of
funds made available under the heading ``Corps of Engineers,
Civil--Construction'' in prior appropriations Acts, other
than funds designated by the Congress as an emergency
requirement pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the budget
or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
1985.
(b) Section 3002 shall not apply to amounts in this
section.
(rescissions)
Sec. 4120. (a) There are rescinded the following amounts
from the specified accounts:
(1) $78,000,000, to be derived from unobligated balances of
funds made available under the heading ``Department of
Energy--Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy'' in division
C of Public Law 111-8 and Public Law 111-85 for biomass and
biorefinery research, development, and demonstration.
(2) $71,000,000, to be derived from unobligated balances of
funds made available in prior appropriations Acts under the
heading ``Department of Energy--Strategic Petroleum
Reserve'', including $14,493,000 provided in Public Law 110-
161 for new site land acquisition activities; $31,507,000
provided in Public Law 111-8 for new site expansion
activities, beyond land acquisition; and $25,000,000 provided
in Public Law 111-85.
(3) $20,000,000, to be derived from unobligated balances of
funds made available in prior appropriations Acts under the
heading ``Department of Energy--Nuclear Energy''.
(b) Section 3002 shall not apply to amounts in this
section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4121. Of the unobligated balances of funds provided
under the heading ``Nuclear Regulatory Commission'' in prior
appropriations Acts, $18,000,000 is permanently rescinded:
Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in
this section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4122. From unobligated balances of prior year
appropriations made available to ``Domestic Nuclear Detection
Office--Systems Acquisition'', $50,000,000 is rescinded:
Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in
this section.
Sec. 4123. (a) The Administrator of General Services, not
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act,
shall prepare and submit to the Congress a building project
survey report related to a consolidated headquarters for the
Federal Bureau of Investigation in the Washington
metropolitan region (as defined in section 8301 of title 40,
United States Code).
(b) The building project survey report shall be prepared by
the Administrator of General Services in consultation with
the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and each
strategy described in the report shall contain, at a minimum,
an estimated cost, a financing and development plan, a
budgetary and financial impact analysis, a procurement and
implementation plan, an analysis of security and information
technology issues specific to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, and a schedule.
(c) The building project survey report shall identify a
preferred strategy.
(rescission)
Sec. 4124. There are permanently rescinded from ``General
Services Administration--Real Property Activities--Federal
Building Fund'', $75,000,000 from Rental of Space and
$25,000,000 from Building Operations, to be derived from
unobligated balances that were provided in previous
appropriations Acts: Provided, That section 3002 shall not
apply to the amount in this section.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 4125. (a) The Secretary of Homeland Security may
transfer to the Secretary of the Interior amounts available
for environmental mitigation requirements for ``U.S. Customs
and Border Protection--Border Security Fencing,
Infrastructure, and Technology'' for fiscal year 2009 or
thereafter, for use by the Secretary of the Interior under
laws administered by such Secretary to mitigate adverse
environmental impacts, including impact on species listed
under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.) resulting from construction, operation, and maintenance
activities related to border security.
(b) Uses of funds authorized by this section include
acquisition of land or interests in land that will, in the
judgment of the Secretary of the Interior, mitigate or off-
set such adverse impacts.
(c) Any funds transferred under this section shall be used
in accordance with an agreement between the Secretaries.
(d) Not later than September 30, 2010, and on an annual
basis thereafter, the Secretary of the Interior shall submit
to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the
House of Representatives a report that describes in detail
the actions taken in the preceding year with amounts
transferred under this section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4126. From unobligated balances of prior year
appropriations made available for ``Transportation Security
Administration--Aviation Security'' in chapter 5 of title III
of Public Law 110-28, $6,600,000 is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4127. From unobligated balances of prior year
appropriations made available for ``United States Coast
Guard--Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements'' in
chapter
[[Page H5375]]
4 of title I of division B of Public Law 109-148, $3,000,000
is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4128. From unobligated balances of prior year
appropriations made available for ``United States Coast
Guard--Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements'' in
chapter 4 of title II of Public Law 109-234, $4,000,000 is
rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4129. From unobligated balances of prior year
appropriations made available for ``Federal Emergency
Management Agency--Administrative and Regional Operations''
in chapter 4 of title II of Public Law 109-234, $36,000,000
is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4130. From unobligated balances of prior year
appropriations made available for ``Domestic Nuclear
Detection Office--Research, Development, and Operations'' in
chapter 5 of title III of Public Law 110-28, $3,800,000 is
rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4131. From unobligated balances of prior year
appropriations made available to ``U.S. Customs and Border
Protection--Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and
Technology'', $200,000,000 is rescinded: Provided, That
section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in this section.
Sec. 4132. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
including any agreement, the Federal share of assistance,
including direct Federal assistance provided under sections
403, 406, and 407 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170b, 5172, and
5173), for damages resulting from FEMA-1909-DR, FEMA-1894-DR,
and FEMA-3311-EM-RI shall not be less than 90 percent of the
eligible costs under such sections.
(rescission)
Sec. 4133. Of the funds made available for ``Bureau of Land
Management--Management of Lands and Resources'' in title VII
of division A of Public Law 111-5, $6,400,000 is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4134. Of the funds made available for ``Bureau of Land
Management--Construction'' in title VII of division A of
Public Law 111-5, $3,600,000 is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4135. Of the funds made available for ``National Park
Service--Construction'' in title VII of division A of Public
Law 111-5, $3,200,000 is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4136. Of the funds made available for ``United States
Geological Survey--Surveys, Investigations, and Research'' in
title VII of division A of Public Law 111-5, $5,000,000 is
rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4137. Of the funds made available for ``Bureau of
Indian Affairs--Construction'' in title VII of division A of
Public Law 111-5, $2,934,000 is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4138. Of the funds made available for ``Bureau of
Indian Affairs--Indian Guaranteed Loan Program Account'' in
title VII of division A of Public Law 111-5, $6,820,000 is
rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4139. Of the funds made available for ``Environmental
Protection Agency--Hazardous Substance Superfund'' in title
VII of division A of Public Law 111-5, $6,000,000 is
rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4140. Of the funds made available for ``Environmental
Protection Agency--Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust
Fund Program'' in title VII of division A of Public Law 111-
5, $9,200,000 is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4141. Of the funds made available for transfer in
title VII of division A of Public Law 111-5, ``Environmental
Protection Agency--Environmental Programs and Management'',
$13,000,000 is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4142. Of the funds made available for ``Department of
Agriculture--Forest Service--Capital Improvement and
Maintenance'' in title VII of division A of Public Law 111-5,
$20,000,000 is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4143. Of the funds transferred in section 703 of title
VII of division A of Public Law 111-5, ``Department of the
Interior--Working Capital Fund'', $4,400,000 is permanently
rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4144. Of the funds made available for ``National Park
Service--Construction'' in chapter 5 of title II of Public
Law 105-18, $7,600,000 is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4145. Of the funds made available for ``National Park
Service--Construction'' in chapter 7 of division B of Public
Law 108-324, $5,104,000 is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4146. Of the funds made available for ``National Park
Service--Construction'' in chapter 5 of title II of Public
Law 109-234, $6,700,000 is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4147. Of the funds made available for ``Fish and
Wildlife Service--Construction'' in chapter 6 of title I of
division B of Public Law 110-329, $13,300,000 is rescinded.
Sec. 4148. Section 11(c)(1) of the Outer Continental Shelf
Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1340(c)(1)) is amended in the fourth
sentence by striking ``within thirty days of its
submission,'' and inserting the following: ``within 90 days
of its submission or within such additional time as the
Secretary determines is necessary to complete any
environmental, safety, or other reviews (in the case of
leases issued pursuant to a sale held after March 17, 2010),
or within 90 days of its submission or, with the consent of
the holder of the lease, within such additional time as the
Secretary determines is necessary to complete any
environmental, safety, or other reviews (in the case of
leases issued pursuant to a sale held on or before March 17,
2010),''.
Sec. 4149. From funds appropriated in this Act under the
heading ``Department of Health and Human Services--Office of
the Secretary--Public Health and Social Services Emergency
Fund'', the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall make
grants to States, in the amount needed to defray actual
costs, for the purpose of assisting school districts serving
significant numbers of children who entered the United States
from Haiti during the period January 12, 2010, through May
30, 2010, and who are United States citizens or Haitian
nationals, to meet the educational and related needs of such
children.
(rescission)
Sec. 4150. The unobligated balance of funds appropriated in
the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1995
(Public Law 103-333; 108 Stat. 2574) under the heading
``Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund'' is
rescinded.
Sec. 4151. Amounts in section 1012 of division B of Public
Law 111-118 shall be deemed to have been designated by such
section on the date of its enactment 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. 4152. (a) Oil Spill Unemployment Assistance.--Upon a
determination by the President that additional resources are
necessary to respond to an incident related to a spill of
national significance declared under the National Contingency
Plan provided for under section 105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605) (``covered incident''), the Secretary
of Labor is authorized to provide to any individual
unemployed as a result of such covered incident such benefit
assistance as the Secretary deems appropriate while such
individual is unemployed for the weeks of such unemployment
with respect to which the individual is not entitled to any
other unemployment compensation (as that term is defined in
section 85(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) or
waiting period credit. Such assistance as the Secretary shall
provide shall be available to an individual as long as the
individual's unemployment caused by such covered incident
continues or until the individual is reemployed in a suitable
position, but no longer than 26 weeks after the individual's
unemployment that resulted from the covered incident. Oil
spill unemployment assistance payments for a week of
unemployment shall not exceed the maximum weekly amount
authorized under the unemployment compensation law of the
individual's State. The Secretary is directed to provide such
assistance through agreements with States that, in the
Secretary's judgment, have an adequate system for
administering such assistance through existing State
agencies.
(b) Federal-State Agreements.--Any State affected by a
covered incident may enter into and participate in an
agreement under this section with the Secretary. Any State
which is a party to an agreement under this section may, upon
providing 30 days' written notice to the Secretary, terminate
such agreement.
(c) Provisions of Agreement.--Any agreement under
subsection (b) shall provide that the State agency of the
State will--
(1) make payments of oil spill unemployment assistance to
individuals who--
(A) are unemployed as a result of a covered incident;
(B) have no rights to regular compensation or extended
compensation with respect to a week under State law or any
other State unemployment compensation law or to compensation
under any other Federal law; and
(C) are not receiving compensation with respect to such
week under the unemployment compensation law of Canada; and
(2) refer individuals receiving oil spill unemployment
assistance under this section to one-stop delivery systems
established under section 134(c) of the Workforce Investment
Act of 1998 for reemployment services or training provided
under such Act, the Wagner-Peyser Act, or other Federal law.
(d) Weekly Benefit Amount, Due Process Rights.--For
purposes of any agreement under this section, the terms and
conditions of Federal law and regulations which apply to
claims for disaster unemployment assistance and to the
payment thereof shall apply to claims for oil spill
unemployment assistance and the payment thereof, except where
otherwise inconsistent with the provisions of this section or
with the regulations or operating instructions of the
Secretary promulgated to carry out this section.
(e) Unauthorized Aliens Ineligible.--A State shall require
as a condition of oil spill unemployment assistance under
this section
[[Page H5376]]
that each alien who receives such assistance must be legally
authorized to work in the United States, as defined for
purposes of the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (26 U.S.C. 3101
et seq.). In determining whether an alien meets the
requirements of this subsection, a State must follow the
procedures provided in section 1137(d) of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 1320b-7(d)).
(f) Fraud and Overpayments.--
(1) In general.--If an individual knowingly has made, or
caused to be made by another, a false statement or
representation of a material fact, or knowingly has failed,
or caused another to fail, to disclose a material fact, and
as a result of such false statement or representation or of
such nondisclosure such individual has received an amount of
oil spill unemployment assistance under this section to which
such individual was not entitled, such individual--
(A) shall be ineligible for further oil spill unemployment
assistance under this section in accordance with the
provisions of the applicable State unemployment compensation
law relating to fraud in connection with a claim for
unemployment compensation; and
(B) shall be subject to prosecution under section 1001 of
title 18, United States Code.
(2) Repayment.--In the case of an individual who has
received oil spill unemployment assistance under this section
to which such individual was not entitled, the State shall
require such individual to repay the amount of such oil spill
unemployment assistance to the State agency, except that the
State agency may waive such repayment if it determines that--
(A) the payment of such oil spill unemployment assistance
was without fault on the part of any such individual; and
(B) such repayment would be contrary to equity and good
conscience.
(3) Prevention and detection by state agency.--The State
agency shall submit a weekly payment file of all benefit
payments to the National Directory of New Hires, and shall
make arrangements for the cross match of the benefit payment
recipients' social security numbers with the National
Directory of New Hires Reported Hire and Benefit payment
databases a minimum of once each week and investigate all
matches.
(4) Recovery by state agency.--
(A) In general.--The State agency may recover the amount to
be repaid, or any part thereof, by deductions from any oil
spill unemployment assistance payable to such individual
under this section or from any unemployment compensation
payable to such individual under any State or Federal
unemployment compensation law administered by the State
agency or under any other State or Federal law administered
by the State agency which provides for the payment of any
assistance or allowance with respect to any week of
unemployment, during the 3-year period after the date such
individual received the payment of the oil spill unemployment
assistance to which such individual was not entitled, except
that no single deduction may exceed 50 percent of the weekly
benefit amount from which such deduction is made.
(B) Opportunity for hearing.--No repayment shall be
required, and no deduction shall be made, until a
determination has been made, notice thereof and an
opportunity for a fair hearing has been given to the
individual, and the determination has become final.
(5) Review.--Any determination by a State agency under this
subsection shall be subject to review in the same manner and
to the same extent as determinations under the State
unemployment compensation law, and only in that manner and to
that extent.
(g) Payments to States.--
(1) Benefits.--There shall be paid to each State that has
entered into an agreement under this section an amount equal
to 100 percent of the oil spill unemployment assistance paid
to individuals by the State under such agreement.
(2) Administration.--There shall be paid to each State that
has entered into an agreement under this section such amounts
as the Secretary determines necessary for the proper and
efficient administration of such agreement.
(h) Financing.--
(1) In general.--There are appropriated out of the general
fund of the United States Treasury such funds as may be
necessary in meeting the costs of benefits, Federal
administration, and State administration of agreements under
this section.
(2) Certification.--The Secretary shall from time to time
certify to the Secretary of the Treasury for payment to each
State the sums payable to such State under this section. Upon
receipt of the certification from the Secretary, the
Secretary of the Treasury shall make payments to the State in
accordance with such certification, by transfers from the
general fund of the United States Treasury.
(i) Relationship With Income Replacement Payments for Lost
Wages or Self Employment Income by the Responsible Party.--
(1) The total combined amount an individual receives of oil
spill unemployment assistance and payments by the responsible
party for either lost wages or self-employment income shall
not exceed the greater of--
(A) the total amount of unemployment assistance that an
individual is entitled to receive under subsection (a), as
determined by the State agency; or
(B) the liability of the responsible party to such
individual for lost wages or self-employment income.
(2) If a responsible party or the Oil Spill Liability Trust
Fund under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et
seq.) makes a payment to the individual for lost wages
related to unemployment resulting from a covered incident,
and an individual has previously received unemployment
assistance under this section for such period of
unemployment, the responsible party or the Oil Spill
Liability Trust Fund shall subtract from such payment the
amount of such unemployment assistance and shall reimburse
such subtracted amount to the United States for deposit in
the general fund of the Treasury. If a responsible party
fails to reimburse such subtracted amount pursuant to this
paragraph, the Secretary of the Treasury shall request the
Attorney General to bring a civil action against the
responsible party or a guarantor in an appropriate district
court to recover the amount of the demand, plus all costs
incurred in obtaining payment including prejudgment interest,
attorneys fees, and any other administrative and adjudicative
costs involved.
(3) If a responsible party or the Oil Spill Liability Trust
Fund has made a payment to an individual for lost wages
related to unemployment resulting from a covered incident,
the amount of such payment shall be subtracted from the
unemployment assistance under this section that the
individual subsequently receives for such period of
unemployment.
(4) Any individual's receipt of unemployment assistance
under this section related to unemployment resulting from a
covered incident shall be conditional on the individual
taking appropriate actions, as determined by the Secretary,
to seek payment for lost wages for such period of
unemployment under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C.
2701 et seq.) from the responsible party or the Oil Spill
Liability Trust Fund.
(5) Any individual, as a condition of receiving oil spill
unemployment assistance, shall provide informed consent to
the sharing of benefit information between the State agency
and the responsible party (or its claim processor) or the Oil
Spill Liability Trust Fund, as appropriate, for the purpose
of determining eligibility and to avoid duplicate payments as
deemed necessary.
(6) If the Secretary determines the actions described in
paragraphs (2) through (5) have not succeeded in avoiding
duplicate payments, the Secretary may take such other actions
as the Secretary determines necessary in order to avoid
duplicate payments, consistent with the responsible party or
the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund making payments to
individuals for lost wages related to unemployment resulting
from a covered incident.
(7) The Secretary may take such actions as the Secretary
determines are necessary for implementing this section,
including entering into agreements with States that have
agreements with the Secretary to administer this program, and
the responsible party with respect to each State's
administration of this program and payments made by the
responsible party to claimants for lost wages and self-
employment income to establish processes for--
(A) the coordination of payment of oil spill unemployment
assistance under this section and payments for lost wages and
self employment income by the responsible party or the Oil
Spill Liability Trust Fund so as to minimize duplicate
payments to claimants, including methods to--
(i) prevent duplicate payments, such as developing methods
for claims processing that identify eligibility for both
types of payments so as to ensure the individual receives no
more than the amount specified in paragraph (1) of this
subsection;
(ii) document that individuals who received either oil
spill unemployment assistance or payments by the responsible
party or the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund prior to
execution of the agreement were unemployed as a result of the
oil spill; and
(iii) ensure prompt and accurate payment of oil spill
unemployment assistance under this section or payment of
claims by the responsible party or the Oil Spill Liability
Trust Fund;
(B) sharing and protecting information regarding an
individual's claim for oil spill unemployment assistance or
claims for replacement of wages that is necessary to
coordinate benefit payments and claims by the responsible
party or the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund under
subparagraph (A);
(C) reimbursement by the responsible party to the Federal
Government and States for payment of oil spill unemployment
assistance to individuals whose unemployment was the result
of a covered incident and for the administration of this
program, which may include the responsible party developing a
special fund for use by the States to pay benefits under this
program, in accordance with the process developed under
subparagraph (A) with a periodic reconciliation process to
make future claims unnecessary;
(D) ensuring that the responsible party shall make benefit
information available to government organizations upon
request, subject to the safeguards applicable to confidential
unemployment compensation information in Federal law and
regulations, which shall apply to the Secretary, the State
agencies administering the oil spill unemployment assistance
program, the responsible party, and the Oil Spill Liability
Trust Fund; and
[[Page H5377]]
(E) developing similar agreements with the responsible
party to coordinate payments of unemployment compensation
under State law related to a covered incident and payments
made by the responsible party or the Oil Spill Liability
Trust Fund.
(8) The procedures developed under this section may be
employed by States to coordinate payments of unemployment
compensation under State law related to a covered incident
and payments made by the responsible party or the Oil Spill
Liability Trust Fund.
(j) Liability of Responsible Parties.--Each responsible
party under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et
seq.) is liable for any costs, net of any payments by the
responsible party to the United States under subsection (i),
incurred by the United States under this section and shall,
upon the demand of the Secretary of the Treasury, reimburse
the general fund of the Treasury for these costs as well as
the costs of the United States in administering its
responsibilities under this section. If a responsible party
fails to pay a demand of the Secretary of the Treasury
pursuant to this subsection, the Secretary shall request the
Attorney General to bring a civil action against the
responsible party or a guarantor in an appropriate district
court to recover the amount of the demand, plus all costs
incurred in obtaining payment including prejudgment interest,
attorneys fees, and any other administrative and adjudicative
costs involved. Such reimbursement shall be without regard to
limits of liability under section 1004 of the Oil Pollution
Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2704).
(k) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect
immediately upon enactment of this Act and shall apply to all
responsible parties under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33
U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), including any party determined to be
liable under such Act for any incident that occurred prior to
the enactment of this section.
(l) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(1) Duplicate payments.--The term ``duplicate payments''
includes any payment that would cause the individual to
receive payments in excess of the amount determined under
paragraph (1) of subsection (i).
(2) Responsible party.--The term ``responsible party''
means one or more responsible parties.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Labor.
(4) State.--The term ``State'' means any State, as such
term is defined in section 3306(j)(1) of the Federal
Unemployment Tax Act (26 U.S.C. 3306(j)(1)).
(5) State agency.--The term ``State agency'' means the
State agency which administers the unemployment compensation
law of the State approved by the Secretary of Labor under
section 3304 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
Sec. 4153. (a) In General.--Section 173(a) of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2918(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) to provide assistance to the Governor of any State
within the boundaries of an area that is the subject of a
Presidential determination that additional resources are
necessary to respond to an incident related to a spill of
national significance declared under the National Contingency
Plan provided for under section 105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605) (`covered incident') to provide oil
spill relief employment in the area.''.
(b) Oil Spill Relief Employment Assistance Requirements.--
Section 173 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29
U.S.C. 2918) is amended by adding at the end the following
new subsection:
``(h) Oil Spill Relief Employment Assistance
Requirements.--
``(1) In general.--Funds made available under subsection
(a)(5)--
``(A) shall be used to provide oil spill relief employment
on projects involving the cleaning, restoration, renovation,
repair and reconstruction of lands, marshes, waters,
structures, and facilities located within the area of the
covered incident, as well as offshore areas related to such
incident, and projects that provide food, clothing, shelter,
and other humanitarian assistance to individuals harmed by
the covered incident;
``(B) may be expended through public and private agencies
and organizations engaged in such projects;
``(C) may be expended to provide employment and training
activities;
``(D) may be expended to provide personal protective
equipment to workers engaged in oil spill relief employment
described in subparagraph (A);
``(E) may be used to increase the capacity of States to
make available the full range of services authorized under
this title and provide information (in languages appropriate
to the individuals served) about, and access to, the variety
of public and private services available to individuals
adversely affected by the covered incident in One-Stop Career
Centers and other access points (including other public
facilities, mobile service delivery units, and social
services offices); and
``(F) may be used to provide temporary employment by public
sector entities for a period not to exceed 6 months, in
addition to the oil spill relief employment described in
subparagraph (A).
``(2) Eligibility.--An individual shall be eligible for
services under subsection (a)(5) if such individual is
temporarily or permanently laid off as a consequence of the
covered incident described in such subsection, is a
dislocated worker, is a long-term unemployed individual, or
meets such other criteria as the Secretary may establish.
``(3) Limitations on oil spill relief employment
assistance.--No individual shall be employed under subsection
(a)(5) for more than 6 months for oil spill relief employment
related to recovery from a single covered incident. The
Secretary may, upon reviewing a State's request, extend such
employment related to recovery from a single covered incident
for up to an additional 6 months.
``(4) Reimbursement.--Each responsible party under the Oil
Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) is liable for
any costs incurred by the United States under this subsection
or subsection (a)(5) and shall, upon the demand of the
Secretary of the Treasury, reimburse the general fund of the
Treasury for the costs incurred under this subsection or
subsection (a)(5) as well as the costs of the United States
in administering its responsibilities under this subsection
or subsection (a)(5). If a responsible party fails to pay a
demand of the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to this
subsection or subsection (a)(5), the Secretary shall request
the Attorney General to bring a civil action against the
responsible party or a guarantor in an appropriate district
court to recover the amount of the demand, plus all costs
incurred in obtaining payment including prejudgment interest,
attorney's fees, and any other administrative and
adjudicative costs involved. Such reimbursement shall be
without regard to limits of liability under section 1004 of
the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2704).
``(5) Use of available funds.--Funds appropriated for
fiscal years 2009 and 2010 and remaining available for
obligation by the Secretary to provide any assistance
authorized under this section shall be available to assist
workers affected by a covered incident, including workers who
have relocated from areas in which a covered incident has
been declared. Under such conditions as the Secretary may
approve, any State may use funds that remain available for
expenditure under any grants awarded to the State under this
section to provide any assistance authorized under this
subsection. Funds used pursuant to the authority provided
under this paragraph shall be subject to the reimbursement
requirements described in paragraph (4).
``(6) Requirements for grant applications.--An application
submitted to the Secretary under this subsection shall
include a detailed description of--
``(A) how the State will ensure the capacity of One-Stop
Career Centers and other access points to--
``(i) provide affected individuals with information, in
languages appropriate to the individuals served, about the
range of available services; and
``(ii) provide affected individuals with access to the
range of needed services;
``(B) how the State will prioritize individuals who are
temporarily or permanently laid off as a consequence of the
covered incident in the assignment of temporary employment
positions; and
``(C) any other supporting information the Secretary may
require.''.
(c) Effective Date.--This section, and the amendments made
by this section, shall take effect immediately upon enactment
of this Act and shall apply to all responsible parties under
the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.),
including any party determined to be liable under such Act
for any incident that occurred prior to the enactment of this
Act.
(d) Appropriation.--There is appropriated $50,000,000 for
an additional amount for ``Department of Labor--Employment
and Training Administration--Training and Employment
Services'', to carry out section 173(a)(5) and (h) of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 29l8(a)(5) and
(h)) (``WIA'') as amended by this Act, to remain available
through June 30, 2011: Provided, That funding shall be
available upon enactment of this Act, notwithstanding section
189(g)(l) of WIA.
Sec. 4154. (a) The Secretary of Labor may reserve not more
than 1 percent of the funds available to carry out section
4152 of this Act and section 173(h) of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 (as added by section 4153 of this Act)
for transfer to appropriate Department of Labor accounts for
program administration and support activities in the
Department of Labor associated with such sections, and for
the increased worker protection and workplace benefit
activities and oversight and coordination activities in
connection with the application of laws and regulations
associated with the Department's response to spills of
national significance declared under the National Contingency
Plan provided for under section 105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605).
(b) A responsible party under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990
(33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) shall, upon the demand of the
Secretary of the Treasury, reimburse the general fund of the
Treasury for all or a portion of the additional amount
appropriated herein, as determined by the Secretary of the
Treasury.
(c) If a responsible party fails to pay a demand of the
Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to this section, the
Secretary shall request the Attorney General to bring a civil
[[Page H5378]]
action against the responsible party or a guarantor in an
appropriate district court to recover the amount of the
demand, plus all costs incurred in obtaining payment
including prejudgment interest, attorneys fees, and any other
administrative and adjudicative costs involved. Such
reimbursement shall be without regard to limits of liability
under section 1004 of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33
U.S.C. 2704).
(d) This section shall take effect immediately upon
enactment of this Act and shall apply to all responsible
parties under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, including any
party determined to be liable under such Act for any incident
that occurred prior to the enactment of this Act.
(e) The Secretary of Labor shall provide to the Committees
on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the
Senate a report describing the use of the funds not later
than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.
(rescission)
Sec. 4155. Of the unobligated balance of funds appropriated
without fiscal year limitation under the heading ``Department
of Health and Human Services--Office of the Secretary--Public
Health and Social Services Emergency Fund'' in fiscal years
2006 through 2010 to prepare for and respond to an influenza
pandemic (including any amount not yet designated by the
President as emergency funds) and the unobligated balance of
funds transferred to ``Public Health and Social Services
Emergency Fund'' pursuant to the fourth paragraph under such
heading in Public Law 111-117, $2,000,000,000 is rescinded:
Provided, That the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in
consultation with the Director of the Office of Management
and Budget, shall determine the amount to be rescinded from
each appropriation and shall transmit a written notice of
such determination to the Committees on Appropriations of the
House of Representatives and the Senate not later than 30
days after enactment of this Act: Provided further, That
section 3002 shall not apply to $500,000,000 of the amount in
this section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4156. Of the funds appropriated for ``Department of
Education--Innovation and Improvement'' in division D of
Public Law 111-117 (123 Stat. 3263), $100,000,000 is
rescinded, to be derived only from the amount available for
grants authorized under subpart I of part B of title V of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965: Provided,
That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in this
section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4157. Of the funds appropriated for ``Department of
Education--Innovation and Improvement'' in division A of
Public Law 111-5 (123 Stat. 182) and division D of Public Law
111-117 (123 Stat. 3263), $200,000,000 is rescinded, to be
derived only from amounts available for the Teacher Incentive
Fund: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to
$100,000,000 of the amount in this section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4158. Of the funds appropriated for ``Department of
Education--State Fiscal Stabilization Fund'' in title XIV of
division A of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (Public Law 111-5; 123 Stat. 279), $500,000,000 is
rescinded, to be derived only from the amount made available
for grants under section 14006 of such title and through a
corresponding reduction in the total amount reserved under
section 14001(c) of such title for grants under such section
14006.
Sec. 4159. Amounts appropriated to the Architect of the
Capitol in the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2006
(Public Law 109-55) under the heading ``Architect of the
Capitol--Capitol Police Building and Grounds'' and that
remain available until September 30, 2010, and amounts
appropriated to the Architect of the Capitol in the
Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-
68) under the heading ``Architect of the Capitol--Capitol
Police Buildings, Grounds and Security'' and that remain
available until September 30, 2014, shall be available to the
Architect of the Capitol for the purchase of real property
(including any buildings or facilities) for the use of the
Capitol Police.
Sec. 4160. (a) Termination of OEPPO.--Section 905 of the
Emergency Supplemental Act, 2002 (2 U.S.C. 130i) is repealed.
(b) Transfer to Sergeant at Arms.--The functions and
responsibilities of the Office of Emergency Planning,
Preparedness, and Operations under section 905 of the
Emergency Supplemental Act, 2002 (2 U.S.C. 130i) (as in
effect on the day before the date referred to in subsection
(c)) shall be transferred and assigned to the Sergeant at
Arms of the House of Representatives.
(c) Effective Date.--This section and the amendment made by
this section shall take effect February 1, 2010.
(rescission)
Sec. 4161. Of the unobligated balances available to the
Architect of the Capitol from prior year appropriations for
the Capitol Visitor Center project, $5,000,000 is rescinded:
Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in
this section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4162. Of the unobligated balances available under
``Department of Defense, Military Construction, Army'' from
prior appropriations Acts, $340,000,000 is rescinded:
Provided, That no funds may be rescinded from amounts that
were designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement
or as appropriations for overseas deployments and other
activities pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the budget
or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
1985: Provided further, That section 3002 shall not apply to
the amount in this section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4163. Of the unobligated balances available under
``Department of Defense, Military Construction, Navy and
Marine Corps'' from prior appropriations Acts, $110,000,000
is rescinded: Provided, That no funds may be rescinded from
amounts that were designated by the Congress as an emergency
requirement or as appropriations for overseas deployments and
other activities pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the
budget or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control
Act of 1985: Provided further, That section 3002 shall not
apply to the amount in this section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4164. Of the unobligated balances available under
``Department of Defense, Military Construction, Air Force''
from prior appropriations Acts, $50,000,000 is rescinded:
Provided, That no funds may be rescinded from amounts that
were designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement
or as appropriations for overseas deployments and other
activities pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the budget
or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
1985: Provided further, That section 3002 shall not apply to
the amount in this section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4165. Of the funds made available for the General
Operating Expenses account of the Department of Veterans
Affairs in section 2201(e)(4)(A)(ii) of division B of Public
Law 111-5 (123 Stat. 454; 26 U.S.C. 6428 note), $6,100,000 is
rescinded.
Sec. 4166. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available by this Act may be obligated by any covered
executive agency in contravention of the certification
requirement of section 6(b) of the Iran Sanctions Act of
1996, as included in the revisions to the Federal Acquisition
Regulation pursuant to such section.
(rescissions)
Sec. 4167. (a) Millennium Challenge Corporation.--Of the
unobligated balances available under the heading ``Millennium
Challenge Corporation'' in title III of division H of Public
Law 111-8 and under such heading in prior Acts making
appropriations for the Department of State, foreign
operations, and related programs, $150,000,000 is rescinded.
(b) Civilian Stabilization Initiative.--
(1) Department of state.--Of the unobligated balances
available under the heading ``Department of State--
Administration of Foreign Affairs--Civilian Stabilization
Initiative'' in prior Acts making appropriations for the
Department of State, foreign operations, and related
programs, $40,000,000 is rescinded.
(2) United states agency for international development.--Of
the unobligated balances available under the heading ``United
States Agency for International Development--Funds
Appropriated to the President--Civilian Stabilization
Initiative'' in prior Acts making appropriations for the
Department of State, foreign operations, and related
programs, $30,000,000 is rescinded.
(c) Section 3002 shall not apply to the amounts in this
section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4168. Of the unobligated balances available under the
heading ``Capital Investment Fund'' in title XI of division A
of Public Law 111-5, $40,000,000 is rescinded.
(rescission)
Sec. 4169. Of the unobligated balances of funds made
available under section 108(b) of Public Law 101-100, as
added by Public Law 101-130, to the Emergency Fund authorized
by section 125 of title 23, United States Code, $10,893,687
is rescinded: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to
the amount in this section.
(rescissions)
Sec. 4170. There are rescinded the following amounts from
the specified accounts:
(1) ``Department of Transportation--Federal Aviation
Administration--Facilities and Equipment'', $2,182,544, to be
derived from unobligated balances made available under this
heading in Public Law 108-324.
(2) ``Department of Transportation--Federal Aviation
Administration--Facilities and Equipment'', $5,705,750, to be
derived from unobligated balances made available under this
heading in Public Law 109-148.
(3) ``Department of Housing and Urban Development--
Community Planning and Development--Community Development
Fund'', $111,602,923, to be derived from unobligated balances
made available under this heading in chapter 10 of title I of
division B of Public Law 110-329.
Sec. 4171. The item relating to ``Federal Housing
Administration--General and Special Risk Program Account'' in
title II of division A of the Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-117; 123 Stat. 3091) is amended by
striking ``$15,000,000,000'' and inserting
``$20,000,000,000'': Provided, That section 3002 shall not
apply to the amount in this section.
Sec. 4172. Section 1117(d) of the Transportation Equity
Act for the 21st Century (112
[[Page H5379]]
Stat. 161) is repealed and the designation made by that
section shall no longer be effective.
(rescission)
Sec. 4173. Of the unobligated balances of contract
authority apportioned to each State for the programs listed
in section 105(a)(2) of title 23, United States Code (except
the equity bonus program under section 105 of such title and
the high priority projects program under section 117 of such
title), $2,200,000,000 is permanently rescinded: Provided,
That such rescission shall be distributed within each State
among all programs for which funds were apportioned for
fiscal year 2009 and to which the rescission applies, to the
extent sufficient funds remain available for obligation, in
the ratio that the amount of funds apportioned for each such
program for such fiscal year, bears to the amount of funds
apportioned for all such programs for such fiscal year:
Provided further, That funds set aside under sections
133(d)(2) and 133(d)(3) of title 23, United States Code,
shall be treated as being apportioned for the purposes of
this section: Provided further, That section 1132 of Public
Law 110-140 shall not apply to the rescission under this
section: Provided further, That section 3002 shall not apply
to the amount in this section.
(rescission)
Sec. 4174. Of the unobligated balances of funds under the
heading ``Department of Housing and Urban Development--
Community Planning and Development--Community Development
Fund'' made available by section 159 of Public Law 110-92, as
added by division B of Public Law 110-116, $400,000,000 is
rescinded.
CHAPTER 2
PRESERVE ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE GENERICS ACT
short title
Sec. 4201. This chapter may be cited as the ``Preserve
Access to Affordable Generics Act''.
unlawful compensation for delay
Sec. 4202. (a) In General.--The Federal Trade Commission
Act (15 U.S.C. 44 et seq.) is amended--
(1) by redesignating section 28 as section 29; and
(2) by inserting before section 29, as redesignated, the
following:
``SEC. 28. PRESERVING ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE GENERICS.
``(a) In General.--
``(1) Enforcement proceeding.--The Federal Trade Commission
may initiate a proceeding to enforce the provisions of this
section against the parties to any agreement resolving or
settling, on a final or interim basis, a patent infringement
claim, in connection with the sale of a drug product.
``(2) Presumption.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), in such a
proceeding, an agreement shall be presumed to have
anticompetitive effects and be unlawful if--
``(i) an ANDA filer receives anything of value; and
``(ii) the ANDA filer agrees to limit or forego research,
development, manufacturing, marketing, or sales of the ANDA
product for any period of time.
``(B) Exception.--The presumption in subparagraph (A) shall
not apply if the parties to such agreement demonstrate by
clear and convincing evidence that the procompetitive
benefits of the agreement outweigh the anticompetitive
effects of the agreement.
``(b) Competitive Factors.--In determining whether the
settling parties have met their burden under subsection
(a)(2)(B), the fact finder shall consider--
``(1) the length of time remaining until the end of the
life of the relevant patent, compared with the agreed upon
entry date for the ANDA product;
``(2) the value to consumers of the competition from the
ANDA product allowed under the agreement;
``(3) the form and amount of consideration received by the
ANDA filer in the agreement resolving or settling the patent
infringement claim;
``(4) the revenue the ANDA filer would have received by
winning the patent litigation;
``(5) the reduction in the NDA holder's revenues if it had
lost the patent litigation;
``(6) the time period between the date of the agreement
conveying value to the ANDA filer and the date of the
settlement of the patent infringement claim; and
``(7) any other factor that the fact finder, in its
discretion, deems relevant to its determination of
competitive effects under this subsection.
``(c) Limitations.--In determining whether the settling
parties have met their burden under subsection (a)(2)(B), the
fact finder shall not presume--
``(1) that entry would not have occurred until the
expiration of the relevant patent or statutory exclusivity;
or
``(2) that the agreement's provision for entry of the ANDA
product prior to the expiration of the relevant patent or
statutory exclusivity means that the agreement is pro-
competitive, although such evidence may be relevant to the
fact finder's determination under this section.
``(d) Exclusions.--Nothing in this section shall prohibit a
resolution or settlement of a patent infringement claim in
which the consideration granted by the NDA holder to the ANDA
filer as part of the resolution or settlement includes only
one or more of the following:
``(1) The right to market the ANDA product in the United
States prior to the expiration of--
``(A) any patent that is the basis for the patent
infringement claim; or
``(B) any patent right or other statutory exclusivity that
would prevent the marketing of such drug.
``(2) A payment for reasonable litigation expenses not to
exceed $7,500,000.
``(3) A covenant not to sue on any claim that the ANDA
product infringes a United States patent.
``(e) Regulations and Enforcement.--
``(1) Regulations.--The Federal Trade Commission may issue,
in accordance with section 553 of title 5, United States
Code, regulations implementing and interpreting this section.
These regulations may exempt certain types of agreements
described in subsection (a) if the Commission determines such
agreements will further market competition and benefit
consumers. Judicial review of any such regulation shall be in
the United States District Court for the District of Columbia
pursuant to section 706 of title 5, United States Code.
``(2) Enforcement.--A violation of this section shall be
treated as a violation of section 5.
``(3) Judicial review.--Any person, partnership or
corporation that is subject to a final order of the
Commission, issued in an administrative adjudicative
proceeding under the authority of subsection (a)(1), may,
within 30 days of the issuance of such order, petition for
review of such order in the United States Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit or the United States
Court of Appeals for the circuit in which the ultimate parent
entity, as defined at 16 C.F.R. 801.1(a)(3), of the NDA
holder is incorporated as of the date that the NDA is filed
with the Secretary of the Food and Drug Administration, or
the United States Court of Appeals for the circuit in which
the ultimate parent entity of the ANDA filer is incorporated
as of the date that the ANDA is filed with the Secretary of
the Food and Drug Administration. In such a review
proceeding, the findings of the Commission as to the facts,
if supported by evidence, shall be conclusive.
``(f) Antitrust Laws.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to modify, impair, or supersede the applicability
of the antitrust laws as defined in subsection (a) of the
first section of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12(a)) and of
section 5 of this Act to the extent that section 5 applies to
unfair methods of competition. Nothing in this section shall
modify, impair, limit or supersede the right of an ANDA filer
to assert claims or counterclaims against any person, under
the antitrust laws or other laws relating to unfair
competition.
``(g) Penalties.--
``(1) Forfeiture.--Each person, partnership or corporation
that violates or assists in the violation of this section
shall forfeit and pay to the United States a civil penalty
sufficient to deter violations of this section, but in no
event greater than 3 times the value received by the party
that is reasonably attributable to a violation of this
section. If no such value has been received by the NDA
holder, the penalty to the NDA holder shall be shall be
sufficient to deter violations, but in no event greater than
3 times the value given to the ANDA filer reasonably
attributable to the violation of this section. Such penalty
shall accrue to the United States and may be recovered in a
civil action brought by the Federal Trade Commission, in its
own name by any of its attorneys designated by it for such
purpose, in a district court of the United States against any
person, partnership or corporation that violates this
section. In such actions, the United States district courts
are empowered to grant mandatory injunctions and such other
and further equitable relief as they deem appropriate.
``(2) Cease and desist.--
``(A) In general.--If the Commission has issued a cease and
desist order with respect to a person, partnership or
corporation in an administrative adjudicative proceeding
under the authority of subsection (a)(1), an action brought
pursuant to paragraph (1) may be commenced against such
person, partnership or corporation at any time before the
expiration of 1 year after such order becomes final pursuant
to section 5(g).
``(B) Exception.--In an action under subparagraph (A), the
findings of the Commission as to the material facts in the
administrative adjudicative proceeding with respect to such
person's, partnership's or corporation's violation of this
section shall be conclusive unless--
``(i) the terms of such cease and desist order expressly
provide that the Commission's findings shall not be
conclusive; or
``(ii) the order became final by reason of section 5(g)(1),
in which case such finding shall be conclusive if supported
by evidence.
``(3) Civil penalty.--In determining the amount of the
civil penalty described in this section, the court shall take
into account--
``(A) the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the
violation;
``(B) with respect to the violator, the degree of
culpability, any history of violations, the ability to pay,
any effect on the ability to continue doing business, profits
earned by the NDA holder, compensation received by the ANDA
filer, and the amount of commerce affected; and
``(C) other matters that justice requires.
``(4) Remedies in addition.--Remedies provided in this
subsection are in addition to,
[[Page H5380]]
and not in lieu of, any other remedy provided by Federal law.
Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to affect any
authority of the Commission under any other provision of law.
``(h) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Agreement.--The term `agreement' means anything that
would constitute an agreement under section 1 of the Sherman
Act (15 U.S.C. 1) or section 5 of this Act.
``(2) Agreement resolving or settling a patent infringement
claim.--The term `agreement resolving or settling a patent
infringement claim' includes any agreement that is entered
into within 30 days of the resolution or the settlement of
the claim, or any other agreement that is contingent upon,
provides a contingent condition for, or is otherwise related
to the resolution or settlement of the claim.
``(3) ANDA.--The term `ANDA' means an abbreviated new drug
application, as defined under section 505(j) of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j)).
``(4) ANDA filer.--The term `ANDA filer' means a party who
has filed an ANDA with the Food and Drug Administration.
``(5) ANDA product.--The term `ANDA product' means the
product to be manufactured under the ANDA that is the subject
of the patent infringement claim.
``(6) Drug product.--The term `drug product' means a
finished dosage form (e.g., tablet, capsule, or solution)
that contains a drug substance, generally, but not
necessarily, in association with 1 or more other ingredients,
as defined in section 314.3(b) of title 21, Code of Federal
Regulations.
``(7) NDA.--The term `NDA' means a new drug application, as
defined under section 505(b) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(b)).
``(8) NDA holder.--The term `NDA holder' means--
``(A) the party that received FDA approval to market a drug
product pursuant to an NDA;
``(B) a party owning or controlling enforcement of the
patent listed in the Approved Drug Products With Therapeutic
Equivalence Evaluations (commonly known as the `FDA Orange
Book') in connection with the NDA; or
``(C) the predecessors, subsidiaries, divisions, groups,
and affiliates controlled by, controlling, or under common
control with any of the entities described in subparagraphs
(A) and (B) (such control to be presumed by direct or
indirect share ownership of 50 percent or greater), as well
as the licensees, licensors, successors, and assigns of each
of the entities.
``(9) Patent infringement.--The term `patent infringement'
means infringement of any patent or of any filed patent
application, extension, reissue, renewal, division,
continuation, continuation in part, reexamination, patent
term restoration, patents of addition and extensions thereof.
``(10) Patent infringement claim.--The term `patent
infringement claim' means any allegation made to an ANDA
filer, whether or not included in a complaint filed with a
court of law, that its ANDA or ANDA product may infringe any
patent held by, or exclusively licensed to, the NDA holder of
the drug product.
``(11) Statutory exclusivity.--The term `statutory
exclusivity' means those prohibitions on the approval of drug
applications under clauses (ii) through (iv) of section
505(c)(3)(E) (5- and 3-year data exclusivity), section 527
(orphan drug exclusivity), or section 505A (pediatric
exclusivity) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act .''.
(b) Effective Date.--Section 28 of the Federal Trade
Commission Act, as added by this section, shall apply to all
agreements described in section 28(a)(1) of that Act entered
into after November 15, 2009. Section 28(g) of the Federal
Trade Commission Act, as added by this section, shall not
apply to agreements entered into before the date of enactment
of this chapter.
notice and certification of agreements
Sec. 4203. (a) Notice of All Agreements.--Section
1112(c)(2) of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement,
and Modernization Act of 2003 (21 U.S.C. 355 note) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``the Commission the'' and inserting the
following: ``the Commission--
``(1) the'';
(2) by striking the period and inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by inserting at the end the following:
``(2) any other agreement the parties enter into within 30
days of entering into an agreement covered by subsection (a)
or (b).''.
(b) Certification of Agreements.--Section 1112 of such Act
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Certification.--The Chief Executive Officer or the
company official responsible for negotiating any agreement
required to be filed under subsection (a), (b), or (c) shall
execute and file with the Assistant Attorney General and the
Commission a certification as follows: `I declare that the
following is true, correct, and complete to the best of my
knowledge: The materials filed with the Federal Trade
Commission and the Department of Justice under section 1112
of subtitle B of title XI of the Medicare Prescription Drug,
Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, with respect to
the agreement referenced in this certification: (1) represent
the complete, final, and exclusive agreement between the
parties; (2) include any ancillary agreements that are
contingent upon, provide a contingent condition for, or are
otherwise related to, the referenced agreement; and (3)
include written descriptions of any oral agreements,
representations, commitments, or promises between the parties
that are responsive to subsection (a) or (b) of such section
1112 and have not been reduced to writing.'.''.
forfeiture of 180-day exclusivity period
Sec. 4204. Section 505(j)(5)(D)(i)(V) of the Federal Food,
Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j)(5)(D)(i)(V)) is
amended by inserting ``section 28 of the Federal Trade
Commission Act or'' after ``that the agreement has
violated''.
commission litigation authority
Sec. 4205. Section 16(a)(2) of the Federal Trade Commission
Act (15 U.S.C. 56(a)(2)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``or'' after the
semicolon;
(2) in subparagraph (E), by inserting ``or'' after the
semicolon; and
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following:
``(F) under section 28;''.
statute of limitations
Sec. 4206. The Commission shall commence any enforcement
proceeding described in section 28 of the Federal Trade
Commission Act, as added by section 3202, except for an
action described in section 28(g)(2) of the Federal Trade
Commission Act, not later than 3 years after the date on
which the parties to the agreement file the Notice of
Agreement as provided by section 1112(c) of the Medicare
Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003
(21 U.S.C. 355 note).
severability
Sec. 4207. If any provision of this chapter, an amendment
made by this chapter, or the application of such provision or
amendment to any person or circumstance is held to be
unconstitutional, the remainder of this chapter, the
amendments made by this chapter, and the application of the
provisions of such chapter or amendments to any person or
circumstance shall not be affected thereby.
CHAPTER 3
COMPUTATION OF MEDICAID AVERAGE MANUFACTURER PRICE
computation of medicaid average manufacturer price (amp) for drugs not
dispensed through retail community pharmacies
Sec. 4301. (a) In General.--Section 1927(k)(1)(B)(i)(IV)
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396r-
8(k)(1)(B)(i)(IV)), as amended by section 2503(a)(2)(B) of
the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law
111-148) and by section 1102(c)(2) of the Health Care and
Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-152), is
amended by inserting after ``retail community pharmacy'' the
following: ``, except that in the case of an inhalation,
infusion, or injectable drug that is not dispensed through a
retail community pharmacy, the exclusion under this subclause
shall not apply to payments received from, and rebates and
discounts provided to, distributors or hospitals, clinics,
doctors, and other entities directly dispensing the drug;
and''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect as if included in section 2503 of Public
Law 111-148.
CHAPTER 4
PUBLIC SAFETY EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE COOPERATION ACT
short title
Sec. 4401. This chapter may be cited as the ``Public Safety
Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2010''.
declaration of purpose and policy
Sec. 4402. The Congress declares that the following is the
policy of the United States:
(1) Labor-management relationships and partnerships are
based on trust, mutual respect, open communication, bilateral
consensual problem solving, and shared accountability. Labor-
management cooperation fully utilizes the strengths of both
parties to best serve the interests of the public, operating
as a team, to carry out the public safety mission in a
quality work environment. In many public safety agencies, it
is the union that provides the institutional stability as
elected leaders and appointees come and go.
(2) State and local public safety officers play an
essential role in the efforts of the United States to detect,
prevent, and respond to terrorist attacks, and to respond to
natural disasters, hazardous materials, and other mass
casualty incidents. State and local public safety officers,
as first responders, are a component of our Nation's National
Incident Management System, developed by the Department of
Homeland Security to coordinate response to and recovery from
terrorism, major natural disasters, and other major
emergencies. Public safety employer-employee cooperation is
essential in meeting these needs and is, therefore, in the
National interest.
(3) The Federal Government needs to encourage conciliation,
mediation, and voluntary arbitration to aid and encourage
employers and the representatives of their employees to reach
and maintain agreements concerning rates of pay, hours, and
working conditions, and to make all reasonable efforts
through negotiations to settle their differences by mutual
agreement reached through collective bargaining or by such
methods as may be provided for in any applicable agreement
for the settlement of disputes.
[[Page H5381]]
(4) The absence of adequate cooperation between public
safety employers and employees has implications for the
security of employees and can affect interstate and
intrastate commerce. The lack of such labor-management
cooperation can detrimentally impact the upgrading of police
and fire services of local communities, the health and well-
being of public safety officers, and the morale of the fire
and police departments. Additionally, these factors could
have significant commercial repercussions. Moreover,
providing minimal standards for collective bargaining
negotiations in the public safety sector can prevent
industrial strife between labor and management that
interferes with the normal flow of commerce.
(5) Many States and localities already provide public
safety officers with collective bargaining rights comparable
to or greater than the rights and responsibilities set forth
in this chapter, and such State and local laws should be
respected.
definitions
Sec. 4403. In this chapter:
(1) Authority.--The term ``Authority'' means the Federal
Labor Relations Authority.
(2) Confidential employee.--The term ``confidential
employee'' has the meaning given such term under applicable
State law on the date of enactment of this Act. If no such
State law is in effect, the term means an individual,
employed by a public safety employer, who--
(A) is designated as confidential; and
(B) is an individual who routinely assists, in a
confidential capacity, supervisory employees and management
employees.
(3) Emergency medical services personnel.--The term
``emergency medical services personnel'' means an individual
who provides out-of-hospital emergency medical care,
including an emergency medical technician, paramedic, or
first responder.
(4) Employer; public safety agency.--The terms ``employer''
and ``public safety agency'' mean any State, or political
subdivision of a State, that employs public safety officers.
(5) Firefighter.--The term ``firefighter'' has the meaning
given the term ``employee engaged in fire protection
activities'' in section 3(y) of the Fair Labor Standards Act
of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203(y)).
(6) Labor organization.--The term ``labor organization''
means an organization composed in whole or in part of
employees, in which employees participate, and which
represents such employees before public safety agencies
concerning grievances, conditions of employment, and related
matters.
(7) Law enforcement officer.--The term ``law enforcement
officer'' has the meaning given such term in section 1204 of
the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42
U.S.C. 3796b).
(8) Management employee.--The term ``management employee''
has the meaning given such term under applicable State law in
effect on the date of enactment of this Act. If no such State
law is in effect, the term means an individual employed by a
public safety employer in a position that requires or
authorizes the individual to formulate, determine, or
influence the policies of the employer.
(9) Person.--The term ``person'' means an individual or a
labor organization.
(10) Public safety officer.--The term ``public safety
officer''--
(A) means an employee of a public safety agency who is a
law enforcement officer, a firefighter, or an emergency
medical services personnel;
(B) includes an individual who is temporarily transferred
to a supervisory or management position; and
(C) does not include a permanent supervisory, management,
or confidential employee.
(11) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several
States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and
any territory or possession of the United States.
(12) Substantially provides.--The term ``substantially
provides'', when used with respect to the rights and
responsibilities described in section 3404(b), means
compliance with each right and responsibility described in
such section.
(13) Supervisory employee.--The term ``supervisory
employee'' has the meaning given such term under applicable
State law in effect on the date of enactment of this Act. If
no such State law is in effect, the term means an individual,
employed by a public safety employer, who--
(A) has the authority in the interest of the employer to
hire, direct, assign, promote, reward, transfer, furlough,
lay off, recall, suspend, discipline, or remove public safety
officers, to adjust their grievances, or to effectively
recommend such action, if the exercise of the authority is
not merely routine or clerical in nature but requires the
consistent exercise of independent judgment; and
(B) devotes a majority of time at work to exercising such
authority.
determination of rights and responsibilities
Sec. 4404. (a) Determination.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Authority shall make a
determination as to whether a State substantially provides
for the rights and responsibilities described in subsection
(b).
(2) Consideration of additional opinions.--In making the
determination described in paragraph (1), the Authority shall
consider the opinions of affected employers and labor
organizations. In the case where the Authority is notified by
an affected employer and labor organization that both parties
agree that the law applicable to such employer and labor
organization substantially provides for the rights and
responsibilities described in subsection (b), the Authority
shall give such agreement weight to the maximum extent
practicable in making the Authority's determination under
this subsection.
(3) Limited criteria.--In making the determination
described in paragraph (1), the Authority shall be limited to
the application of the criteria described in subsection (b)
and shall not require any additional criteria.
(4) Subsequent determinations.--
(A) In general.--A determination made pursuant to paragraph
(1) shall remain in effect unless and until the Authority
issues a subsequent determination, in accordance with the
procedures set forth in subparagraph (B).
(B) Procedures for subsequent determinations.--Upon
establishing that a material change in State law or its
interpretation has occurred, an employer or a labor
organization may submit a written request for a subsequent
determination. If satisfied that a material change in State
law or its interpretation has occurred, the Authority shall
issue a subsequent determination not later than 30 days after
receipt of such request.
(5) Judicial review.--Any person or employer aggrieved by a
determination of the Authority under this section may, during
the 60-day period beginning on the date on which the
determination was made, petition any United States Court of
Appeals in the circuit in which the person or employer
resides or transacts business or in the District of Columbia
circuit, for judicial review. In any judicial review of a
determination by the Authority, the procedures contained in
subsections (c) and (d) of section 7123 of title 5, United
States Code, shall be followed.
(b) Rights and Responsibilities.--In making a determination
described in subsection (a), the Authority shall consider a
State's law to substantially provide the required rights and
responsibilities unless such law fails to provide rights and
responsibilities comparable to or greater than the following:
(1) Granting public safety officers the right to form and
join a labor organization, which may exclude management
employees, supervisory employees, and confidential employees,
that is, or seeks to be, recognized as the exclusive
bargaining representative of such employees.
(2) Requiring public safety employers to recognize the
employees' labor organization (freely chosen by a majority of
the employees), to agree to bargain with the labor
organization, and to commit any agreements to writing in a
contract or memorandum of understanding.
(3) Providing for the right to bargain over hours, wages,
and terms and conditions of employment.
(4) Making available an interest impasse resolution
mechanism, such as fact-finding, mediation, arbitration, or
comparable procedures.
(5) Requiring enforcement of all rights, responsibilities,
and protections provided by State law and enumerated in this
section, and of any written contract or memorandum of
understanding between a labor organization and a public
safety employer, through--
(A) a State administrative agency, if the State so chooses;
and
(B) at the election of an aggrieved party, the State
courts.
(c) Compliance With Requirements.--If the Authority
determines, acting pursuant to its authority under subsection
(a), that a State substantially provides rights and
responsibilities described in subsection (b), then this
chapter shall not preempt State law.
(d) Failure to Meet Requirements.--
(1) In general.--If the Authority determines, acting
pursuant to its authority under subsection (a), that a State
does not substantially provide for the rights and
responsibilities described in subsection (b), then such State
shall be subject to the regulations and procedures described
in section 3405 beginning on the later of--
(A) the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of
this Act;
(B) the date that is the last day of the first regular
session of the legislature of the State that begins after the
date of the enactment of this Act; or
(C) in the case of a State receiving a subsequent
determination under subsection (a)(4), the date that is the
last day of the first regular session of the legislature of
the State that begins after the date the Authority made the
determination.
(2) Partial failure.--If the Authority makes a
determination that a State does not substantially provide for
the rights and responsibilities described in subsection (b)
solely because the State law substantially provides for such
rights and responsibilities for certain categories of public
safety officers covered by this chapter but not others, the
Authority shall identify those categories of public safety
officers that shall be subject to the regulations and
procedures described in section 4405, pursuant to section
4408(b)(3) and beginning on the appropriate date described in
paragraph (1), and those categories of public safety officers
that shall remain subject to State law.
[[Page H5382]]
role of federal labor relations authority
Sec. 4405. (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Authority shall issue
regulations in accordance with the rights and
responsibilities described in section 4404(b) establishing
collective bargaining procedures for employers and public
safety officers in States which the Authority has determined,
acting pursuant to section 4404(a), do not substantially
provide for such rights and responsibilities.
(b) Role of the Federal Labor Relations Authority.--The
Authority, to the extent provided in this chapter and in
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Authority,
shall--
(1) determine the appropriateness of units for labor
organization representation;
(2) supervise or conduct elections to determine whether a
labor organization has been selected as an exclusive
representative by a voting majority of the employees in an
appropriate unit;
(3) resolve issues relating to the duty to bargain in good
faith;
(4) conduct hearings and resolve complaints of unfair labor
practices;
(5) resolve exceptions to the awards of arbitrators;
(6) protect the right of each employee to form, join, or
assist any labor organization, or to refrain from any such
activity, freely and without fear of penalty or reprisal, and
protect each employee in the exercise of such right; and
(7) take such other actions as are necessary and
appropriate to effectively administer this chapter, including
issuing subpoenas requiring the attendance and testimony of
witnesses and the production of documentary or other evidence
from any place in the United States, and administering oaths,
taking or ordering the taking of depositions, ordering
responses to written interrogatories, and receiving and
examining witnesses.
(c) Enforcement.--
(1) Authority to petition court.--The Authority may
petition any United States Court of Appeals with jurisdiction
over the parties, or the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit, to enforce any final orders
under this section, and for appropriate temporary relief or a
restraining order. Any petition under this section shall be
conducted in accordance with subsections (c) and (d) of
section 7123 of title 5, United States Code.
(2) Private right of action.--Unless the Authority has
filed a petition for enforcement as provided in paragraph
(1), any party has the right to file suit in any appropriate
district court of the United States to enforce compliance
with the regulations issued by the Authority pursuant to
subsection (b), and to enforce compliance with any order
issued by the Authority pursuant to this section. The right
provided by this subsection to bring a suit to enforce
compliance with any order issued by the Authority pursuant to
this section shall terminate upon the filing of a petition
seeking the same relief by the Authority.
strikes and lockouts prohibited
Sec. 4406. (a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), an
employer, public safety officer, or labor organization may
not engage in a lockout, sickout, work slowdown, strike, or
any other organized job action that will measurably disrupt
the delivery of emergency services and is designed to compel
an employer, public safety officer, or labor organization to
agree to the terms of a proposed contract.
(b) No Preemption.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to preempt any law of any State or political
subdivision of any State with respect to strikes by public
safety officers.
existing collective bargaining units and agreements
Sec. 4407. A certification, recognition, election-held,
collective bargaining agreement or memorandum of
understanding which has been issued, approved, or ratified by
any public employee relations board or commission or by any
State or political subdivision or its agents (management
officials) and is in effect on the day before the date of
enactment of this Act shall not be invalidated by the
enactment of this Act.
construction and compliance
Sec. 4408. (a) Construction.--Nothing in this chapter
shall be construed--
(1) to preempt or limit the remedies, rights, and
procedures of any law of any State or political subdivision
of any State that provides greater or comparable rights and
responsibilities than the rights and responsibilities
described in section 4404(b);
(2) to prevent a State from enforcing a right-to-work law
that prohibits employers and labor organizations from
negotiating provisions in a labor agreement that require
union membership or payment of union fees as a condition of
employment;
(3) to preempt or limit any State law in effect on the date
of enactment of this Act that provides for the rights and
responsibilities described in section 4404(b) solely because
such State law permits an employee to appear on the
employee's own behalf with respect to the employee's
employment relations with the public safety agency involved;
(4) to preempt or limit any State law in effect on the date
of enactment of this Act that provides for the rights and
responsibilities described in section 4404(b) solely because
such State law excludes from its coverage employees of a
State militia or national guard;
(5) to permit parties in States subject to the regulations
and procedures described in section 4405 to negotiate
provisions that would prohibit an employee from engaging in
part-time employment or volunteer activities during off-duty
hours;
(6) to prohibit a State from exempting from coverage under
this chapter a political subdivision of the State that has a
population of less than 5,000 or that employs less than 25
full-time employees; or
(7) to preempt or limit the laws or ordinances of any State
or political subdivision of a State that provide for the
rights and responsibilities described in section 4404(b)
solely because such law or ordinance does not require
bargaining with respect to pension, retirement, or health
benefits.
For purposes of paragraph (6), the term ``employee'' includes
each and every individual employed by the political
subdivision except any individual elected by popular vote or
appointed to serve on a board or commission.
(b) Compliance.--
(1) Actions of states.--Nothing in this chapter or the
regulations promulgated under this chapter shall be construed
to require a State to rescind or preempt the laws or
ordinances of any of the State's political subdivisions if
such laws provide rights and responsibilities for public
safety officers that are comparable to or greater than the
rights and responsibilities described in section 4404(b).
(2) Actions of the authority.--Nothing in this chapter or
the regulations promulgated under this chapter shall be
construed to preempt--
(A) the laws or ordinances of any State or political
subdivision of a State, if such laws provide collective
bargaining rights for public safety officers that are
comparable to or greater than the rights enumerated in
section 4404(b);
(B) the laws or ordinances of any State or political
subdivision of a State that provide for the rights and
responsibilities described in section 4404(b) with respect to
certain categories of public safety officers covered by this
Act solely because such rights and responsibilities have not
been extended to other categories of public safety officers
covered by this chapter; or
(C) the laws or ordinances of any State or political
subdivision of a State that provide for the rights and
responsibilities described in section 4404(b), solely because
such laws or ordinances provide that a contract or memorandum
of understanding between a public safety employer and a labor
organization must be presented to a legislative body as part
of the process for approving such contract or memorandum of
understanding.
(3) Limited enforcement power.--In the case of a law
described in paragraph (2)(B), the Authority shall only
exercise the powers provided in section 4405 with respect to
those categories of public safety officers who have not been
afforded the rights and responsibilities described in section
4404(b).
(4) Exclusive enforcement provision.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of the chapter, and in the absence of a
waiver of a State's sovereign immunity, the Authority shall
have the exclusive power to enforce the provisions of this
chapter with respect to employees of a State.
authorization of appropriations
Sec. 4409. There are authorized to be appropriated such
sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this
chapter.
CHAPTER 5
PROGRAM INTEGRITY INITIATIVES
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
enforcement
For an additional amount for ``Enforcement'', $245,000,000,
to remain available through September 30, 2011, for
additional and enhanced tax enforcement activities: Provided,
That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount under this
heading.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
state unemployment insurance and employment service operations
For an additional amount for ``State Unemployment Insurance
and Employment Service Operations'', $5,000,000, to be
expended from the Employment Security Administration Account
of the Unemployment Trust Fund and remain available through
September 30, 2011, to conduct in-person reemployment and
eligibility assessments and unemployment insurance improper
payment reviews: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply
to the amount under this heading.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Account
For an additional amount for ``Health Care Fraud and Abuse
Control Account'', $250,000,000, to remain available through
September 30, 2012, to be transferred from the Federal
Hospital Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Supplementary
Medical Insurance Trust Fund, as authorized by section 201(g)
of the Social Security Act, of which $124,747,000 shall be
for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Program
Integrity Activities, including administrative costs, to
conduct oversight activities for Medicare Advantage and the
Medicare Prescription Drug Program authorized in title XVIII
of the Social Security Act, for activities listed
[[Page H5383]]
in section 1893 of such Act, and for Medicaid and Children's
Health Insurance Program program integrity activities; of
which $65,040,000 shall be for the Department of Health and
Human Services Office of Inspector General to carry out fraud
and abuse activities authorized by section 1817(k)(3) of such
Act; and of which $60,213,000 shall be for the Department of
Justice to carry out fraud and abuse activities authorized by
section 1817(k)(3) of such Act: Provided, That section 3002
shall not apply to the amounts under this heading.
RELATED AGENCIES
Social Security Administration
limitation on administrative expenses
For an additional amount for ``Limitation on Administrative
Expenses'', $38,000,000, to remain available through
September 30, 2011, for the cost associated with conducting
continuing disability reviews under titles II and XVI of the
Social Security Act and for the cost associated with
conducting redeterminations of eligibility under title XVI of
the Social Security Act: Provided, That section 3002 shall
not apply to the amount under this heading.
CHAPTER 6
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS TITLE
Sec. 4601. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act
may be used to maintain or establish a computer network
unless such network blocks the viewing, downloading, and
exchanging of pornography.
(b) Nothing in subsection (a) shall limit the use of funds
necessary for any Federal, State, tribal, or local law
enforcement agency, or other entity, to carry out criminal
investigation, prosecution, or adjudication activities.
Sec. 4602. (a) Statutory Paygo.--The budgetary effects of
this Act, for the purpose of complying with the Statutory
Pay-As-You-Go-Act of 2010, shall be determined by reference
to the latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO
Legislation'' for this Act, jointly submitted for printing in
the Congressional Record by the Chairmen of the House and
Senate Budget Committees, provided that such statement has
been submitted prior to the vote on passage in the House
acting first on this conference report or amendment between
the Houses.
(b) Exclusion From Paygo.--
(1) Savings in this Act that would be subject to inclusion
in the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go scorecards are providing an
offset to increased discretionary spending. As such, they
should not be available on the scorecards maintained by the
Office of Management and Budget to provide offsets for future
legislation.
(2) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget
shall not include any net savings resulting from the changes
in direct spending or revenues contained in this Act on the
scorecards required to be maintained by OMB under the
Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.
Amendment No. 3
Page 8, strike line 3 and all that follows through page 9,
line 6.
Page 9, line 10, strike ``$11,719,927,000, of which
$218,300,000'' and insert ``$218,300,000, which''.
Page 9, line 18, strike ``$2,735,194,000, of which
$187,600,000'' and insert ``$187,600,000, which''.
Page 10, line 3, strike ``$829,326,000, of which
$30,700,000'' and insert ``$30,700,000, which''.
Page 10, line 11, strike ``$3,835,095,000, of which
$218,400,000'' and insert ``$218,400,000, which''.
Page 10, beginning on line 20, strike ``$1,236,727,000:
Provided, That up to $50,000,000, to remain available until
expended,'' and insert ``$50,000,000, to remain available
until expended: Provided, That such amount''.
Page 11, strike line 22 and all that follows through page
18, line 18.
Page 18, strike line 20, and all that follows through page
19, line 18.
Page 19, line 19, strike ``304.'' and insert ``301.''.
Page 20, line 3, strike ``305.'' and insert ``302.''.
Page 20, line 8, strike ``306.'' and insert ``303.''.
Page 20, line 18, strike ``307.'' and insert ``304.''.
Page 21, line 3, strike ``308.'' and insert ``305.''.
Page 38, strike lines 4 through 22.
Page 41, strike lines 6 through 16.
Page 42, strike lines 8 through 12.
Page 43, strike lines 22 through 25.
Page 45, strike lines 3 through 19.
Page 48, line 8, strike the dollar amount and all that
follows through ``available'' on page 49, line 3 and insert
``$175,000,000, to remain available until September 30,
2012,''.
Page 49, line 20, after the first comma, strike the dollar
amount and all that follows through ``available'' on line 23
and insert ``$50,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2012,''.
Page 52, strike line 3 and all that follows through page
58, line 20.
Page 58, line 22, strike ``1007.'' and insert ``1004.''.
Page 61, line 13, strike ``1008.'' and insert ``1005.''.
Page 62, line 15, strike ``1009.'' and insert ``1006.''.
Page 64, line 14, strike ``1010.'' and insert ``1007.''.
Page 66, line 10, strike ``1011.'' and insert ``1008.''.
Page 66, line 16, strike ``1012.'' and insert ``1009.''.
Page 66, line 23, strike ``1013.'' and insert ``1010.''.
Page 67, line 13, strike ``1014.'' and insert ``1011.''.
Page 67, line 21, strike ``1015.'' and insert ``1012.''.
Page 68, line 21, strike ``Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan,
and''.
Page 68, line 23, strike ``those countries'' and insert
``that country''.
Page 69, strike line 8 and all that follows through page
70, line 18.
Amendment No. 4
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. (a) Limitation.--Funds appropriated in this Act
for the continued military operations of the Armed Forces in
Afghanistan may be obligated and expended within Afghanistan
only for the purposes of--
(1) providing for the continued protection of members of
the Armed Forces and civilian and contractor personnel of the
Federal Government who are in Afghanistan; and
(2) beginning the safe and orderly withdrawal from
Afghanistan of all members of the Armed Forces and Department
of Defense contractor personnel who are in Afghanistan.
(b) Clarification.--Nothing in subsection (a) shall be
construed to prohibit or otherwise restrict the use of funds
available to any department or agency of the United States to
carry out diplomatic efforts or humanitarian activities in
Afghanistan, including security related to such efforts and
activities.
Amendment No. 5
Page 22, after line 16, insert the following:
Sec. 309. (a) Findings Regarding Security and Stability
Conditions in Afghanistan.--Since the last national
intelligence estimate on conditions in Afghanistan, there
have been fundamental changes in the conditions in that
country, and fundamental changes in the United States
military and diplomatic strategy toward that country,
including--
(1) the August 2009 elections in Afghanistan;
(2) the strategy announced by the President in December
2009 to guide United States military operations, including a
commitment to begin redeployment of troops out of Afghanistan
by July 2011;
(3) the tactics employed by the United States, which
emphasize counterinsurgency military operations and
increasing civilian participation;
(4) the level of United States forces deployed to
Afghanistan; and
(5) the continuing development of Afghanistan's security
forces, including the Afghan National Army and the Afghan
National Police.
(b) Report.--Not later than January 31, 2011, the Director
of National Intelligence shall submit to the President and
the Congress a new national intelligence estimate on security
and stability in Afghanistan and Pakistan, which shall
include--
(1) an assessment of the ability, performance, intent, and
commitment of the Government of Afghanistan to work with the
United States to implement the strategy announced in December
2009;
(2) an assessment of the ability, performance, intent, and
commitment of the Government of Pakistan to work with the
United States to implement the strategy announced in December
2009;
(3) an assessment of the security forces of Afghanistan and
Pakistan, including their ability to maintain security in
areas where they are deployed, and an assessment of the
timing of full deployment as envisioned by the December 2009
strategy;
(4) an assessment of whether continuing United States
military presence in Afghanistan contributes to Afghan and
Pakistani support for, or sympathy toward, the Taliban, al
Qaeda, or other insurgents;
(5) an assessment of the effect of continuing United States
military presence on the strength of al Qaeda and other
terrorist organizations in Afghanistan and neighboring
countries, including those in the United States Central
Command and United States Africa Command areas of
responsibility; and
(6) an assessment of the effect of the continuing United
States military presence on the ability of al Qaeda and
related terrorist organizations to obtain resources, recruit
personnel, and continue operations targeted at the United
States and its allies.
(c) Plan With Timetable Required.--Not later than April 4,
2011, the President shall submit to Congress a plan for the
safe, orderly, and expeditious redeployment of the Armed
Forces from Afghanistan, including military and security-
related contractors, together with a timetable for the
completion of that redeployment and information regarding
variables that could alter that timetable.
(d) Status Updates.--Not later than 90 days after the date
of the submittal of the plan required by subsection (c), and
every 90 days thereafter, the President shall submit to
Congress a report setting forth the current status of the
plan for redeploying the Armed Forces from Afghanistan.
(e) Oversight of Contractors Engaged in Activities Relating
to Afghanistan.--
(1) Recommendations required.--Not later than 90 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Special Inspector
General for Afghanistan Reconstruction shall, in consultation
with the Inspector General of the
[[Page H5384]]
Department of Defense, the Inspector General of the United
States Agency for International Development, and the
Inspector General of the Department of State--
(A) issue recommendations on measures to increase oversight
of contractors engaged in activities relating to Afghanistan
that have a record of engaging in waste, fraud, or abuse;
(B) report on the status of efforts of the Department of
Defense, the United States Agency for International
Development, and the Department of State to implement
existing recommendations regarding oversight of such
contractors; and
(C) report on the extent to which military and security
contractors or subcontractors engaged in activities relating
to Afghanistan have been responsible for the deaths of Afghan
civilians.
(2) Elements of recommendations.--The recommendations
issued under paragraph (1) shall include--
(A) recommendations for reducing the reliance of the United
States on--
(i) military and security contractors or subcontractors
engaged in activities relating to Afghanistan that have been
responsible for the deaths of Afghan civilians; and
(ii) Afghan militias or other armed groups that are not
part of the Afghan National Security Forces; and
(B) recommendations for prohibiting the Department of
Defense, the Department of State, or the United States Agency
for International Development from entering into contracts
with contractors engaged in activities relating to
Afghanistan that have a record of engaging in waste, fraud,
or abuse.
Sec. 310. (a) Limitation on Funds.--None of the funds
available to the Department of Defense in the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act, 2011 may be obligated or expended
in a manner that is inconsistent with the President's policy
announced on December 1, 2009, to begin the orderly
withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan after
July 1, 2011, unless the Congress approves a joint resolution
as specified in subsection (b).
(b) Joint Resolution.--For purposes of this section, the
term ``joint resolution'' means a joint resolution introduced
in either House of the Congress after receipt by the Congress
of the national intelligence estimate required under section
309 of this Act, the matter after the resolving clause of
which is as follows: ``That the Congress approves the
obligation and expenditure of funds appropriated in the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2011 for United
States combat operations in Afghanistan after July 1, 2011,
even if the plan submitted on April 4, 2011, is inconsistent
with the intention to begin the process of orderly withdrawal
of United States troops from such combat operations in
Afghanistan.''.
(c) Expedited Procedures in the House.--
(1) A joint resolution in the House of Representatives
shall be referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
(2) If the committee has not reported the joint resolution
at the end of 20 legislative days after its introduction, the
committee shall be discharged from further consideration of
the joint resolution, and the joint resolution shall be
placed on the appropriate calendar of the House.
(3) When the committee has reported a joint resolution or
been discharged from further consideration, it is at any time
thereafter in order (even though a previous motion to the
same effect has been disagreed to) to move to proceed to the
consideration of the joint resolution. The motion is highly
privileged in the House. The motion is not subject to
amendment, or to a motion to postpone, or to a motion to
proceed to the consideration of other business. A motion to
reconsider the vote by which the motion is agreed to or not
agreed to shall not be in order.
(4) Debate on the joint resolution shall be limited to not
more than 9 hours, which shall be divided equally between
those favoring and those opposing the joint resolution. An
amendment to, or motion to recommit, the joint resolution is
not in order. A motion to reconsider the vote by which the
joint resolution is agreed to or not agreed to is not in
order.
(5) Motions to postpone and motions to proceed to the
consideration of other business shall be decided without
debate.
(6) Appeals from the decisions of the Chair relating to the
application of the rules of the House to the procedure
relating to the joint resolution shall be decided without
debate.
(d) Expedited Procedures in the Senate.--[To be supplied.]
(e) Congressional Rulemaking.--Subsections (c) and (d) are
enacted by the Congress--
(1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House of
Representatives and the Senate, respectively, and as such
they are deemed a part of the rules of each House,
respectively, but applicable only with respect to the
procedures to be followed in that House in the case of joint
resolutions described in subsection (b), and they supersede
other rules only to the extent that they are inconsistent
with such other rules; and
(2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of
either House to change the rules (so far as relating to the
procedures of that House) at any time, in the same manner and
to the same extent as in the case of any other rule of that
House.
Sec. 311. Nothing in section 309 or 310 shall be construed
so as to limit or prohibit any authority of the President
to--
(1) attack al Qaeda forces wherever they are located;
(2) gather, provide, and share intelligence with allies
operating in Afghanistan and Pakistan; or
(3) modify the military strategy and operations of the
Armed Forces as such Armed Forces redeploy pursuant to a
timetable and strategy developed under section 309(c).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1500, the
motion shall be debatable for 1 hour and 30 minutes, with 30 minutes
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member
of the Committee on Appropriations; then 30 minutes equally divided and
controlled by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), or her
designee, and an opponent; and then 30 minutes equally divided and
controlled by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), or his
designee, and an opponent.
The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lewis) each will control 15 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
General Leave
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on the pending legislation.
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 5 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, the underlying bill presented to us by the Senate is,
essentially, a bill to provide funding to continue the war activities
in Afghanistan. Why, people might ask, are we trying to add this
amendment to that proposal?
I would suggest the numbers tell the story. With this bill from the
Senate, we will be spending, in this fiscal year, $167 billion on the
war in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is obvious to any but the most obtuse
that that expenditure is killing our ability to finance a recovery of
our own economy.
We tried to deal with that problem in December with a $90 billion
economic package. The Senate declined to act on it. We've proposed
smaller packages on two occasions since then. About a month ago we
offered a $23 billion package aimed primarily at trying to save
teachers' jobs, teachers who otherwise are going to be laid off because
of the severe economic conditions in virtually every State in the
Union, except a few lucky exceptions like North Dakota and South
Dakota.
We now bring before the House a bill which reflects what we've been
asked to do by a great many Members. It attempts to provide a much
smaller aid package to keep those teachers on the job, about $10
billion; and it contains a few other small items, including almost $5
billion in additional Pell Grants funds for some 87,000 students who
are going to need them badly.
We were also asked to provide offsets, and so we have done that. We
have offsets for virtually every dollar above the President's request,
and those offsets are not pleasant, and they are not popular.
Certainly, I don't like some of them myself. But the fact is that they
are necessary if we're to provide a fiscally disciplined bill that has
a chance of getting the votes to pass this House, and that's what we've
done.
I think people need to ask themselves one question: Are they
interested in simply standing by and allowing teachers to be fired day
after day for the next 3 months all around the country, or are they
willing to do something about it? I hope the answer is the latter.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 2020
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, let me begin by making a personal observation. This
evening we are embarking upon the most irresponsible, convoluted
legislative exercise I have seen in my many years in this body. My dear
friend and former chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, the
late Senator Robert Byrd, would be embarrassed by this process, or the
lack of process, because it greatly diminishes the integrity of this
Congress he loved so dearly. I can
[[Page H5385]]
hear Senator Byrd's voice clear as day. ``Shame, shame,'' he would say.
It was 35 days ago that the full Appropriations Committee was
scheduled to mark up the fiscal year 2010 emergency supplemental before
us. Republicans and Democrats alike had a number of amendments they
planned to offer to make the package a better piece of legislation.
But, for reasons that remain a mystery to everyone, that markup was
abruptly canceled 3 hours before it was to occur. Tonight, the House is
considering legislation written by Chairman Obey and the majority
leadership with absolutely no input from rank-and-file Members on
either side of the aisle.
The only legislation we should be considering today is a clean
emergency supplemental funding bill to provide critical funding for our
troops; foreign assistance and economic support for Afghanistan, as
well as Pakistan and Iraq, should be included; FEMA disaster
assistance; oil spill cleanup assistance; and relief for Haiti. Many
other funding and policy items could easily be addressed through our
regular order spending bills.
Just hours ago we were sent a package of six different amendments and
two resolutions, totaling 153 pages. Included in that package were
efforts to cut off troop funding, a timetable for troop withdrawal from
Afghanistan, billions in additional spending on domestic programs, a
variety of complex legal settlements piggybacked into a billion-dollar
summer youth program, and a deem-and-scheme resolution that proposes
spending $31 billion more in discretionary spending in FY 2011 than was
spent in FY 2010. It's worth noting that only in Washington could
Chairman Obey and Chairman Spratt characterize this $31 billion
increase as a cut.
I am deeply concerned about the impact these amendments could have on
our ability to approve a bill for the President's signature prior to
the Fourth of July recess. The failure of this body to approve critical
funds for our troops before the Fourth of July would send absolutely
the wrong message to our men and women in uniform, and delay needed
money for other emergency needs.
Further, this inaction would force our commanders to begin making
budget decisions that could compromise our military readiness. It would
also signal to our enemies a lack of resolve that could undermine our
mission in several very dangerous areas of the world.
The fact that we are sitting here in July without this spending bill
passed and signed into law is, frankly, astonishing to me. The
President submitted his request in February of this year. The Senate
passed its war funding measure on May 27, and indicated that it was
ready to conference the bill with the House. The House never marked up
this supplemental or had an opportunity to amend it in any way. And
yet, here we are 35 days and tens of billions of dollars of spending
later, and we still have not approved funding for our troops.
Yesterday, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released a
long-term budget outlook. CBO noted that our national debt equaled 40
percent of our country's economic input in 2008. By the end of this
year, the Federal debt will represent 62 percent of our national
economy. That's a 22 percent increase in the level of debt in just 2
years. The additional unrequested nontroop-related spending the House
is considering today would drive that debt even higher.
I recognize there are tremendous political pressures that come to
bear on majority Members when it comes to opposing measures sponsored
by their own party. Today my request to the Members of the majority is
quite simple: Please think long and hard about the consequences of
supporting anything beyond the clean Senate supplemental spending bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield myself 30 additional seconds.
I urge my colleagues on both sides, particularly my friends in the
majority who are truly concerned about the ever-escalating rates of
growth of spending, to reject these amendments and reject this Fourth
of July spending spree. Let's support our troops, pass a clean version
of the supplemental on a broad, bipartisan basis, and get this package
to the Commander in Chief. Our men and women in harm's way deserve no
less.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OBEY. I yield myself 1 minute.
Somehow we are being told that we are committing a mortal sin because
we are trying to attach some material to the bill sent to us by the
Senate. I would simply point out that just a few weeks ago, as the
gentleman from Massachusetts pointed out earlier in the debate, when
the defense authorization bill was on the floor only nine Republicans
in this House voted for it. They felt then that another matter was
evidently more important than providing passage for that bill. And yet
today they criticize us because we are suggesting several additions to
the appropriations bill. I find that inconsistent.
I would also point out that there are a number of high-priority
national items that we are trying to add besides education funding. We
are trying to provide additional funds for Pell Grants, some $5
billion. We are trying to provide $700 million more for border
security, $180 million more for energy loans, $163 million more for
schools on military installations, $142 million for gulf coast oil
spill funding, and $16 million to build a new soldier processing center
at Fort Hood.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. OBEY. I yield myself 30 additional seconds.
I would like to know what's wrong with any of those items.
I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Reyes) to explain why it's necessary to do additional funding for
border security.
Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment, the Obey
amendment, because during these tough economic times there are many
areas that merit attention. This amendment takes a comprehensive
approach to addressing the vital needs of our communities. Of
particular importance to me is the support in this amendment for border
security and also for education.
Border security is a major portion of the concern of Americans, as we
have seen in recent days. This amendment provides $701 million to
strengthen our security efforts along the U.S.-Mexico border. The funds
would be used to hire 1,200 Border Patrol agents and 500 Customs and
Border Protection officers that would be working the ports of entry,
critically needed today, as well as to improve tactical communications
and make other much-needed investments in the security along the U.S.-
Mexico border.
Residents along the border in districts such as the one that I
represent remain deeply concerned about the level of violence affecting
our southern neighbor Mexico. As a former Border Patrol sector chief
and veteran of 26\1/2\ years in the United States Border Patrol, I know
very well what these resources that are provided in this amendment mean
to a critical area such as the Southwest border.
I am particularly encouraged by Mr. Obey's efforts in this amendment
to address the long-standing needs of our ports of entry by providing
funds for Customs and Border Protection officers. For too long,
inadequate staffing and outdated infrastructure at our ports of entry
have made the U.S. and Mexico border less safe. This is a major step
forward in making our Nation even more secure by providing funding for
more officers at our ports of entry to conduct a more thorough and
efficient inspection and to keep Americans safe.
{time} 2030
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. OBEY. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. REYES. In addition, this amendment also provides $10 billion to
support our teachers across the country and another $4.9 billion to
fill the shortage, as Mr. Obey said, in the Pell Grant program.
It is vitally important that we recognize that the resources that are
dedicated here are important not just along the border but to the
security of Americans everywhere. So, therefore, I urge my colleagues
to vote for the Obey amendment. And I thank Chairman Obey, Speaker
Pelosi, Majority Leader Hoyer, and Chairman Price for their leadership
on this very important issue.
[[Page H5386]]
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 3 minutes
to our leader of the Homeland Security Committee, the gentleman from
Kentucky (Mr. Rogers).
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I thank the chairman for yielding.
I rise today to voice my opposition to the blatant exploitation of
our brave troops and the brazen process being undertaken here tonight.
With this ongoing charade, the Democrat majority has chosen to drag out
the consideration of this supplemental appropriations bill now 5 months
lagging. They've chosen to bypass a markup by the Appropriations
Committee. They've chosen to dictate by the few rather than legislate
by the representative many. And worst of all, they're holding hostage
vital funding for our troops as a vehicle for more spending, more
bailouts, more encroachment by the Federal Government into our private
lives.
A clean supplemental, Mr. Speaker, could have easily been disposed of
through regular order months ago. Regrettably, the majority has waited
until the very last minute, twisted the rules of the House, and put the
Pentagon and our warfighters in dire straits. This abuse of Congress'
national security responsibilities would be outrageous if it wasn't so
sad. And for what? For what? Another bailout? more spending? political
points? to curry special interest favors?
The American people want a fiscally responsible government that first
and foremost provides for the safety and security of this great Nation,
and the American people expect the Congress to meet that solemn
responsibility while mindful it is their money, not ours.
Instead, let's just call this what it is. The Democrat majority has
hijacked our national security for their perceived political security.
This is not the governance the American people want nor deserve. We can
do better.
And so I plead with my colleagues to restore regular order and return
to the business at hand, which is providing for our warfighters and
responsibly wielding the power of the purse.
I urge a defeat of all of these amendments and this bill.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards).
Mr. EDWARDS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I had the humbling privilege of
representing Fort Hood, America's largest Army installation, for 14
years, through three combat deployments. It is now next door to my
district in central Texas.
Fort Hood has sent more troops to Iraq and Afghanistan than any other
military installation in America. And despite that sacrifice, sadly,
the soldiers and families at Fort Hood had to face an unbearable and
unspeakable tragedy at the hands of a terrorist in our midst who killed
12 Fort Hood Army soldiers and one Army civilian just several months
ago.
The soldier processing center through which soldiers go--often the
last building they see before they leave Fort Hood, and it's the first
building they see when they come home from being a year away from their
family serving in Iraq or Afghanistan--is a soldier development
servicing center there.
At the request of the Pentagon, I want to thank Chairman Obey for
putting our request for $16.5 million into this amendment. First,
because that center was old and antiquated, inefficient and too small,
but most importantly because the soldiers at Fort Hood who've
sacrificed so much for our Nation's defense in Iraq and Afghanistan
should not be asked to process through a building where 12 of their
fellow soldier comrades in that installation were brutally murdered at
the hands of a domestic terrorist.
I thank Chairman Obey for putting this in. It is a meaningful,
dignified way to show support for our troops. And I support this
amendment and ask my colleagues on a bipartisan basis to support it as
well.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes
to the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Smith of Texas.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank the
ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), for yielding
me time.
Mr. Speaker, I'm opposed to the inclusion of the Preserve Access to
Affordable Generics Act'' in H.R. 4899.
Most cases in the United States, whether civil or criminal, antitrust
or patent, settle. The reasons for this are simple. Litigation is
expensive and its outcomes are uncertain.
The supposed problem involves a payment of cash in a settlement of a
patent case brought by a generic drug manufacturer. Such payments are
said to frustrate the intent of Federal law by allowing the brand name
pharmaceutical company to pay to delay entry of the generic competitor
into the market.
The proposed solution to this problem incorporated in this bill goes
much too far. It creates a presumption that all such settlements are
unlawful. The bill sets forth the criteria that a court may use to
determine whether to uphold the settlement. However, the validity of
the underlying patent is not one of those specified criteria.
Also, the bill dramatically reduces the ability of the companies to
settle these cases. If the parties cannot agree on the date of entry
into the market, then in many cases they would effectively be forced to
litigate the case. This means that the entry of the generic into a
particular drug market could be delayed significantly.
The majority of Federal courts, including the Second, Eleventh, and
D.C. Circuits, have upheld the validity of these settlements. Congress
should uphold the well-reasoned judgment of these courts. Innovative
new drugs, after all, are created in the laboratory, not in the
courtroom.
I urge my colleagues to reject this attempt to legislate an unrelated
domestic issue on a bill that is intended to pay for our troops
overseas.
Mr. OBEY. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop).
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, we are here on a bill that allegedly
provides supplemental funding for our troops, yet within the bowels of
this House amendment are provisions that have implications for our
border security, provisions in violation of our rules but nonetheless
provide a permanent authority to transfer money from border patrol to
the Department of the Interior with absolutely no limit--$50 million
this time, but then unlimited after that.
So to have the situation of Congress appropriating money we think is
going to border patrol, but then border patrol will have to give that
money to the Department of the Interior for alleged mitigation issues,
such concepts and projects as, in the past: hiring three employees of
the Interior to monitor prong-horned antelope or having a biologist
watch the erection of 15-foot towers to verify that no animal was
crushed; or having Fish and Wildlife, for one acre of possible habitat
loss, insisting border patrol buy 55 acres somewhere else to give to
them.
We will have the outrageous situation of Interior and Forest Service
regulations blocking the border patrol from their patrols and doing
their job, and yet the same provision, the border patrol has to pay
DOI, with no oversight from the legislature, no internal rules for
caution of spending, no limitation, just to do their job.
{time} 2040
Even Secretary Napolitano last year sent us a letter in which she
said the Border Patrol stops the drug cartels, the human traffickers,
the potential terrorists, and that is a value in and of itself to the
environment and should count as mitigation.
Yet, in the provisions within this particular bill, that does not
take place. This provision was a dumb idea in the wrong bill. It
diverts dollars from the Border Patrol and makes our border less
secure.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, how much time does each side have remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Wisconsin has 6 minutes
remaining. The gentleman from California has 3\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Price).
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, as the chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations
Subcommittee, I am happy to remind
[[Page H5387]]
our colleagues of the provisions in this bill that will enhance border
security.
The Obey amendment will add money for urgent needs, to address the
alarming level of violence attributable to Mexican gangs and drug
cartels. It will increase the presence of critical Border Patrol and
Customs personnel at the border, and it will strengthen the protection
of jeopardized communities.
There are four critical aspects of these border provisions:
First, the Obey amendment will strengthen enforcement between ports
of entry to deter and apprehend smugglers and illegal crossings. That
means 1,200 new Border Patrol agents. It means up to three additional
forward operating bases, and it will provide two new unmanned aircraft
systems for CBP to patrol the border.
Second, the Obey amendment will tighten enforcement at ports of entry
while aiding legitimate travel and commerce. It will sustain hundreds
of critical CBP officer positions at risk of being cut because of
declining fee collections. It will add 500 CBP officers for inspection
and enforcement at ports of entry, inbound and outbound, to crack down
on drugs, weapons, cash, and alien traffickers.
Third, the bill enhances Immigration and Customs Enforcement's
(ICE's) investigative operations on the border and their cooperation
with our Mexican partners to target the cartels, their criminal
enterprises, and their violent henchmen.
Four new Southwest Border Enforcement Security Task Forces.
Additional vetted law enforcement units with the Government of Mexico.
A 120-day surge in the ICE Joint Criminal Alien Removal Task Force and
Criminal Alien Programs. Training for Mexican officials on
investigations of transnational drug smuggling, money laundering, human
trafficking, and child exploitation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. OBEY. I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Finally, the bill expands aid to State
and local partners along the border, expanding the grant assistance
under Operation Stonegarden to State and local law enforcement in
cooperation with DHS.
Mr. Speaker, this Obey amendment would greatly enhance our border
security. I urge its adoption.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my
colleague from the Appropriations Committee, the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen).
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I want to associate my remarks with my ranking member,
Mr. Lewis.
Following the time-honored tradition of our Defense Appropriations
Subcommittee, Chairman Dicks and Mr. Young have put together, in a
collegial manner, a solid product. The funding for defense operations
and maintenance, for the Afghan and Iraq Security Forces, for Army base
operations, M-RAPs, National Guard and Reserve equipment, and the other
portions of the defense and of the military construction portion of the
bill are worthy of our support.
If that's where the story ended, we would be fine, but as Ronald
Reagan famously said, ``There they go again.''
This legislation contains over $72 billion in discretionary and
mandatory spending. Less than half of that total, $35 billion, is
related to the ongoing fight against the Taliban and al Qaeda in
Afghanistan or our withdrawal from Iraq and the State Department
funding related to the war on terror. The rest is earmarked for
nondefense programs, new bailouts, and pet projects to benefit the
majority's political allies.
I share the views of Mr. Lewis on the extraneous spending in this
bill: the $10 billion State bailout fund, the $5 billion Pell Grant
infusion, the $500 million to ``forward-fund'' accounts in the fiscal
year 2011 appropriations bills, thereby freeing up money to spend on
other activities in fiscal year 2011, the $245 million to allow the IRS
to ramp up its enforcement activities.
My colleagues in the majority just don't get it. This is Washington
``business as usual'' as this Congress uses funding for our deployed
warfighters, many of them in harm's way as we speak, to provide for
more unnecessary social spending.
My colleagues, I urge the adoption of a clean supplemental
appropriation as quickly as possible so our men and women in uniform
can continue to do their important work on our behalf.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, it is important for all of my colleagues, especially
those on the majority side of the aisle, to make note of the fact that
this is the President's supplemental request. This amendment adds
almost $17 billion in new domestic spending to a critical war funding
and disaster assistance bill, most of which was never formally
requested by the Commander in Chief and none of which is included in
the Senate-passed bill. These bloated domestic spending add-ons include
those that either are unnecessary spending or should be considered as
part of the regular fiscal year 2011 appropriations process.
For example, the amendment includes language under the Teacher Jobs
Fund that singles out Texas by requiring that Texas maintain a higher
level of State support for elementary and secondary education and
higher education spending than any other State. It adds $4.95 billion
for Pell Grants that would normally be and should be funded in the
fiscal year 2011 Labor, Health, and Human Services bill, as has been
the practice in previous years.
There is $538 million to game the fiscal year 2011 appropriations
process by forward-funding certain activities now with fiscal year 2010
funds, thereby freeing up money to spend on other activities in 2011.
This includes giving the IRS an additional $245 million now to ramp up
its enforcement.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous
consent request to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
(Mr. KUCINICH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks and include extraneous material.)
Mr. KUCINICH. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I rise in support of the Obey amendment, amendment No. 2 to H.R.
4899, Supplemental Appropriations for FY 2010. However, I do so with
significant reservation because of the $9 billion in nuclear loan
guarantees that have been inserted into this bill of otherwise badly
needed funding.
The nuclear power industry has already received $51 billion in loan
guarantee authority. The guarantees leave the taxpayer on the hook for
energy policy so fiscally irresponsible, it has attracted bipartisan
opposition. Indeed, private investment in new plants is nearly
impossible to come by because the investment is so unattractive. The
Congressional Budget Office characterized the risk of default on such
projects as ``well above 50 percent.'' Even plants under construction
are being abandoned. If private firms won't invest, should we be
putting taxpayers on the hook?
Energy from wind and solar makes more financial sense and creates
many more jobs when compared with nuclear power sans massive subsidies.
But the loan guarantees for clean energy sources, which were added to
make the nuclear loan giveaways easier to swallow, are not an industry
priority. They need more direct subsidies to get started with the
urgency required to address global warming.
This amendment also contains otherwise valuable funding for teacher's
jobs, Pell grants, and Gulf Coast oil spill clean-up. I voted for this
amendment because of the dire needs in these areas and others. But
slipping in $9 billion in nuclear loan guarantees when we struggle to
find money to extend unemployment compensation and create new green
jobs is not acceptable.
The Economics of Nuclear Reactors: Renaissance or Relapse?
(By Mark Cooper, Senior Fellow for Economic Analysis, Institute for
Energy and the Environment, Vermont Law School--June 2009)
ISSUE BRIEF
Findings
Within the past year, estimates of the cost of nuclear
power from a new generation of reactors have ranged from a
low of 8.4 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh) to a high of 30
cents. This paper tackles the debate over the cost of
building new nuclear reactors, with the key findings as
follows:
The initial cost projections put out early in today's so-
called ``nuclear renaissance'' were about one-third of what
one would have expected, based on the nuclear reactors
completed in the 1990s.
[[Page H5388]]
The most recent cost projections for new nuclear reactors
are, on average, over four times as high as the initial
``nuclear renaissance'' projections.
There are numerous options available to meet the need for
electricity in a carbon-constrained environment that are
superior to building nuclear reactors. Indeed, nuclear
reactors are the worst option from the point of view of the
consumer and society.
The low carbon sources that are less costly than nuclear
include efficiency, cogeneration, biomass, geothermal, wind,
solar thermal and natural gas. Solar photovoltaics that are
presently more costly than nuclear reactors are projected to
decline dramatically in price in the next decade. Fossil
fuels with carbon capture and storage, which are not
presently available, are projected to be somewhat more costly
than nuclear reactors.
Numerous studies by Wall Street and independent energy
analysts estimate efficiency and renewable costs at an
average of 6 cents per kilowatt hour, while the cost of
electricity from nuclear reactors is estimated in the range
of 12 to 20 cents per kWh.
The additional cost of building 100 new nuclear reactors,
instead of pursuing a least cost efficiency-renewable
strategy, would be in the range of $1.9-$4.4 trillion over
the life of the reactors.
Whether the burden falls on ratepayers (in electricity
bills) or taxpayers (in large subsidies), incurring excess
costs of that magnitude would be a substantial burden on the
national economy and add immensely to the cost of electricity
and the cost of reducing carbon emissions.
Approach
This paper arrives at these conclusions by viewing the cost
of nuclear reactors through four analytic lenses.
First, in an effort to pin down the likely cost of new
nuclear reactors, the paper dissects three dozen recent cost
projections.
Second, it places those projections in the context of the
history of the nuclear industry with a database of the costs
of 100 reactors built in the U.S. between 1971 and 1996.
Third, it examines those costs in comparison to the cost of
alternatives available today to meet the need for
electricity.
Fourth, it considers a range of qualitative factors
including environmental concerns, risks and subsidies that
affect decisions about which technologies to utilize in an
environment in which public policy requires constraints on
carbon emissions.
The stakes for consumers and the nation are huge. While
some have called for the construction of 200 to 300 new
nuclear reactors over the next 40 years, the much more modest
task of building 100 reactors, which has been proposed by
some policymakers as a goal, is used to put the stakes in
perspective. Over the expected forty-year life of a nuclear
reactor, the excess cost compared to least-cost efficiency
and renewables would range from $19 billion to $44 billion
per plant, with the total for 100 reactors reaching the range
of $1.9 trillion to $4.4 trillion over the life of the
reactors.
Hope and Hype vs. Reality in Nuclear Reactor Costs
From the first fixed price turnkey reactors in the 1960s to
the May 2009 cost projection of the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, the claim that nuclear power is or could be
cost competitive with alternative technologies for generating
electricity has been based on hope and hype. In the 1960s and
1970s, the hope and hype analyses prepared by reactor vendors
and parroted by government officials helped to create what
came to be known as the ``great bandwagon market.'' In about
a decade utilities ordered over 200 nuclear reactors of
increasing size.
Unfortunately, reality did not deliver on the hope and the
hype. Half of the reactors ordered in the 1960s and 1970s
were cancelled, with abandoned costs in the tens of billions
of dollars. Those reactors that were completed suffered
dramatic cost overruns. On average, the final cohort of great
bandwagon market reactors cost seven times as much as the
cost projection for the first reactor of the great bandwagon
market. The great bandwagon market ended in fierce debates in
the press and regulatory proceedings throughout the 1980s and
1990s over how such a huge mistake could have been made and
who should pay for it.
In an eerie parallel to the great bandwagon market, a
series of startlingly low-cost estimates prepared between
2001 and 2004 by vendors and academics and supported by
government officials helped to create what has come to be
known as the ``nuclear renaissance.'' However, reflecting the
poor track record of the nuclear industry in the U.S., the
debate over the economics of the nuclear renaissance is being
carried out before substantial sums of money are spent.
Unlike the 1960s and 1970s, when the utility industry,
reactor vendors and government officials monopolized
preparation of cost analyses, today Wall Street and
independent energy analysts have come forward with much
higher estimates of the cost of nuclear reactors.
The most recent cost projections are, on average, over four
times as high as the initial nuclear renaissance projections.
Even though the early estimates have been subsequently
revised upward in the past year and utilities offered some
estimates in regulatory proceedings that were twice as high
as the initial projections, these estimates remain well below
the projections from Wall Street and independent analysts.
Moreover, in an ominous repeat of history, utilities are
insisting on cost-plus treatment of their reactor projects
and have steadfastly refused to shoulder the responsibility
for cost overruns.
One thing that utilities and Wall Street analysts agree on
is that nuclear reactors will not be built without massive
direct subsidies either from the federal government or
ratepayers, or from both.
In this sense, nuclear reactors remain as uneconomic today
as they were in the 1980s when so many were cancelled or
abandoned.
The economic cost of low carbon alternatives
There is a second major difference between the debate today
and the debate in the 1970s and 1980s. In the earlier debate,
the competition was almost entirely between coal and nuclear
power generation. Today, because the debate is being carried
out in the context of policies to address climate change, a
much wider array of alternatives is on the table. While
future fossil fuel (coal and natural gas) plants with
additional carbon capture and storage technologies that are
not yet available are projected to be somewhat more costly
than nuclear reactors (see Figure ES-2), efficiency and
renewables are also primary competitors and their costs are
projected to be much lower than nuclear reactors.
Figure ES-2 presents the results of half a dozen recent
studies of the cost of alternatives, including two by
government entities, three by Wall Street analysts and one by
an independent analyst. Figure ES-2 expresses the cost
estimated by each study for each technology as a percentage
of the study's nuclear cost estimate. Every author identifies
a number of alternatives that are less costly than nuclear
reactors.
One of the central concerns about reliance on efficiency
and renewables to meet future electricity needs is that they
may not be available in sufficient supply. However, analysis
of the technical potential to deliver economically
practicable options for low-cost, low-carbon approaches
indicates that the supply is ample to meet both electricity
needs and carbon reduction targets for three decades or more
based on efficiency, renewables and natural gas (see Figure
ES-3).
Figure ES-3 builds a ``supply curve'' of the potential
contribution and cost of efficiency and renewables, based on
analyses by the Rand Corporation, McKinsey and Company, the
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the Union of Concerned
Scientists and the American Council for an Energy Efficient
Economy. Clearly, there is huge potential for low carbon
approaches to meet electricity needs. To put this potential
into perspective, long-term targets call for emissions
reductions below 2005 levels of slightly more than 40 percent
by 2030 and 80 percent by 2050. Even assuming that all
existing low carbon sources (about 30 percent of the current
mix) have to be replaced by 2030, there is more than ample
potential in the efficiency and renewables.
With continuing demand growth, it would still not be until
2040 that costly or as yet nonexistent technologies would be
needed. Thus, pursuing these low cost options first meets the
need for electricity and emissions reductions, while allowing
time for technologies to be developed, such as electricity
storage or carbon capture, that could meet electricity needs
after 2040. The contending technologies that would have to be
included in the long term are all shown with equal costs,
above the technologies that have lower costs because it is
difficult to project costs that far out in future and there
will likely be a great deal of technological change before
those technologies must be tapped to add substantial
incremental supplies.
A comprehensive view of options for meeting electricity needs
In addition to their cost, nuclear reactors possess two
other characteristics that make them an inferior choice among
the options available.
The high capital costs and long construction lead times
associated with nuclear reactors make them a risky source of
electricity, vulnerable to market, financial, and
technological change that strengthen the economic case
against them.
While nuclear power is a low carbon source of electricity,
it is not an environmentally benign source. The uranium fuel
cycle has significant safety, security, and waste issues that
are far more damaging than the environmental impact of
efficiency and renewables.
Figure ES-4 depicts three critical characteristics of the
alternatives available for meeting electricity needs in a
carbon-constrained environment. The horizontal axis
represents the economic cost. The vertical axis represents
the societal cost (with societal cost including
environmental, safety, and security concerns). The size of
the circles represents the risk. Public policy should exploit
the options closest to the origin, as these are the least-
cost alternatives. Where the alternatives are equal on
economic cost and societal impact, the less risky should be
pursued.
Nuclear reactors are shown straddling the positive/negative
line on societal impact. If the uranium production cycle--
mining, processing, use and waste disposal--were deemed to
have a major societal impact, nuclear reactors would be moved
much higher on the societal impact dimension. If one believes
that nuclear reactors have a minor impact, reactors would be
moved down on the societal impact dimension. In either case,
there are numerous options that should be pursued
[[Page H5389]]
first. Thus, viewed from a multidimensional perspective,
including economic, environmental, and risk factors, there
are numerous preferable alternatives.
The impact of subsidies
As noted, nuclear reactors are very unlikely to be built
without ratepayer and taxpayer subsidies. Many of the hope
and hype analyses advance scenarios in which carbon is priced
and nuclear reactors are the beneficiaries of large
subsidies. Under those sets of extreme assumptions, nuclear
reactors become less costly than fossil fuels with carbon
capture and storage costs. However, they do not become less
costly than efficiency and renewables. High carbon costs make
efficiency' and renewables more attractive.
Moreover, public policy has not tended to be quite so
biased, although the supporters of nuclear power would like
it to be. Imposing a price on carbon makes all low carbon
options, including efficiency and renewables, more attractive
as options. Subsidy programs tend to be applied to all low
carbon technologies. As a result, although the carbon pricing
and subsidy programs implemented and contemplated in recent
years tend to impose cost on consumers or shift them from
ratepayers to taxpayers; they do not change the order in
which options enter the mix. In other words, given pricing
and subsidies that simply values carbon emission or its
abatement, the economic costs as estimated above dictate the
order in which options are implemented. Nuclear reactors
remain the worst option. It is possible to bias policies so
severely that the order of priority changes, but that simply
imposes unnecessary costs on consumers, taxpayers, and
society.
Conclusion
The highly touted renaissance of nuclear power is based on
fiction, not fact. It got a significant part of its momentum
in the early 2000s with a series of cost projections that
vastly understated the direct costs of nuclear reactors. As
those early cost estimates fell by the wayside and the
extremely high direct costs of nuclear reactors became
apparent, advocates for nuclear power turned to climate
change as the rationale to offset the high cost. But
introducing environmental externalities does not resuscitate
the nuclear option for two reasons. First, consideration of
externalities improves the prospects of non-fossil, non-
nuclear options to respond to climate change. Second,
introducing externalities so prominently into the analysis
highlights nuclear power's own environmental problems. Even
with climate change policy looming, nuclear power cannot
stand on its own two feet in the marketplace, so its
advocates are forced to seek to prop it up by shifting costs
and risks to ratepayers and taxpayers.
The aspiration of the nuclear enthusiasts, embodied in
early reports from academic institutions, like MIT, has
become desperation, in the updated MIT report, precisely
because their reactor cost numbers do not comport with
reality. Notwithstanding their hope and hype, nuclear
reactors are not economically competitive and would require
massive subsidies to force them into the supply mix. It was
only by ignoring the full range of alternatives--above all
efficiency and renewables--that the MIT studies could pretend
to see an economic future for nuclear reactors, but the
analytic environment has changed from the early days of the
great bandwagon market, so that it is much more difficult to
get away with passing off hope and hype as reality.
The massive shift of costs necessary to render nuclear
barely competitive with the most expensive alternatives and
the huge amount of leverage (figurative and literal) that is
necessary to make nuclear power palatable to Wall Street and
less onerous on ratepayers is simply not worth it because the
burden falls on taxpayers. Policymakers, regulators, and the
public should turn their attention to and put their resources
behind the lower-cost, more environmentally benign
alternatives that are available. If nuclear power's time ever
comes, it will be far in the future, after the potential of
the superior alternatives available today has been exhausted.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, let me simply say that our Republican friends
are running true to form tonight. In the past 2 weeks, they have voted
against funding unemployment insurance for people who have been laid
off in the most excruciating recession in 70 years. Now, today, they
are refusing to support a proposal which will help us stave off the
laying off of well over 100,000 additional teachers around the
country--something which, I think, thoughtful people would recognize
would injure not just those teachers but their students and the
communities in which those students are supposed to learn. There is
nothing as expensive as ignorance, and ignorance is fed when you have
an inadequate number of quality teachers.
Let me devote the rest of my time to something that I consider to be
fairly off the point today because it had been suggested to us that the
Secretary of Education is somewhat unhappy because of the offsets that
we have required in order to pay for this additional funding. Let me
put that into perspective.
We are trying to provide $15 billion in additional education
resources to this administration--$10 billion to stave off the firing
of teachers and about $5 billion to fill the shortfall that developed
in the Pell program this year because of the economy.
{time} 2050
In order to finance that, we have had to cut many programs. I don't
like to do that, and the administration certainly doesn't like to see
it either. But we also had to require that the Secretary's department
itself take a cut that is equal to about 5 percent of the value of the
additional education dollars that his department would receive.
One of the Secretary's objections, evidently, is the fact that last
year in the stimulus package we provided him with a $4.3 billion pot of
money to use virtually any way he wanted to stimulate educational
progress in this country; $4.3 billion. He has spent a very small
amount of that, about $600 million, and we decided we had to cut about
$500 million out of that fund in order to finance and fully pay for the
package before us. That still leaves him with $3.2 billion in money
that he can spend any way his department wants.
We had a big discussion yesterday in the Agriculture Appropriations
Subcommittee about whether or not it was acceptable for the Secretary
of Agriculture to have a $38 million pot, yet the Secretary of
Education is somehow offended because he only has $3.2 billion to pass
around. I would suggest that that loose money, that untargeted money
that he has available, is roughly functional to what could be called a
congressional earmark. In fact, what I would call that fund is a fund
that enables the Secretary to provide executive branch earmarks.
I would point out that all of the legislative-directed earmarks in
the Labor-H bill last year amounted to less than $1 billion, and yet
the Secretary seems to be offended by the fact that he only has three
times that amount to spread around as he sees fit.
I would also point out that in the year-and-a-half they have only
gotten grants out to two States, and the department has already
announced that at most there will be about 15 other States that might
get winning grants, which means that more than half the country will
never see a dime from that money.
I would suggest that there is nothing wrong with providing the
Secretary a modest amount of funds to promote educational change. God
knows we need it. But to suggest that we are being unduly harsh is a
joke.
With that, I urge support for this amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate from the Committee on
Appropriations has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) and
the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) each will control 15 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I want to first thank Chairman
Obey for his incredible leadership on this supplemental. It was a very
difficult job to put this together, but you have done a phenomenal job.
Let me also thank the Chair of the Rules Committee, Congresswoman
Slaughter, and Speaker Pelosi, for their leadership and for allowing
this important discussion and amendment.
Also I would like to applaud Congressman McGovern for his thoughtful
and important amendment. He and Mr. Obey set forth this amendment that
we will vote on today. I strongly support it and their efforts to get
an exit strategy to end this war.
My amendment is very straightforward. It would prevent any escalation
or any ongoing combat operation in Afghanistan and limit the funding to
the safe and orderly withdrawal of our troops and military contractors
from Afghanistan.
It is critical to understand that this amendment would provide for
the safety of our troops, civilian personnel, and contractors while
troop withdrawal takes place. It does not allow funding for ongoing
combat operations or for this escalation. It is not a cut-and-run
amendment. It would not leave our troops stranded in harm's way.
Simply put, this amendment provides for the safe and orderly
withdrawal of
[[Page H5390]]
our troops from Afghanistan, and we need it because the reality is that
there is no military solution to Afghanistan. In fact, the occupation
of Afghanistan is making us less safe. Our occupation is a prime
recruiting tool for the insurgency and for al Qaeda.
If we remember, nearly 9 years ago the reason the authorization was
granted, which I could not support, was to provide authorization to go
after al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. Well, nearly a decade later, what
are we doing there? We need to redefine this mission. We need to begin
the safe, timely withdrawal of U.S. troops and military contractors,
and we should do so by adopting this amendment today which stops this
funding.
A few months from now, the war from Afghanistan will enter, as I
said, its tenth year. It is already the longest war in our Nation's
history, longer than Vietnam and the Civil War, and there is really no
end in sight. In fact, this concern of ``war without end'' again is why
I opposed the resolution authorizing military force on September 14,
2001. It was a blank check then, and it remains a blank check now.
I think it is important to take a moment and put the evolution of
this war in context, because we have to remember that, again, there was
no discussion about the potential consequences of invading Afghanistan.
The debate we are having today should have happened 10 years ago.
Few people imagined that we would have nearly 100,000 troops there a
decade later, despite the fact that the CIA estimates that there may be
only 50 to 100 al Qaeda in Afghanistan. So we have to be honest; the
war is not working. The Afghan government is plagued by incompetence
and corruption, The Afghan Security Forces are in shambles, and,
tragically, just over 1,000 servicemen and -women have lost their
lives.
It is clear that our servicemen and -women have performed with
incredible courage and commitment. They have done everything we have
asked them to do. As the daughter of a 25-year military officer, my dad
was a lieutenant colonel in the Army, I understand and know the
sacrifices these families are making. But the truth is, they have been
put in an impossible situation. The Afghan government is anything but a
reliable partner, and conditions on the ground make winning over the
Afghan people extremely difficult, if not nearly an impossible task.
Sadly, this war has no end in sight. We are bound to see the generals
come back to us and ask us for more money, more time, and more troops
if they say it is going well. If it is not going well, I expect to see
the generals come back and ask for more money, more time, and more
troops.
So regardless of the situation, unless Congress does something, and
we have to face this, if Congress allows this, it will be an endless
war. So enough is enough. The U.S. has no choice but to pursue and
support a political and diplomatic solution in Afghanistan. We must be
about that hard work now.
So please join me in supporting the safe and orderly withdrawal of
our troops. We can and we must responsibly bring them home and end this
war now.
I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
California.
Mr. LEWIS of California. I rise to oppose the Lee amendment to
essentially cut off the funding for our troops in Afghanistan.
I am very proud to yield 5 minutes to my colleague, our leader on the
Defense Subcommittee, the gentleman from Florida, Bill Young.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding
the time.
I rise to give compliments to Chairman Norm Dicks of the subcommittee
for having worked with the minority and the majority, as well as the
President of the United States, to develop a very good Defense
appropriations supplemental appropriations bill for our troops who are
fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The bill provides the equipment necessary for those troops to carry
out their mission. The bill provides for training. The bill provides
for self-protective measures to keep our troops safe while they fight
the war they were sent to fight.
{time} 2100
The only problem I have is we're not going to vote on that bill.
Although this is supposedly a defense supplemental, that bill is not
going to be voted on. That bill was reported and approved by the
subcommittee back in May, but yet there has been no consideration
beyond that date. The subcommittee approved it back in May after the
President requested it.
The members of the Appropriations Committee have not had an
opportunity to vote on a Defense supplemental appropriations bill. The
Members of the House have not had an opportunity to vote on a Defense
appropriations supplemental bill. There's something wrong with that.
Chairman Dicks did a good job. He worked with us, as did Chairman
Murtha before him, and it was a good bipartisan effort. We're not only
not going to vote on that good bill, but we're not even going to have a
chance to vote on the Senate version of the bill that's not quite as
good as the House version, but it's better than nothing. And it's time
that we provide the funding for our troops in the field, deployed and
exposed to danger, so that they're provided with what they need.
I have a problem with this. I said the subcommittee approved the bill
back in May. The full committee has not considered it. As a matter of
fact, we are rapidly approaching the 1-year anniversary of the last
time the Appropriations Committee met to consider an appropriations
bill. Now, that's unusual. It seems to me like it flies in the face of
the Constitution, because Article I, section 9 makes it very clear that
the executive branch of government cannot spend money from the General
Treasury that has not first been appropriated by Congress. And if the
Appropriations Committee doesn't meet to approve the bills or to report
the bills to the House, how are we going to meet that constitutional
responsibility? It's pretty tough.
July 22 last year was the last time the Appropriations Committee met
to consider an appropriations bill. So I compliment Chairman Dicks for
creating a good bipartisan product that the President of the United
States supported, and I am just disappointed that we're not going to
have a chance to vote on it. Our troops in the field need to know that
we are supporting them with whatever it is that they need to carry out
their mission.
I am opposed to all of these amendments that we are considering
because none of them do anything to support our troops in the field,
which is what this bill is supposed to be all about. These amendments
are not good, and it's just a real shame that we are not considering
the needs of our troops who are deployed, to provide what it is that
they need in order to accomplish the mission that we sent them to
accomplish and to protect themselves while they're doing it.
Mr. Speaker, typically, I would use my time talking on a Supplemental
as the Ranking Member of the Defense Subcommittee to congratulate
Chairman Dicks on a fine bi-partisan package that he and his staff put
together. I would thank him for treating us fairly and listening to the
minority's concerns, and suggest that we pass the bill as quickly as
possible.
Regrettably, I cannot do that today because the bill before us is the
product of such an abuse of power and process that we aren't even
voting on Chairman Dicks' bill.
Instead, we find ourselves voting on the Senate defense supplemental
in the hope of getting the Department of Defense the desperately needed
funds for on-going Afghanistan operations before they run out.
And I must say that really upsets me. While this is our best chance
of getting badly needed funds to the Department, Chairman Dicks and his
staff had produced a very fine, truly bi-partisan supplemental bill . .
. one that in my opinion was much better than this Senate bill.
But because of his leadership, that bill never saw the light of day.
Not because it was controversial, or contained something bad, but
because procedurally a small group of Members couldn't find a way to
get unrelated, extraneous domestic spending items attached to it.
So instead today, maybe it is in my best interest for me to use this
time making a case for my old spot on the Armed Services Committee.
That may seem odd, but I can only wonder how much longer the
Appropriations Committee will exist . . . if it still does.
I do thank Mr. Dicks for his courtesy and cooperation. I only regret
that his leadership
[[Page H5391]]
decided to play politics with what was a good bill which supported our
troops.
Ms. LEE of California. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
California, Chairman George Miller.
(Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to
revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I want to thank the gentlewoman for
offering this amendment and for yielding me time.
This is an important amendment. The time has come to understand what
is taking place in Afghanistan and the incredible price that our
soldiers are paying in that country and the incredible price that the
American taxpayer is paying to fund this war. We've got to understand
that the ingredients for victory, as people identify it and discuss it
and describe it, are simply not present in Afghanistan:
The idea that we would expand the franchise of an honest central
government to the countryside so we could stabilize the countryside.
There is no honest central government in Afghanistan. It's rife with
corruption, including the President of the country and his family and
his relatives and his warlords and his ministers, and that's got to
stop;
The idea that we are going to get help from the neighbors. We're
getting minimal help from the Pakistanis. We're getting no help of any
consequence from the Russians or the Chinese or the Indians because
they're all engaged in the same game. They are protecting their
position while America bleeds, while America bleeds the blood of our
soldiers, while our Treasury bleeds the dollars of our taxpayers, and
that's been going on and on and on and on.
We know how these Taliban were created. We know who supported them.
We know the double accounting they do. We know the protections that
they run. We know the sanctuaries that they provide them. And yet our
soldiers are required to go in and ferret it out over and over and over
again. We're told that we are going to develop this nation, that if we
bring development, we'll have peace in Pakistan.
One of the first requests from the generals 8 years ago, 9 years ago
was to send small-scale agriculture. You know what the request is 9, 10
years later? Send small-scale agriculture. Get us a police force that
is honest. Get us troops that are honest, that will fight. None of that
has been matched. But what has been matched is the death and the
maiming and the injuries of our American soldiers. It is time to bring
them home.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes
to the gentleman from Missouri, Ike Skelton, the chairman of the House
authorizing committee on national security or defense.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to all of
the amendments to end funding for the war in Afghanistan or to withdraw
our troops before the job is done. Afghanistan is the epicenter for
terrorism, and it was the genesis of multiple attacks against our
Nation, including the attacks on September 11. We must not forget why
we are fighting this war. There's far too much at stake.
For nearly a decade during the previous administration, Afghanistan
was the forgotten war with no clear strategy. But now we have a
strategy, a good strategy. We're already seeing clear signs of success
even before the surge of an additional 30,000 troops is complete. With
the help of our allies, we are capturing or killing terrorists every
week, including the most significant Taliban capture since the start of
the war.
We've been in Afghanistan for many years, and I recognize that the
patience of the American people is not unlimited. But thanks to the men
and women of our military and the new strategy adopted, we are finally
on the path to success. Now is not the time to abandon this war, our
NATO allies, and the Afghan people.
The amendments to immediately cut off funding for the war in
Afghanistan or to immediately redeploy our troops are clearly the wrong
thing to do. But it would be equally unwise to make a decision now to
leave Afghanistan before the job is done. At long last, we have a
strategy for success. Now is not the time to abandon that strategy. I
urge my colleagues to join me in standing behind our troops and the
security of our Nation by voting against these amendments.
Ms. LEE of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Kucinich).
Mr. KUCINICH. Just a few days before his dismissal, General
McChrystal wrote what has been described as a devastating report on his
mission. He pointed out that he faced a resilient and growing
insurgency with too few troops, and he expected no progress in the
coming months. Why are we continuing to send our troops into a mission
impossible? Why are we committing our troops to a situation which is
certainly bound to bring about more casualties, both of our troops and
innocent civilians?
General Petraeus is promising an escalation of the war which will put
more American lives on the line and more innocent civilians killed. Do
we support our troops? If we do, and if we really paid attention to
what's going on in Afghanistan, if we really supported our troops, we'd
bring them home. And that's exactly what the Barbara Lee amendment is
designed to do, and that's why we should support it.
As related by William Polk in his recent article in
``Counterpunch''--Just a few days before his dismissal, General
McChrystal wrote what has been described as a ``devastating report on
his mission.'' He pointed out that he faced a ``resilient and growing
insurgency'' with too few troops and he expected no progress in the
coming months.
Why are we continuing to send our troops into a mission impossible?
Why are we committing our troops to a situation which is certainly
bound to bring about more casualties, both of our troops and innocent
civilians? General Petraeus is promising an escalation of the war which
will put more American lives on the line and more innocent civilians
killed.
Do we support our troops? If we do, and if we really paid attention
to what's going on in Afghanistan, if we really supported our troops we
would bring them home. That's exactly what the Barbara Lee Amendment is
designed to do, and that's why we should support it.
What Now?
Afghanistan Sitrep
(By William R. Polk)
On June 24, the International Herald Tribune published an
editorial from its parent, The New York Times, entitled
``Obama's Decision.'' Both the attribution--printing in the
two newspapers which ensures that the editorial will reach
both directly and through subsidiary reprinting almost every
``decision maker'' in the world--and the date--just before
the appointment of David Petraeus to succeed Stanley
McChrystal--are significant. They could have suggested a
momentary lull in which basic questions on the Afghan war
might have been reconsidered.
That did not happen. The President made clear his belief
that the strategy of the war was sound and his commitment to
continue it even if the general responsible for it had to be
changed.
The editorial sounded a different note arising from the
events surrounding the fall of General McChrystal: Mr. Obama,
said The Times, ``must order all of his top advisers to stop
their sniping and maneuvering'' and come up with a coherent
political and military plan for driving back the Taliban and
building a minimally effective Afghan government.''
In short, Mr. Obama must get his team together and evolve a
plan.
Unfortunately, the task he faces is not that simple.
First, consider the ``team.'' It has two major components,
the military officers whom McChrystal gathered in Kabul. As
they made clear in the Rolling Stone interview, they think of
themselves as ``Team America'' and hold in contempt everyone
else. Those who don't fully subscribe to their approach to
the war are unpatriotic, stupid or cowardly. Those officers
are not alone. Agreeing with them is apparently now a large
part of the professional military establishment. They are the
junior officers whom David Petraeus and Stanley McChrystal
have selected, promoted and with whom they take their stand.
The other ``component'' is not a group but many groups with
different agendas and constituencies. The most crucial for my
purposes here are the advisers to the President; they were
dismissed out of hand as ``the wimps in the White House.''
Most, but not all, were civilians. Other senior military
officers, now retired, who are not part of ``Team America''
and its adherents were also disparaged. Famously, General Jim
Jones, the director of the National Security Council staff,
was called a ``clown.''
These were the comments that forced Mr. Obama's hand and
were what the press latched upon to explain the events. But
many missed the point that McChrystal had just a few days
before his dismissal written a devastating report on his
mission. Confidential copies of it were obtained by the
London newspaper, The Independent on Sunday, which published
it today, but of course
[[Page H5392]]
the President had seen it earlier. Essentially, its message
boiled down to failure.
McChrystal pointed out that he faced a ``resilient and
growing insurgency,'' with too few troops and expected no
progress in the coming six months. Despite expenditures of at
least $7 billion a month, his politico-military strategy
wasn't working. Within weeks of the ``victory'' over the
Taliban in the agricultural district of Marja, the Taliban
were back and the box full of government he had announced
proved to be nearly empty. As the expression went in the days
of the Vietnam war, whatever happened during the day, the
guerrillas ``owned the night.'' As he described it, Marja was
the ``bleeding ulcer'' of the American campaign.
Behind McChrystal's words, the figures were even more
devastating: Marja, despite the descriptions in the press is
not a town, much less a city; it is a hundred or so square
miles of farm land with dispersed hamlets in which about
35,000 people live and work. Into that small and lightly
populated area, McChrystal poured some 15,000 troops, and
they failed to secure it.
To appreciate what those figures mean, consider them in
context of Petraeus's counterinsurgency theory, on which
McChrystal was basing his strategy. As he had explained it,
Marja should be taken, secured and held. Then an
administration--McChrystal's ``government in a box''--should
be imposed upon it. Despite all the hoopla about the
brilliant new strategy, it was hardly new. In fact it was a
replay of the strategy the French General Lyautey called the
tache d'huile (the oil spot) and applied in Indochina over a
century ago. We also tried it in Vietnam, renaming it the
``ink spot.'' The hope was that the ``spot,'' once fixed on
the Marja, would smudge into adjoining areas and so
eventually spread across the country. Clear and simple, but
unfortunately, like so much in counterinsurgency theory, it
never seemed to work.
Petraeus's counterinsurgency theory also illuminated how to
create the ``spot.'' What was required was a commitment of
forces in proportion to native population size. Various
numbers have been put forth but a common number is about one
soldier for each 50 inhabitants. Marja was the area chosen
for the ``spot.'' The people living there, after all, were
farmers, wedded to the land, and so should be more tractable
than the wild warriors along the tribal frontier. Moreover,
it was the place where the first significant American aid
program, the Helmand Valley Authority, had been undertaken in
the late 1950s. So, if an area were to be favorable to
Americans, it ought to be Marja. But, to take no chances,
General McChrystal decided to employ overwhelming force. So,
what is particularly stunning about the failure in Marja is
that the force applied was not the counterinsurgency model of
1 soldier for each 50 inhabitants but nearly 1 soldier for
each 2 inhabitants.
If these numbers were projected to the planned offensive in
the much larger city of Kandahar, which has a population of
nearly 500,000, they become impossibly large. Such an attack
would require at least four times as many U.S. and NATO as in
Marja. That is virtually the entire fighting force and what
little control over Marja and most other areas, perhaps
even the capital, Kabul, that now exists would have to be
given up or else large numbers of additional American
troops would have to be engaged. Moreover, in response to
such an attack, it would be possible for the insurgents
also to redeploy so the numbers would again increase.
The more fundamental question, which needs to be addressed,
is why didn't this relatively massive introduction of troops
with awesome and overwhelming fire power succeed. Just a few
days before he was fired, as I have mentioned, General
McChrystal posed, but could not answer, that question. I hope
President Obama is also pondering it.
For those who read history, the answer is evident. But, as
I have quoted in my book Understanding Iraq, the great German
philosopher, Georg Willhelm Friedrich Hegel, despaired that
``Peoples and governments never have learned anything from
history or acted on principles deduced from it'' and,
therefore, as the American philosopher George Santayana
warned us, not having learned from history, we are doomed to
repeat it. Indeed, it seems that each generation of Americans
has to start all over again to find the answers. Who among
our leaders and certainly among college students now really
remembers Vietnam? So, consider these simple facts:
The first fact, whether we like it or not, is that nearly
everyone in the world has a deep aversion to foreigners on
his land. As far as we know, this feeling goes back to the
very beginning of our species because we are territorial
animals. Dedication to the protection of homeland permeates
history. And the sentiment has never died out. Today we call
it nationalism. Nationalism in various guises is the most
powerful political idea of our times. Protecting land,
culture, religion and people from foreigners is the central
issue in insurgency. The former head of the Pakistani
intelligence service, who has had unparallelled experience
with the Taliban over many years, advised us that we should
open our eyes to seeing the Afghan insurgents as they see
themselves: ``They are freedom fighters fighting for their
country and fighting for their faith.'' We agreed when they
were fighting the Russians; now, when many of the same people
are fighting us, we see them only as terrorists. That label
does not help us understand why they are fighting.
Instead of asking why they are fighting, counterinsurgents
think they can overcome aversion to foreign invaders by
``renting'' the natives. In Marja, we not only put in a large
military contingent but, as Rajiv Chandrasekaran reported
this month in The Washington Post, we offered to employ
virtually the entire adult population, some 10,000 people.
Unquestionably such efforts do persuade some of the people
for some of the time. But not all or permanently. In Marja,
only 1,200 people signed up for the jobs we offered.
Why so few? After all, the Afghans, as I wrote in an
earlier article, have suffered through virtually continuous
war for thirty years. Many are wounded or sick, with some
even on the brink of starvation. More than one in three
subsists on the equivalent of less than 45 cents a day,
almost one in two lives below the poverty line and more than
one in two preschool children is stunted because of
malnutrition. They are the lucky ones; one in five dies
before the age of 5. Obviously, the Afghans need help, so we
think they should welcome our efforts to aid them. But Marja
shows that they do not. Nation-wide, independent observers
have found that attitude is common: most do not want us
there, even giving them aid. And even those who do are fairly
easily dissuaded by the insurgents.
Threats or attacks by the insurgents have brought them into
our gunsights. In Afghanistan, as in Vietnam, we have tried
to so weaken the insurgents that they cannot effectively
block our programs. Our ``body counts'' in Vietnam showed
that we killed off the entire Viet Minh several times over
and today we are told that the ranks of the Taliban have been
severely depleted. But, because the motivation that energized
the first group of insurgents is widely shared, and is
usually intensified by foreign military action, which by its
nature is regarded by many of the natives as unjustified and
brutal, new insurgents as well as supporters of the
temporarily evicted insurgents will emerge from among the
inhabitants of the oil/ink spot. Outsiders may have come in,
but, according to U.S. military intelligence about three in
four insurgents fight within five miles of their homes. They
were ``home'' and taking up arms within a month in Marja.
Indeed, the campaign may have been, to use that cumbersome
locution of governmentese, ``counter-productive.'' According
to the former British counter-terrorism chief and current
head of the U.N. monitoring mission, Richard Barnett, as
cited in The Guardian/The Observer last week, ``Attempts by
British and American forces to expand their control over
Afghan territory over the past 12 months have been counter-
productive and led to a worsening security situation.''
The second fact is that those insurgents who don't get
killed are the ones who have learned three simple ways to
defeat the counterinsurgents.
The first of these ways to defeat counterinsurgents is to
use appropriate tactics--never stand and fight. Insurgents
can see that their enemies outgun, and usually far out-
number, them so they should hit and run--lay mines, ambush
patrols, disrupt logistics but never get caught. Drawing on a
Kenyan fable, this has been termed ``the war of the flea and
the lion.'' The flea bites and jumps away. The powerful lion
swats, occasionally hits, but eventually tires and moves
away. Lions don't defeat fleas.
The second way insurgents can defeat the counterinsurgent
is a form of jujitsu--using his strength against him. His
strength is his superiority in weapons. So the insurgent
seeks to incite him to use them. Inevitably, caught in the
middle, the people--who are after all the ``spoil'' in
insurgency warfare--get hurt. And when they get hurt, they
naturally come to hate those who fire the weapons. In
Vietnam, insurgents would sometimes enter a ``neutral''
village, shoot at an American airplane and then steal away.
The attacked airplane would call in troops or gunships. The
villagers would suffer and would be confirmed in their hatred
of the Americans. It was brutal but very effective.
Counterinsurgents think they can avoid this problem by
withholding as much as possible of their lethal power. But
doing so is very difficult. Their soldiers also get hurt and
angry. And they come to hate the locals--wogs, gooks, rag
heads, untermenschen--who appear to them dirty, slovenly,
corrupt and cowardly. No one can be trusted when even
children act as spies or carry bombs. Soldiers make bad
neighbors to civilians in the best of circumstances and
insurgency is not one of those circumstances. As I have
pointed out in my book, The Birth of America, it was the
presence of even superbly disciplined British troops in
Boston that touched off the American Revolution.
The third way insurgents can defeat invaders is by
destroying their local puppets. Ruling another country is, of
course, expensive and difficult so foreigners have almost
always and everywhere enrolled willing natives to help. In
the American Revolution we called those people ``the
Loyalists.'' In Vietnam, they were the government of the
South. In Afghanistan they are the ``Kabul government.''
So the insurgents regard collaborators--``Quislings'' as we
called them in the Second World War--as their prime target.
In America, the colonists threatened, tarred and feathered,
lashed, imprisoned, hanged or drove away tens of thousands of
the Loyalists. In Vietnam, French police records show
[[Page H5393]]
that in the 1950s, the Viet Minh virtually wiped out the
administration of the southern government, murdering
policemen, postmen, judges and other civil servants as well
as teachers and doctors. And today in Afghanistan, as Rod
Nordland reported in The New York Times on June 10, ``The
Taliban have been stepping up a campaign of assassinations in
recent months against officials and anyone else associated
with local government in an attempt to undermine
counterinsurgency operations in the south.''
One Afghan told Nordland, ``I know many people who are
afraid to take jobs with the government or the aid community
now. It's a very effective and very efficient campaign; the
armed opposition are using this tool because it works.'' Even
from a nationalist perspective, this is very rough justice.
But many Afghans appear to believe it is both ``justice'' and
Afghan justice.
To validate their actions, the insurgents must themselves
supply what the foreigners and their local supporters offer.
We have full records of how insurgents did this in Yugoslavia
and Greece during the Second World War. The records are not
so open for Afghanistan as yet. But, we know from a study by
the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) that the
Taliban has set up a ``widespread paramilitary shadow
government . . . in a majority of Afghanistan's 34
provinces.''
One of the things these shadow governments do is administer
the law. For years, I have read reports contrasting what
happens in a government court and a Taliban court. In the
government court, cases languish for months or years while
bribes are collected. A U.N. study found earlier this year
that officials shake down their fellow citizens for an amount
that is nearly a quarter of the country's gross domestic
product. In a Taliban court, there is no bribery and no
delay: Islamic law as defined by Afghan custom is immediate.
From our point of view, this too is very rough justice, if
justice at all, but in insurgencies, people appear willing to
put aside the niceties of peaceful life. In our Revolution we
did too.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 3 minutes
to Ike Skelton's partner, the gentleman from California, Buck McKeon,
who is the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee.
Mr. McKEON. I thank the leader for yielding me the time.
Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed that the House Democratic
leadership would allow a vote on these three amendments at this time.
Make no mistake, all three would go far to cripple the war effort in
Afghanistan and directly undermine the Commander in Chief.
Just 24 hours ago, the Senate unanimously confirmed General David
Petraeus as the new commander of the U.S. and international forces in
Afghanistan. And yet, not a day later, here we are on the House floor
taking dangerous political potshots at our troops' mission and the
President's strategy to surge an additional 30,000 troops in the
region.
{time} 2110
I strongly oppose all three Afghanistan amendments before us. Not
only would they tie the hands of the Commander in Chief, but they send
the exact wrong message to our allies and enemies alike at such a
critical moment in our efforts in Afghanistan.
Today, our newly confirmed commander walked the halls at NATO
headquarters, working to reassure our allies that our country is
committed to this war. And right now he is heading to Afghanistan to
take command. We should stand in unity with him, not sit here in
Washington taking vote after vote to strip funding from our warfighters
before his plan even touches down.
General Petraeus has proven himself to be one of America's most
capable military officers. He turned around a perilous situation in
Iraq, and our combat troops have started coming home. By the end of
August, our troop levels in Iraq will be down to 50,000 for training
and reserve purposes.
I believe the President has chosen the right commander and the right
strategy in Afghanistan. I'm confident that General Petraeus and our
troops can succeed if given the time, space, and resources they need to
complete their mission.
As the General arrives in Afghanistan, those of us here in Congress
cannot lose sight of the broader perspective. Our brave military men
and women and their civilian counterparts are in the midst of a tough
fight that's critical to the U.S. national security. Cutting off their
funding in the middle of that fight is tantamount to abandonment.
In December, and again last week, the President reminded us why we
are in Afghanistan. It was the epicenter of where al Qaeda planned and
launched the 9/11 attacks against innocent Americans. After an
exhaustive 90-day review last fall, the President recommitted the
United States to defeating al Qaeda and the Taliban.
The timeline for success in Afghanistan cannot be dictated by
arbitrary political clocks here in Washington. It must be driven by the
operational clock in Kabul, Kandahar and the Afghanistan countryside.
We all hope and pray that the goal can be accomplished by July 2011,
but the President must adhere to his recent comments that conditions on
the ground will dictate the pace of any withdrawal next summer.
I urge my colleagues to reject these ill-timed measures, reject
attempts to strip funding for our warfighters and, instead, show our
troops and allies a united front in our efforts.
Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar).
Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentlewoman for her courageous lead on this
issue.
This $35 billion for Afghanistan is roughly equivalent to the amount
in the Recovery Act for highways and transit. If instead of Afghanistan
these funds were invested at home, we could do the equivalent of what
we did in the Recovery Act, 35,000 lane-miles of highway improved;
1,262 bridges; 12,000 transit buses and rail passenger cars; 5,000
transit stations improved; and 1.3 million jobs that we've documented
on our portion of the Recovery Act.
But this is a conflict with no exit, no end, no offset; and we should
not provide more money for it.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).
(Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment and
also to the underlying bill.
I have great respect for the gentlelady who brings this amendment.
She said earlier that there is, in her way of thinking, no military
solution in Afghanistan. But let me say that surrender is a military
tactic. I just oppose it.
This is a very serious time in the life of our country here at home;
and it's easy, I suspect, for some Americans to forget that we're a
Nation at war. But we are.
As I was reminded when I traveled to Afghanistan the day after
Christmas this last year, at this very hour, we have men and women in
uniform in harm's way in Afghanistan and Iraq. And we owe them, in this
moment, the resources they need to complete their mission, get the job
done, and come home safe. We also owe them the respect of doing that
without using our soldiers as a vehicle for other domestic spending
priorities.
Military spending bills should be about military spending, and
nothing else. And this legislation fails that test.
Before us today is a $75 billion spending bill, but less than half of
this legislation will be used to support the Defense Department's war
operations. Less than half. The military funding measure will spend
almost $5 billion, supposedly, on a temporary bailout for a Federal
Pell Grant program. This so-called military funding measure will spend
$50 million on the Port of Guam, and $18 million for emergency
reforestation, and $15 million for a highway safety study.
This military funding measure will also even spend, as we've heard in
earlier debate, $10 billion on teacher jobs.
Now, I've been married, as of a month ago, for 25 years to a teacher.
I support teachers. I believe education is a State and local function.
Anybody else remember that we just spent $53 billion in supposedly
one-time spending for education in the President's failed stimulus
bill? And now, on the backs of our soldiers, comes another $10 billion
that has to be appropriated to save teachers jobs?
We can do better, men and women.
To top it all off, $63 billion of this bill isn't even paid for, just
more deficits and more debt.
One of the ways the Democrats are saving a little bit of money here
is by $3 billion in cuts to the Defense Department.
We can do better. Our soldiers deserve better. Let's reject this
legislation. Let's do right by our soldiers.
[[Page H5394]]
Military spending bills should be about military spending, and nothing
else.
Ms. LEE of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California, Congresswoman Waters.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support, strong support, of
Congresswoman Barbara Lee's amendment to the 2010 Supplemental
Appropriations Act. This amendment would limit the funds appropriated
within the supplemental to the continued protection of our military and
civilian personnel in Afghanistan, while a plan is implemented to begin
their safe and orderly withdrawal from the region.
Despite nearly $300 billion spent on a predominantly military
operation, by the way, resulting in the loss of over 1,000 U.S. troops
in Afghanistan, we have not been able to successfully address
Afghanistan's economic depravity, political corruption, or social
divisions that have significantly impeded our military efforts within
the country.
The American public is tired of this long, drawn-out war. Moreover,
many of us in Congress do not see the logic in investing further funds
toward training the Afghan Army, when all methods utilized to this
point have failed to achieve tangible gains.
Furthermore, charges of corruption within the Karzai government have
negatively impacted our credibility among Afghans, forcing them to
choose between two different groups of terrorists.
The counterinsurgency (COIN) strategy is failing in Afghanistan and
the Afghan government remains corrupt and illegitimate in the eyes of
many of the Afghan citizens. The critical appropriations being offered
in other Amendments (disaster relief, education funding, black farmer
settlements) today underscores why we can no longer afford to continue
our expensive military strategy in Afghanistan.
Deploying more combat troops to Afghanistan and continuing Bush
wartime engagement strategies will fail to help Afghanistan build long-
term sustainable institutions and a credible democratic government.
Despite nearly $300 billion spent on a predominantly military operation
(resulting in the loss of over 1,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan), we
have not been able to successfully address Afghanistan's economic
depravity, political corruption, or social divisions that have
significantly impeded our military efforts within the country. The
American public is beginning to tire of this long drawn-out war.
Moreover, many of us in Congress do not see the logic in investing
further funds towards training the Afghan army when all methods
utilized to this point have failed to achieve tangible gains.
Furthermore, charges of corruption within the Karzai government have
negatively impacted our credibility among Afghans, forcing them to
choose between two different groups of terrorists--the Taliban or the
corrupt Karzai government comprised of former warlords, responsible for
some of the same atrocities the Taliban currently inflicts upon
civilians.
A strengthened Taliban has resurfaced and is engaged in violent
attacks throughout the country so that now is the deadliest time for
American soldiers since the war began. Booming opium production helps
fund the Taliban, which also receives aid from al Qaeda networks in
Pakistan. The fledgling Afghan army and police are not ready to defend
the country from insurgent attacks and operate independently from U.S.
military involvement, training, and support. The highly organized and
determined insurgency has continued to exploit the weak central
government. Although the main insurgent groups may not have the same
operational structure or long-term goals, they are inherently united in
their efforts to drive the U.S. out of Afghanistan and unravel the
central Afghan ``democratic'' government.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote yes on
Representative Lee's Amendment so that we can begin the process of
bringing our troops home!
{time} 2120
Ms. LEE of California. Just for clarification, let me make sure that
the opposition understands that this bill did not leave here as a
military spending bill. It left here as a government-wide spending
bill. It is very legitimate to deal with domestic issues because it was
a disaster-relief bill. The military spending was actually added in the
Senate. So what we are doing today is very credible, very legitimate.
We want to begin to end this war, and we want to do it by stopping the
funding.
I yield 1 minute to Congressman Rohrabacher, the gentleman from
California.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes, there are snowballs in hell. I rise in support
of amendments 4 and 5. I do so with a heavy heart, as I deeply
appreciate the Americans whose lives are in danger in Afghanistan. They
are there to protect us against the radical forces of Islam, which used
Afghanistan as a base of operations that led to the slaughter of 3,000
Americans on 9/11, which is almost 9 years ago. After that vicious
attack on our civilian population, yes, we cannot let down our guard.
However, that does not mean rubberstamping any military operation, even
if it does not have a chance of success.
I have been engaged in Afghanistan since the 1980s, and I can state
emphatically that if we continue our present strategy in Afghanistan,
we will not succeed, and America will eventually be weakened by loss of
lives and the expenditures of hundreds of billions of dollars.
What works in Afghanistan is what has worked in Afghanistan: Let the
Afghans pay the price. Let them do their fighting. Putting American
boys in their place is contrary to our national interests, and will not
lead to success. Trying to foist upon the Afghan people a corrupt
centralized government in Kabul will not work. We need to change
strategy instead of putting our people into a meat grinder in the place
of Afghans themselves.
I rise in support of Amendments Nos. 4 and 5. I do this with a heavy
heart, as I deeply appreciate the brave Americans whose lives are in
danger in Afghanistan. They are there to protect us against the forces
of radical Islam, which used Afghanistan as a base of operations. And
that is what led directly to the slaughter of 3,000 Americans on 9-11
almost nine years ago. After that vicious attack on our civilian
population, we must never let down our guard, or show signs of weakness
before this evil fanatic enemy. However, that doesn't mean rubber
stamping any military operation even if it does not appear to have a
chance of success. I have been engaged in Afghanistan since the 1980s
and I can state emphatically that if we continue our present strategy
in Afghanistan we will not succeed and America will eventually be
weakened by loss of lives and the expenditure of hundreds of billions
of dollars.
Putting our courageous defenders in a no-win situation will sap the
will of our people and the capabilities of our military, as it did in
Iraq. And while going into Iraq was neither illegal nor immoral, it was
a mistake, because there was no way to succeed and withdraw before
being stuck in a bloody and costly war of attrition, from which we are
only presently extricating ourselves.
Continuing the war in Afghanistan as we are now engaged will lead
nowhere but to a similar meat grinder, dragging us down and at a
horrendous cost. None of this means that I believe we should cede
control of Afghanistan to radical anti-American Muslims. It instead
means we must be realistic, so the sacrifice of our brave defenders
will not be in vain.
We could have and should have eliminated Saddam Hussein through an
alliance with those forces in Iraq that despised that bloody tyrant--
the Kurds, the Shiites, the professional soldiers and bureaucracy.
A similar strategy already worked in Afghanistan after 9-11, the
Taliban and al-Qaeda forces were not defeated by an invasion of U.S.
military troops. Only 200 American military personnel were on the
ground when this terrorist army was driven out. It was the Afghans
themselves--the Northern Alliance--who won the day. They had American
air support but they were the ones on the ground. I'd say it was not
ours, but their boots on the ground that did the job. However, most of
them didn't have boots. This ``let the locals do their own fighting''
principle is the formula for success. In Afghanistan, let those forces
who despise the radical Taliban fight them and defeat them with our
help, but not in their place. Instead, our young people are doing the
fighting, and the dying. Why? Because we are trying to foist onto all
Afghans a structure of government that is totally inconsistent with
their culture and tradition--a centralized all-powerful government in
Kabul. That has never worked in Afghan history, especially when that
central government is corrupt and backed by a foreign army.
America needs to rethink our approach in Afghanistan. We owe it to
those who are risking their lives to not keep them engaged in an
impossible mission. Nonetheless, I firmly believe radical Islam can be
defeated in Afghanistan.
I would suggest that it is time for America to open and honestly
discuss the various approaches available, and then to move toward a
plan that will work.
As for me, I say, let the Afghans who expelled the Taliban in the
past do the fighting for themselves now. Let them do their own
fighting--it is a strategy that works.
[[Page H5395]]
Spending more to keep the current situation from deteriorating in the
long run will be a waste of treasure and a waste of lives.
I ask my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on Amendments 4 and
5.
Ms. LEE of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from
Maryland, Congresswoman Donna Edwards.
Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support as a
cosponsor of this amendment, and I thank Congresswoman Lee for her
steadfast leadership on this issue.
This amendment requires that we act on evidence. And we know that
based on the evidence, our Afghanistan policy is a failure. Numerous
revised strategies and restated mission statements, from President
Bush, to Prime Minister Gordon Brown, to Prime Minister Blair, to
President Obama, restated mission statements that continue to fall
short of the touted successes, so-called successes.
The U.S. military reported today that 102 coalition forces were
killed in June alone, along with countless Afghanis, rivaling the
heights of the Iraq war. It's time to cast aside a policy of increasing
entrenchment and use our resources to bring our troops, our treasure
home.
I want to be perfectly clear: My opposition to the war is opposition
to the policy; it's not to the brave men and women who serve this
country with honor. But we do them an injustice by not having a real
debate on the floor of this House about this policy and its failure.
I have seen the conditions on the ground, just recently in May, for
myself, and I can assure you this war will never end quickly, if at
all. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. And whether it was
McKiernan, McChrystal, Petraeus, it's not just about the generals; it's
about the policy. And it's a failure.
Ms. LEE of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Texas,
Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I rise strongly to support the Barbara Lee
amendment, of which I am a cosponsor. And this is allowing the orderly
withdrawal of our troops, one thing that we did not do in the Vietnam
war, when we lost 58,000 of our young men and women, who we treasure
and thank them for their service.
Now today we have the opportunity to do what Congress should do. It's
not to give an unending mandate to a war that is not a constitutionally
declared war, which this is not.
So I would say that if we are looking for the terrorists, al Qaeda is
not there. Our intelligence authorities, and General Petraeus have
indicated that there are less than a hundred al Qaeda terrorists in
Afghanistan. There are insurgents who are the Taliban. It is well known
that if you give to the Taliban the mountains and valleys that have
been given by General McChrystal, and concentrate your war efforts in
the cities, you still will lose this war. The Taliban will never
surrender the mountains and will continue to attack.
A thousand-plus have died; $37 billion is in this bill. We must do
what we did not do in Vietnam, and not cry after the fact when we saw
the 58,000 body bags come home.
Yes, we salute the young men and women who are on the front lines. We
thank them for their service and the sacrifice of their families. I
have been to Afghanistan many times, and I believe we have a better
way. Now is the time to invest in the Afghan people, and the government
to make a difference, not continue to lose the precious treasure of
America. Stand against this war and have an orderly withdrawal for the
sake of the American people and bring our troops home with honor.
America has not lost the war. America has created a roadmap for
Afghanistan to follow and to build its country up.
Our stated, limited military mission was precisely to hold back
Talibon momentum--i.e., to ``stalemate'' it--while economics
development and good governance took hold and we enabled Afghan
security forces to replace ours. Instead, our military assistance has
dwarfed our development and government efforts--which are still
stumbling--and no independent analyst seriously thinks the Afghan army
and police will be able to take over the nation's security for years.
Military's momentum has taken over.
We have changed the Afghan equation, but for the worse. The U.S.
troop surge illustrates a lesson we learned in Vietnam. Large-scale
insertion of foreign troops into a domestic insurgency--whatever its
initial cause--dramatically transforms the hostilities from an internal
dispute into one focused on driving out ``foreign invaders,'' as
Afghanistan has done repeatedly throughout its history.
Even if, contrary to fact, a Taliban takeover threatened our
security, the Administration's strategy would make no sense. There is a
basic contradiction between, on the one hand, the claim that defeating
the Taliban is vital to our safety and, on the other hand, the claim
that our commitment is short term and of limited extent. The two
efforts to square that inconsistency have already proven unrealistic.
The Pentagon told us that successful campaigns in Taliban strongholds
like Helmand and Kandahar Provinces would break the back of Taliban
efforts to control the country and bring them to the bargaining table.
The Pentagon told us that successful campaigns in Taliban strongholds
like Helmand and Kandahar Provinces would break the back of Taliban
efforts to control the country and bring them to the bargaining table.
But it now is very unlikely that our military will be holding a
decisive upper hand after the Kandahar and similar campaigns. The
Helmand campaign remains, at best, a ``work in progress,'' with dubious
results thus far. The supposedly decision campaign to ``win Kandahar
province'' has been heavily diluted and downgraded, even before getting
fully underway. The new focus on nighttime raids and air strikes
continues to kill civilians, badly undercutting U.S. strategy to ``win
over'' the Afghan people.
June was the deadliest month of the nine-year-long Afghanistan war.
Should the U.S. get out of Afghanistan? Why or why not?
Frank Askin, professor of law at Rutgers University, said: There is
no use throwing good money (and good bodies) after bad. There can be no
successful outcome to this war, unless we are prepared to stay in
Afghanistan forever. We need the money back home, Let's just declare
victory and get out!
Paul Kawika Martin, policy and political director of Peace Action,
said: Yes, the U.S. should get the military out of Afghanistan.
Today, Representatives in the house will have the opportunity to vote
against $33 Billion dollars ``emergency'' supplemental funding for the
failed escalation in Afghanistan. They will also have the opportunity
to vote for a MdGovern/Obey amendment that will among other things
require the president to present Congress with:
(1) a new National Intelligence Estimate on Afghanistan by January
31, 2011. 2) a plan by April 4, 2011 on the safe, orderly and
expeditious redeployment of U.S. troops from Afghanistan, including a
timeframe for the completion of the redeployment.
The amendment also requires Congress to vote if the president wants
to change his announce plan to begin to drawdown troops by July 2011
and expands oversight of private contractors in Afghanistan to deal
more effectively with corruption, waste, fraud and abuse.
A large coalition of 20 organization representing nearly 13 million
people support this amendment because the enormous costs in blood and
treasure is not necessarily making Americans safer. Instead, focusing
on regional political solutions and investing in Afghan-led aid and
development that brings people out of poverty has a far better chance
of success at a fraction of the cost. Let's not forget that we are
funding this war by borrowing from China and as Admiral Mike Mullen,
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said last week: debt is the number
one threat to America's National Security. It is time to bring our
troops home with honor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Non- WIA not
deaths KIA hostile WIA RTD** RTD**
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) U.S. CASUALTY STATUS:
Fatalities as of: July 1, 2010, 10 a.m. EDT
OIF U.S. Military Casualties By Phase:
Combat Operations--19 Mar 03 thru 30 Apr 03.......... 139 109 30 116 429
Post Combat Ops--1 May thru Present.................. 4,261 3,370 891 17,782 13,547
OIF U.S. DoD Civilian Casualties..................... 13 9 4 ......... .........
------------------------------------------------------
Totals........................................... 4,413 3,488 925 17,898 13,976
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page H5396]]
OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF) U.S. CASUALTY STATUS
FATALITIES AS OF: July 1, 2010, 10 a.m. EDT
OEF U.S. Military Casualties:
In and Around Afghanistan***......................... 1056 840 216 2,973 3,649
Other Locations****.................................. 78 8 70 ......... 1
OEF U.S. DoD Civilian Casualties..................... 2 1 1 ......... .........
------------------------------------------------------
Worldwide Total.................................. 1,136 849 287 2,973 3,650
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM includes casualties that occurred on or after March 19, 2003 in the Arabian Sea,
Bahrain, Gulf of Aden, Gulf of Oman, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Persian Gulf, Qatar, Red Sea, Saudi Arabia, and
United Arab Emirates. Prior to March 19, 2003, casualties in these countries were considered OEF.
**These columns indicate the number of servicemembers who were Wounded in Action (WIA) and Returned to Duty
within 72 hours AND WIA and Not Returned to Duty within 72 hours. To determine the total WIA figure, add the
columns ``WIA RTD'' and ``WIA Not RTD'' together. These figures are updated on Tuesday unless there is a
preceding holiday.
***OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM (In and Around Afghanistan), includes casualties that occurred in Afghanistan,
Pakistan, and Uzbekistan.
****OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM (Other Locations), includes casualties that occurred in Guantanamo Bay (Cuba),
Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Philippines, Seychelles, Sudan, Tajikistan, Turkey,
and Yemen.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have on
each side?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 2\1/2\ minutes. The
gentlewoman from California has 3 minutes.
Mr. LEWIS of California. I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. LEE of California. I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Kagen).
(Mr. KAGEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. KAGEN. I rise in support of this amendment and ask a question:
Whose side are these gentlemen on? The leader of Iran was there with
the leader of Afghanistan 1 day after our Secretary of Defense,
Secretary Gates, was there. Are these our friends? Are these the people
you are willing to invest $35 billion in?
Two thousand three hundred years of human history have proven one
thing in Afghanistan: It's easy to get into Afghanistan, and very hard
to get out. When you leave, they will shoot you in the rear end.
Forty percent of all money we are investing in Afghanistan is being
stolen. One hundred al Qaeda were there before we had the surge. This
is our time to leave Afghanistan, with all honor and respect. We will
always support our troops, but not a losing policy.
Ms. LEE of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Grayson).
Mr. GRAYSON. I speak tonight in support of peace. The hardest thing
that we often do as human beings is this, to admit that we are wrong.
It's not easy. We all know it. We don't look forward to it. And
sometimes we feel bad afterward. But we have to admit we are wrong when
we are wrong, because if we don't we keep hurting ourselves. And that's
exactly what we see in Iraq and Afghanistan. At this point, we are
hurting ourselves. We are hurting ourselves extremely deeply.
We have spent over $3 trillion pursuing these wars. That's over
$10,000 for every man, woman, and child in this country. We have put
our whole national economy at risk, bringing it to the brink of
national bankruptcy. We have killed thousands of Americans, hundreds of
thousands of Afghans, and of Iraqis. We have shed blood all over the
Middle East at this point.
And in addition to that, we have done lasting damage to ourselves as
a country on a moral level, on an economic level, and on a level of the
health of the young men and women who serve us. A quarter of a million
of them left with permanent brain abnormalities. We are hurting
ourselves. We are a strong country. We decide when wars begin and when
wars end, and we have to decide to end this one right now.
Ms. LEE of California. How much time do I have now, Mr. Speaker?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Ms. LEE of California. I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous
consent request to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).
(Ms. CHU asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks.)
Ms. CHU. I rise in support of the amendment.
Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Nadler).
Mr. NADLER of New York. Mr. Speaker, every dollar we spend in
Afghanistan, every life we sacrifice there is a tragic waste that does
not enhance the security of the United States.
We were attacked on 9/11 by al Qaeda. Al Qaeda had bases in
Afghanistan. It made sense to go in and destroy those bases, and we
did. But those bases are no longer there. They are in Pakistan and
Yemen and Somalia, and we are not invading those countries. Why do we
undertake to invent the corrupt government and try to impose it on the
country?
Afghanistan is in the middle of a 35-year civil war. We have no
business intervening in that civil war. We have no ability and no
necessity to win it for one side or the other.
This whole idea of counterinsurgency, that we are going to persuade
the people left alive after our firepower is applied to love the
government that we like, is absurd. At this point we must recognize
that rebuilding Afghanistan is both beyond our ability and irrelevant
to our purpose of preventing terrorist attacks on the United States.
We should support this amendment. We should support our troops. We
should bring them home now.
Every dollar we spend in Afghanistan, every life we sacrifice there,
is a tragic waste that does not enhance the security of the United
States. We were attacked on 9/11 by Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda had bases in
Afghanistan; it made sense to go in and destroy those bases, and we
did. But the CIA tells us that there are fewer than one hundred Al
Qaeda personnel now in all of Afghanistan--their bases are in Pakistan,
but we are not invading Pakistan. They have bases in Somalia and Yemen,
but we are not invading Somalia and Yemen.
An intelligent policy might be to attack the bases from which mayhem
is being plotted against us, wherever they are--not to try to remake a
country that nobody since Genghis Khan has managed to conquer. What
makes us think, what arrogance gives us the right to assume, that we
can succeed where the Moguls, the British, the Soviets, failed. No
government in Afghanistan, no government in Kabul, has ever been able
to make its writ run and rule the country.
Why have we undertaken to invent a government that is not supported
by the majority of the people, that is corrupt, and try to impose it on
the country? Afghanistan is in the middle of what is, at this point, a
53-year-civil war. We have no business intervening in that civil war,
we have no ability and no necessity to win it for one side or the
other. This whole idea of counter-insurgency, that we are going to
persuade the people left alive after our firepower is applied, to love
the government that we like is absurd.
It will take tens of years, hundred of billions of dollars, tens of
thousands of American lives, if it can be done at all, and we don't
need to do it. It's their country. If they want to have a civil war, we
can't stop them. We can't choose the rulers that they have, we don't
have to like the rulers that they have, we don't have to like their
choices. It's not up to us.
Aside from assuring that specific bases are not being used against
us--we should not spend a nickel, we should not waste a life, in
pursuit of an unintelligent, unthought-through, unachievable, and
unnecessary goal.
At this point, we must recognize that rebuilding Afghanistan is both
beyond our ability, and irrelevant to our purpose of preventing
terrorist attacks on the United States.
We should support this amendment.
We should support our troops.
We should bring them home.
{time} 2130
Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, let me begin by reminding the Members that this
supplemental originally was sent to us by our Commander in Chief, the
President of the United States, Barack Obama.
I understand the concerns about the war in Afghanistan. I have
similar concerns, especially following the recent turmoil regarding
command changes. But I also have full faith and confidence in our brave
and selfless men and women fighting over there.
[[Page H5397]]
The President knows that war is tough and a dirty business. But our
forces, although tired, are eager for the opportunity to succeed and
more than capable of doing so.
I have in my hand a Statement of Administration Policy from our
Commander in Chief, Barack Obama. In it, his advisers suggest, if this
amendment is a part of the bill, that they will be recommending to the
President that he veto this bill.
Indeed, it is time for us to recognize that the war on terror is very
real. The challenge in Afghanistan is supported by the President
because he recognizes it's very real, and it's one of the bases of
operation for their activities. In fact, I believe that we have to let
conditions on the ground dictate the process, as General Petraeus just
testified this week, even if those conditions require forces to stay
past the President's July 11 withdrawal date.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
Mr. Speaker, as we approach the 10-year mark in this war, which is
the longest war in U.S. history, we need to ask when is enough enough?
How many of our brave men and women must be sacrificed in this never-
ending war? How much blood, how much treasure do we have to spend in
Afghanistan? And, also, we have to ask ourselves do we need another 10
years to figure it out. I suggest that we don't.
It's time to change course. It's time for Congress to assert itself
in our responsibilities, in our role. We control the purse strings, and
enough is enough. We need to say today that we must begin to safely
withdraw our young men and women from Afghanistan. No more funds for
combat operations.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate from the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Lee) and an opponent has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern)
and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) each will control 15
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the McGovern-
Obey-Jones amendment. Quite simply, all this amendment does is make
sure that the President and the Congress be accountable to the American
people, our troops, and their families about what our policy in
Afghanistan is going to be from July 2011 onward.
At this time I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Obey), chairman of the Appropriations Committee.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, as was pointed out earlier, those who suggest
that any efforts to add any items to what is called a military
supplemental are somehow out of line are simply wrong. This legislation
started out as a disaster relief bill. It went to the Senate, and they
morphed it into a military supplemental, and we're simply now
responding to that action.
I want to talk about the problems in Afghanistan. A year ago, I made
the statement that while I was dubious about the mission in
Afghanistan, I would give the President a year to see whether his
policy would bear fruit. But I warned at the time that we could have
the best possible policy in the world and, if we did not have the tools
to implement it, it would be a failure. And I would suggest that the
only two tools that we have available to use in that region of the
world are the Pakistan Government and the Afghan Government; and I
think it's safe to say that both of them have been less than a
spectacular success, to say the least. Since then, I think it's also
fair to say that events have gone downhill, especially in Afghanistan.
And in addition, since we're now spending $167 billion on these two
wars, I think it's also obvious that we're having a profoundly negative
effect on our ability to reinvest in and rebuild our own economy. And I
think the time has come for new consideration.
Now, last December the President indicated that it was his intention
to follow a policy which would begin to withdraw our troops from
Afghanistan beginning in July of 2011. This amendment is meant to
simply buttress that commitment, and what it says is this: It requires
that in January, a new intelligence estimate be provided, and that
after that is provided, the administration, by April 4, must respond to
it by sending to the Congress an outline of its plans to follow the
policy which they have announced which would begin to get us out of
there starting in July of next year.
What this amendment also says is, if the administration decides to
follow a different policy by, for instance, extending that date, then
they cannot do that unless the Congress explicitly votes to allow the
funds to be used for that purpose.
What I'm concerned about is this: What I can see happening is come
next July, we can be told by the Pentagon, well, things are marginally
better than we thought they would be and so we're going to need more
time and that target date will be slipped. On the other hand, they can
also say things are really going badly and so we obviously can't get
out at this time. We need to have more time.
I want to know that there is a serious, determined commitment to
withdraw our troops beginning in June of next year. That is more than
ample time for the Pakistani Government and the Afghan Government to
demonstrate whether they are capable of doing this mission or not.
I think it is obvious that we are not going to be able to rebuild our
own country and make the investments we need here at home so long as
we're continuing this mission in Afghanistan. And so I think this
provides an orderly, rational, responsible, thoughtful way by which we
can reach a conclusion to get out of that country rather than spending
another 9 years before we finally face up to reality.
I thank the gentleman for the time.
Disclosure of Earmarks
The following table lists the congressional earmarks (as
defined in clause 9(e) of rule XXI) contained in the House
amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 4899. The House
amendment does not contain any limited tax or tariff benefits
as defined in paragraphs (f) or (g) of clause 9 of rule XXI.
TABLE IV--CHAPTER 1--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, ARMY
[Congressionally Directed Spending Items]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Account Location Project Amount Requester
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Construction, Army...... Texas: Ft. Hood..... Soldier Readiness $16,500,000 Edwards (TX)
Processing Center.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TABLE IV--CHAPTER 1--GENERAL
[Congressionally Directed Spending Items]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agency Account Project Amount Requester(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA............................. General Provision... Reimbursements for ............ Kennedy; Langevin
Presidentially
Declared Disasters,
RI, TN.
FHWA............................. General Provision... Repeal of Section ............ Carney
1117(d) of the
Transportation
Equity Act for the
21st Century.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
California.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my
colleague from New Jersey, Rodney Frelinghuysen.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to oppose all
amendments to this legislation, especially those dealing with our
operations in Afghanistan.
Mr. Speaker, my colleagues, how quickly we forget. As Mr. Lewis
mentioned, as did Mr. Pence, with historic
[[Page H5398]]
speed, the Senate this week unanimously confirmed our new NATO
commander in Afghanistan. During his brief confirmation hearing,
General David Petraeus urged this Congress to approve the War Funding
Bill in an expedited way. Yet this evening, this process guarantees
that no funding will be signed into law before mid-July. And if that's
not bad enough, we find ourselves here on the floor debating not one,
but three amendments that have the effect of defunding our Afghanistan
operations, basically tying the hands of our Commander in Chief and
micromanaging the military at a time when they need to do their job and
to be successful.
Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, we are a nation at war. We have
soldiers and Marines deployed halfway around the world. Many of them
are in combat at this very hour facing a dangerous enemy. And yet we
find ourselves here tonight questioning the very mission we've asked
our troops to execute. What message does that send to them if they're
watching us? What message does it say to our allies, some of whom may
question it in their own governments, their resolution to stay the
course? What message does it send to our enemies, people who would
launch deadly attacks in our homeland as they've done in their homeland
each and every day at an early opportunity.
This is a critical moment in our efforts in Afghanistan. I urge
rejection of these amendments and support of our troops.
Let's pass the clean supplemental. Get rid of these amendments that
do harm to our mission in Afghanistan and get about the business of
supporting our national defense in a proper way.
{time} 2140
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Jones), a cosponsor of this amendment.
Mr. JONES. Mr. Speaker, I would like to start my comments out with an
editorial from the Pensacola News Journal, dated June 25: ``Is
Afghanistan worth it?''
``It isn't often that conservative columnist George Will and liberal
columnist Thomas Friedman are on the same page. Welcome to
Afghanistan.''
Mr. Speaker, the reason we need to have this debate tonight is due to
one issue. The main issue that bothers me greatly is what is called
``rules of engagement.''
In fact, on the 20th of June, in The Washington Post, George Will
wrote an editorial, ``An NCO recognizes a flawed Afghanistan
strategy.''
``A recent email from a noncommissioned officer serving in
Afghanistan: He explains why the rules of engagement for U.S. troops
are `too prohibitive for coalition forces to achieve sustained tactical
success.' ''
I also would like to show, very quickly, two newspapers articles from
the Marine Times:
``Rules of engagement. We are putting our kids out there to fight
with their hands handcuffed--left to die. They call for help. Negligent
Army leadership refuse and abandon them on the battlefield. Four
marines and one Army killed.''
I actually spoke to this father, Mr. Speaker, from Maine, who was
featured in the Marine Times, which reads: ``Caution killed my son.
Marine families blast suicidal tactics in Afghanistan.''
This is what they call ``rules of engagement.'' We handcuff our
troops, and we tell them we want them to go out and fight.
Mr. Speaker, I have a retired general who, for the last 9 months, has
been my adviser on Afghanistan. I gave him my word that I would not use
his name publicly on the floor of the House, in a committee or in a
newspaper. Six weeks ago, I asked him again about Afghanistan, and this
is what he emailed back to me:
``Afghanistan has been too tough a nut to crack for every nation that
has ever tried to crack it. We need to figure out a way to honorably
pack our bags and get out. It is not in our national interests to be
there.''
That is why I am on this amendment with Mr. McGovern and Mr. Obey. I
don't see how anybody could be opposed to this. If you are concerned
about our troops and if you are concerned about the frequent
deployments that are wearing out our military and their families, if
you are concerned about the billions of dollars that are unaccounted
for in Afghanistan, this is a reasonable amendment. It will give hope
to our troops, and it will give hope to our taxpayers that we are
watching their moneys. More importantly, the troops will know what is
in front of them--not 10 more years of going down a road that has no
end to it.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I will ask the men and women in this room to
continue to pray for our men and women in uniform and their families.
Let's pass this amendment. It is a good amendment.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert into the Record two
articles that appeared in the Washington Post. One is entitled, ``U.S.
Indirectly Paying Afghan Warlords as Part of Security Contract.'' The
other is entitled, ``U.S. Officials Say Karzai Aides are Derailing
Corruption Cases Involving Elite.''
[From the Washington Post, June 22, 2010]
U.S. Indirectly Paying Afghan Warlords as Part of Security Contract
(By Karen DeYoung)
The U.S. military is funding a massive protection racket in
Afghanistan, indirectly paying tens of millions of dollars to
warlords, corrupt public officials and the Taliban to ensure
safe passage of its supply convoys throughout the country,
according to congressional investigators.
The security arrangements, part of a $2.16 billion
transport contract, violate laws on the use of private
contractors, as well as Defense Department regulations, and
``dramatically undermine'' larger U.S. objectives of
curtailing corruption and strengthening effective governance
in Afghanistan, a report released late Monday said.
The report describes a Defense Department that is well
aware that some of the money paid to contractors winds up in
the hands of warlords and insurgents. Military logisticians
on the ground are focused on getting supplies where they are
needed and have ``virtually no understanding of how security
is actually provided'' for the local truck convoys that
transport more than 70 percent of all goods and materials
used by U.S. troops. Alarms raised by prime trucking
contractors were met by the military ``with indifference and
inaction,'' the report said.
``The findings of this report range from sobering to
shocking,'' Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass.) wrote in an
introduction to the 79-page report, titled ``Warlord, Inc.,
Extortion and Corruption Along the U.S. Supply Chain in
Afghanistan.''
The report comes as the number of U.S. casualties is rising
in the Afghan war, and public and congressional support is
declining. The administration has been on the defensive in
recent weeks, insisting that the slow progress of anti-
Taliban offensives in Helmand province and the city of
Kandahar does not mean that more time is needed to assess
whether President Obama's strategy is working.
``I think it's much too early to draw a negative
conclusion,'' said a senior administration official, speaking
on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal
deliberations. ``I think there's more positive than negative.
We're heading toward a year-end assessment, which will be a
big one for us.'' The review was set when Obama announced in
December that he would send an additional 30,000 troops to
Afghanistan and begin to withdraw them in July 2011.
Tierney is chairman of the national security subcommittee
of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
whose majority staff spent six months preparing the report. A
proponent of a smaller U.S. military footprint in Afghanistan
and targeted attacks on insurgents, Tierney said in an
interview Monday that he hopes the report will help members
of Congress ``analyze whether they think this is the most
effective way to go about dealing with terrorism. Or the most
cost-effective way.''
The report's conclusions will be introduced at a hearing
Tuesday at which senior military and defense officials are
scheduled to testify. The report says that all evidence and
findings were made available to Republicans on the
subcommittee. A spokesman for Rep. Jeff Flake (Ariz.), the
ranking Republican, said the lawmaker will not comment until
he has seen the entire report.
In testimony shortly after Obama's strategy announcement,
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said that ``much of
the corruption'' in Afghanistan has been fueled by billions
of dollars' worth of foreign money spent there, ``and one of
the major sources of funding for the Taliban is the
protection money.''
Military officials said that they have begun several
corruption investigations in Afghanistan and that a task
force has been named, headed by Navy Rear Adm. Kathleen
Dussault, director of logistics and supply operations for the
chief of naval operations and former head of the Baghdad-
based joint contracting command for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith, communications chief for U.S.
and NATO forces in Kabul, said that the entire Tierney report
[[Page H5399]]
has not been examined but that Dussault will be ``reviewing
every aspect of our contracting process and recommending
changes to avoid our contribution to what is arguably a major
source of revenue that feeds the cycle of corruption.''
The U.S. military imports virtually everything it uses in
Afghanistan--including food, water, fuel and ammunition--by
road through Pakistan or Central Asia to distribution hubs at
Bagram air base north of Kabul and a similar base outside
Kandahar. From there, containers are loaded onto trucks
provided by Afghan contractors under the $2.16 billion Host
Nation Trucking contract. Unlike in the Iraq war, the
security and vast majority of the trucks are provided by
Afghans, a difference that Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal,
the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has praised
as promoting local entrepreneurship.
The trucks distribute the material to more than 200 U.S.
military outposts across Afghanistan, most of them in the
southern and eastern parts of the country where roads are
largely controlled by warlords and insurgent groups.
The report found no direct evidence of payoffs to the
Taliban, but one trucking program manager estimated that $1.6
million to $2 million per week goes to the insurgents.
Most of the eight companies approved for the contract are
Afghan-owned, but they serve largely as brokers for
subcontractors that provide the trucks and security for the
convoys, which often contain hundreds of vehicles. According
to the congressional report, the U.S. officers charged with
supervising the deliveries never travel off bases to
determine how the system works or to ensure that U.S. laws
and regulations are followed.
The report describes a system in which subcontractors--most
of them well-known warlords who maintain their own militias--
charge $1,500 to $15,000 per truck to supply guards and help
secure safe passage through territory they control. The most
powerful of them, known as Commander Ruhullah, controls
passage along Highway One, the principal route between Kabul
and Kandahar, under the auspices of Watan Risk Management, a
company owned by two of Afghan President Hamid Karzai's
cousins.
Overall management of who wins the security subcontracts,
it said, is often controlled by local political powerbrokers
such as Karzai's half brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, head of the
Kandahar provincial council.
Relatively unknown before U.S. forces arrived in
Afghanistan in fall 2001, Ruhullah is ``prototypical of a new
class of warlord in Afghanistan,'' the report said. Unlike
more traditional warlords, he has no political aspirations or
tribal standing but ``commands a small army of over 600
guards.''
The ``single largest security provider for the U.S. supply
chain in Afghanistan,'' Ruhullah ``readily admits to bribing
governors, police chiefs and army generals,'' the report
said. In a meeting with congressional investigators in Dubai,
he complained about ``the high cost of ammunition in
Afghanistan--he says he spends $1.5 million per month on
rounds for an arsenal that includes AK-47s, heavy machine
guns and RPGs,'' or rocket-propelled grenades. It added:
``Villagers along the road refer to him as `the Butcher.' ''
Despite his ``critical role,'' the report said, ``nobody
from the Department of Defense or the U.S. intelligence
community has ever met with him,'' other than special
operations forces who have twice arrested and released him,
and he ``is largely a mystery to both the U.S. government and
the contractors that employ his services.''
Defense regulations and laws promulgated following
difficulties with private security contractors in Iraq limit
the weaponry that contractors can use and require detailed
incident reports every time shots are fired. But such reports
are rarely, if ever, filed, investigators said.
Another trucking contractor described a ``symbiotic''
relationship between security providers such as Ruhullah and
the Taliban, whose fighters operate in the same space, and
said that the Taliban is paid not to cause trouble for the
convoys. ``Many firefights are really negotiations over the
fee,'' the report said.
Among its recommendations, the report calls on the military
to establish ``a direct line of authority and accountability
over the private security companies that guard the supply
chain'' and to provide ``the personnel and resources required
to manage and oversee its trucking and security contracts in
Afghanistan.''
____
[From the Washington Post, June 28, 2010]
U.S. Officials Say Karzai Aides Are Derailing Corruption Cases
Involving Elite
(By Greg Miller and Ernesto Londono)
Top officials in President Hamid Karzai's government have
repeatedly derailed corruption investigations of politically
connected Afghans, according to U.S. officials who have
provided Afghanistan's authorities with wiretapping
technology and other assistance in efforts to crack down on
endemic graft.
In recent months, the U.S. officials said, Afghan
prosecutors and investigators have been ordered to cross
names off case files, prevent senior officials from being
placed under arrest and disregard evidence against executives
of a major financial firm suspected of helping the nation's
elite move millions of dollars overseas.
As a result, U.S. advisers sent to Kabul by the Justice
Department, the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration
have come to see Afghanistan's corruption problem in
increasingly stark terms.
``Above a certain level, people are being very well
protected,'' said a senior U.S. official involved in the
investigations.
Karzai spokesman Waheed Omar denied investigations had been
derailed. ``There is no case, no instance, in which the
palace or anyone from the palace has interfered with a
case,'' he said.
Afghanistan is awash in international aid and regarded as
one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Indeed, even
as the United States and its allies pour money in, U.S.
officials estimate that as much as $1 billion a year is
flowing out as part of a massive cash exodus. The money, as
first reported in The Washington Post in February, is often
carried out in full view of customs officials at Kabul's
airport, where such transfers are legal as long as they are
declared. Officials suspect much of the cash is going to the
Persian Gulf emirate of Dubai, where elite Afghans, including
Karzai's older brother, have villas.
For the Obama administration, the ability of Afghan
investigators to crack down on corruption is crucial. If
American voters see Karzai's government as hopelessly
corrupt, public support for the war could plunge. Corruption
also fuels the Taliban insurgency and complicates efforts to
persuade ordinary Afghans to side with leaders in Kabul.
Afghanistan's attorney general, Mohammed Ishaq Aloko, was
seen as a potential ally against corruption when he took the
job two years ago. Some investigations have ended in
convictions. But U.S. officials said that Aloko, a native of
Kandahar province who studied law in Germany, has repeatedly
impeded prosecutions of suspects with political ties.
In meetings with U.S. Justice Department officials, Aloko
has seemed almost apologetic and acknowledged coming under
pressure from Karzai as well as members of parliament,
officials said. On one occasion, according to a U.S.
official, Aloko told his American counterparts, ``I'm doing
this because that is what the president tells me I have to
do.''
The official, like others quoted in this report, spoke on
the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive
investigations.
Aloko referred questions to his deputy, Rahmatullah Nazari,
who blamed resource constraints for his office's failure to
win more corruption convictions. ``There isn't any kind of
pressure on the attorney general's office,'' Nazari said.
``If anyone caves to pressure, they should go to prison.''
But U.S. officials point to multiple instances of
interference. The most prominent example to surface publicly
involves Afghanistan's former minister of Islamic affairs,
who fled the country this year as prosecutors were preparing
to charge him with extorting millions of dollars from
companies seeking contracts to take pilgrims to the Muslim
holy land, a trip known as the hajj.
A travel ban was issued to block the former minister,
Mohammad Siddiq Chakari, from leaving. But U.S. officials
said Chakari escaped after showing airport security officials
a letter he obtained from Aloko's office saying he had
cooperated in the case and was not to be detained. Nazari
said Chakari had not been convicted of a crime and,
therefore, could not be prevented from leaving.
Chakari, who is now in London, has repeatedly maintained
his innocence. Because there is no extradition treaty between
Afghanistan and Britain, U.S. officials said it is unlikely
that he will ever stand trial. Even so, some regard his
departure as a moral victory.
``The very fact that the former minister of the hajj had to
leave the country is in a way a remarkable achievement,''
said Steve Kraft, director of Afghanistan and Pakistan
programs for the State Department's Bureau of International
Narcotics and Law Enforcement. ``We would rather see him in
jail here. But in the old days, they would have scoffed'' at
the idea of pursuing such a probe, he added.
Combined efforts
Critics say Karzai's initiatives are meant to appease the
international community. ``It's all a show,'' lawmaker Sayed
Rahman said, noting that no senior government official has
been imprisoned on corruption charges.
Over the past year, U.S. officials said, Afghan
investigators have assembled evidence against three Karzai-
appointed provincial governors accused of embezzlement or
bribery. All three cases have been blocked. The interference
has persisted, officials said, despite Karzai's pledge in
November during his second inaugural address to make fighting
corruption a focus of his new term.
The extent of the interference has become evident,
officials said, in large part because of improvements in
Afghan authorities' ability to pursue corruption cases.
Over the past two years, U.S. agencies have allied with
their Afghan counterparts to create elite investigative and
prosecutorial teams. Afghan applicants undergo polygraph
tests in which they are asked whether they have taken bribes.
Some have been sent to U.S. facilities, including the DEA
academy in Quantico, to be trained.
Still, Karzai's administration has reportedly taken steps
to limit the independence of these units. The U.S. official
said that Aloko recently created a three-member commission to
``review'' the units'' cases and that it has
[[Page H5400]]
removed names of politically connected Afghans from
prosecutors' files.
Nazari, Aloko's deputy, said that if others know of a list
of names that have been removed, ``they should bring it to
us.''
The long-term aim of the anti-corruption units, Kraft said,
is to assemble cases in which the evidence is ``so profound
and well-known that the ability to get people off the hook
will no longer be there.''
Evidence from wiretaps
A key capability is a U.S.-provided eavesdropping system
that allows Afghan investigators to intercept celiphone calls
in the most populous parts of the country.
The wiretaps, approved by Afghan judges, have yielded key
evidence in a growing list of embezzlement and bribery cases.
U.S. officials said the wiretaps have also caught senior
officials and members of parliament discussing efforts to
derail certain cases.
In January, Afghan authorities raided the offices of New
Ansari, a firm that has served as Afghanistan's primary link
to the ``hawala'' money exchange system. This informal system
for transferring cash overseas makes electronic tracking
difficult. A second U.S. official familiar with the
investigation said the firm is suspected of laundering drug
money, delivering funds to insurgents and helping Afghan
officials transfer tens of millions of dollars to accounts
abroad.
After the raid, wiretaps picked up conversations indicating
that there had been a frantic meeting involving Karzai aides
at the presidential palace. U.S. officials said members of
Karzai's administration as well as members of parliament held
subsequent meetings with Aloko, pressuring him to ensure that
certain New Ansari executives not be charged.
Among those protected was Haji Muhammad Rafi Azimi, deputy
chairman of Afghan United Bank, a subsidiary of New Ansari,
U.S. officials said. On a wiretap recording, Azimi is heard
discussing bribes paid to Chakari. The recorded conversations
were played in open court in the trial of a lower-ranking
official in the Religious Affairs Ministry, Mohammed Noor.
``It's clear to everyone involved he should be indicted and
charged,'' a U.S. official said of Azimi. But, the official
said, Azimi is ``a businessman who knows a great deal about
the finances of government officials.''
A second U.S. official familiar with the case concurred.
``What happened is a large group of very powerful people . .
. went to the attorney general and told him to stand down,''
the official said.
Phone calls and e-mails to Azimi did not elicit any
responses. Guards outside New Ansari's office in Kabul told a
reporter that the site had been closed for months. They said
they did not know why they were still getting paid to guard
it.
Noor, a civil servant, was sentenced to 15 years in prison
after being convicted in May of collecting bribe money for
Chakari in Saudi Arabia and bringing it to Afghanistan. Two
others in the case are awaiting trial. Azimi remains in his
position at Afghan United Bank.
Aloko has announced that his office is investigating five
current and former ministers, reportedly including Mohammad
Ibrahim Adel, the mines minister, accused by U.S. officials
of taking a $30 million bribe from a Chinese firm. Adel
stepped down, but neither he nor any other minister--besides
Chakari--has been charged.
Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).
Mr. COHEN. I thank Mr. McGovern for granting me the time and for
bringing this amendment.
Mr. Speaker, you don't put good money after bad, and this would be
putting good money after bad.
I was in this Hall earlier with Senator McGovern, in the Speaker's
lobby, and I said something to Senator McGovern, former Senator
McGovern.
He said, Did I hear Vietnam?
Well, the echoes of Vietnam are in this Chamber, Mr. Speaker. When
people on the other side say they don't want to hear about surrender
and that that is not right, we could still be in Vietnam, and we would
still be losing American lives and American resources, because that was
a war we couldn't win, and some people wouldn't accept it. So we lost
more lives and more American economies and more opportunities in
America.
My district cannot afford another $35 billion and $35 billion and $35
billion in trying to create infrastructure in Afghanistan, which is not
a Third World country, but probably like a fifth world country--the
third most corrupt nation on the face of the Earth. That is not what
the United States of America is known for doing--supporting corrupt
countries around the world with a man like Karzai, whose brother is in
the opium trade, with a country that predominantly benefits from the
growing of poppies and from the spreading of heroin around the world.
That is who we are supporting.
We should not be spending our money and our lives. I go to the
funerals of every soldier in my district who passes, and I don't want
to go to more of them. I stop every soldier I see in airports and ask
them about where they are going.
When they are going to Afghanistan or to Iraq, I ask them, How is it
going?
Almost all of them going to Afghanistan say, Not well. They look at
me and they say, We should not stay there. We are not doing well.
I went to a function in my district in the west side, almost entirely
African American, and to a person, we need to spend our money here. On
the east side of my district, which is entirely Caucasian, and I asked
this crowd of 30: Does anybody want me to go to Washington and vote for
more funds for Afghanistan? Not one.
This war is lost. Bring our troops home. Save our money.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).
Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I heard the majority, the leader of the House, during
the debate on the rule give a really good talk about how we wished that
every Member could have something to input on this bill and that there
are 435 of us, so they structured a rule in the way that they think.
There is one choice that is missing. There is no ability for a Member
of the House tonight to vote on the Senate bill and send to the
President of the United States before the 4th of July a clean funding
bill for the troops who are in the field. Because the rule is self-
executing an amendment already, if that bill passes, it conflicts with
the Senate bill, and nothing can go to the President. The Senate is in
West Virginia.
So, Mr. Speaker, what I think the House ought to be doing is clearing
the Senate amendments for presentation to the President, not sending
more proposals to the Senate, but putting the test that the Senate has
already passed on the President's desk for approval of law tomorrow.
So, to that end, I wonder if the proponent of the pending motion, the
gentleman from Wisconsin, would yield to me for a unanimous consent
request. I'll even tell you what it is in the hopes that it might be
propounded.
I would like to ask unanimous consent that the pending motion to
concur in the Senate amendment with amendments be considered as
withdrawn in favor of a motion simply to concur in the Senate
amendment. I would ask the gentleman if he would yield to me for that
purpose.
Will you yield to me to permit the Members of this House to have a
clean bill on war funding to support the troops? It is a ``yes'' or
``no'' question.
Mr. Speaker, I've got to tell you the silence on the other side is
deafening. There is no ability tonight to cast a vote on a bill that
the Senate has passed that can go to the President.
Mr. OBEY. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LaTOURETTE. I am happy to yield to the gentleman.
Mr. OBEY. The gentleman seems to think the Senate bill is the
original bill. The Senate amended the House bill, which was a disaster
bill. If you wanted a clean vote, we would be voting on the disaster
bill tonight, not the war.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, my
understanding of where we are is that the Senate hollowed out the House
bill so that you don't have a motion to recommit, so that you don't
have any amendments except the ones that you have structured, and you
have denied the Members of this House the opportunity to cast an up-or-
down vote on the war funding instead.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 additional minute to
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).
Mr. LaTOURETTE. I only need 10 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table
the bill, H.R. 4899, with the Senate amendments thereto, and concur in
the Senate amendments.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Ohio?
Mr. OBEY. I object.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
[[Page H5401]]
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, this is really
unfortunate. We have troops in the field; we have a holiday upon us,
and no one in this House is going to be able to cast a vote on a clean
supplemental. The President of the United States, for crying out loud,
has asked for it. He has issued a veto threat against this charade that
we're performing tonight, and I think it's a shame that we can't at
least have a vote and let the House work its will.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of
my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California is recognized
for 10 minutes.
{time} 2150
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important for the Members to one more
time remind themselves, ourselves, that this is the President's
supplemental and it is designed to provide needed funding for our
troops who are representing our interests and fighting for freedom in
Afghanistan.
I think it is very important that this amendment goes on to restrict
year 2011 funds from being used in a manner inconsistent with a July
2011 troop withdrawal unless expressly provided for and by a joint
resolution of the Congress. The President of the United States has
indicated in his policy administration statement coming from his chief
advisers that if the amendments we have been considering this evening
are a part of this bill, those chief advisers will recommend to the
President that he veto this funding measure.
It is very apparent that the other body tomorrow is leaving town, if
they haven't already left town. Indeed, amendments to this bill will
cause this bill to involve a considerable delay for funding for our
troops almost regardless. As I argued under the previous
administration, we should not tie the President's hands while he is
executing his duties as Commander in Chief, perhaps the most solemn of
the Commander in Chief's responsibilities. This amendment would do just
that.
Further, just this week the President's new commanding general
testified that the July 11th date is not a race for the exits. Rather,
that date will begin a condition-based process. He further left open
the option of recommending changes or delays in the current plan.
The amendment further attempts to encumber future year funds, which
is not only impractical, but the conditions on which those funds would
be encumbered are questionable.
Honestly, I fail to see the logic in attempting to fence future year
funds, and I can't help but wonder why try to do this now when the
fiscal year 2011 process is working its way through the committee. The
war on terror, Mr. Speaker, continues to be very real. Our troops
certainly understand it, even if our majority leadership does not
understand it.
Of course, I want our troops home as quickly as possible, but tying
the hands of the Commander in Chief and the commanders executing the
war is irresponsible and dangerous.
Mr. Speaker, for that reason, I have a unanimous consent request.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table
the bill, H.R. 4899, with the Senate amendments thereto, and concur in
the Senate amendments.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
Mr. OBEY. I object.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am very surprised there was
an objection to that recommendation. After all, we are just trying to
find some way to get the President's original recommendations up here
so that the Commander in Chief can support our troops so that they can
come home as quickly as possible. In Afghanistan, whether we believe it
or not, the war on al Qaeda involves our future freedom, and certainly
it would have a significant impact upon peace in the world.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Georgia, Jack Kingston.
Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and
while I certainly appreciate the sincerity of the people who are
offering this amendment, I disagree with it, inasmuch as it ties the
hands of the military.
I have had the opportunity to go to Iraq and Afghanistan several
times, and I can say war is complicated. War does not always go your
way. The enemy does not always cooperate with the best of our plans.
And yet we here in the safety of the U.S. Congress can dictate to the
commanders in the field what direction the war should go in and the
timeframe and what should happen next, according to a political
guideline and a political deadline as opposed to military guidelines
and military deadlines.
When the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations visited General
McChrystal and Ambassador Eikenberry and the rest of our leadership in
March in Afghanistan, one of the things that they told us is that there
had been a difference, some significant differences, in the war. Part
of it was that the Afghan army was stepping up in a completely
different way, a new culture, if you will. They were taking ownership
in the war.
In Pakistan, troops had been shifted from the Kashmir border over to
the Afghan border and they were being attacked themselves by Taliban
terrorists, and so the Pakistanis were showing an interest and an
energy which up until now they had not given us or given the Afghan
people. They are no longer looking at this war as America's war in
Afghanistan. They are seeing it as their war that has spilled into
Pakistan, and it is causing instability in the region.
But I will say this, that our commander at the time, General
McChrystal, said, I am not over here to waste our time and to waste
soldiers' lives. I am keenly aware that the clock is ticking and we
have to have a resolution on this.
The campaign in Marja had just been concluded. It went very well. The
shift to the next campaign in Kandahar was already underway, and people
were moving in that direction.
So, Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important for us to let the
military make these decisions and not political representatives in
Washington. I think, furthermore, bogging this bill down with all kinds
of extracurricular amendments further sends a mixed signal to our
troops and the international community.
I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table H.R. 4899,
with the Senate amendments thereto, and concur in the Senate
amendments.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. According to the Speaker's announced policy,
such requests are not entertained that have not been cleared by the
leadership on both sides.
Mr. KINGSTON. That is why I was asking for unanimous consent, Mr.
Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Those requests are not entertained, under a
previously announced policy of the Speaker.
Mr. KINGSTON. It is a shame, because when it comes to war, it is too
bad that we are going to let parliamentary procedures tie our hands in
doing what is right for the soldiers.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman 1
additional minute.
Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I just want to make this point about H.R.
4899 and the Senate amendment. It's that it gives a clean bill and a
bill that will unfetter the generals so they can do the right thing.
They have worked closely with the administration.
As we know, the transition from McChrystal to Petraeus has probably
been traumatic or tenuous enough on all of us on a bipartisan basis,
and at this time we don't need to add to the military woes in the
international efforts in Afghanistan by sending a bill, which,
incidentally, is not going to be signed by the President. The President
has already said he is going to veto it, and the Senate is not going to
pass it anyway, so why are we doing this on the eve of the Fourth of
July?
[[Page H5402]]
We need to have a clean bill. That is why I think, Mr. Speaker, the
best thing for us to do is take H.R. 4899 with the Senate amendment and
concur with the Senate resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will notify Mr. McGovern that he
has 6 minutes remaining, and Mr. Lewis has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for
time; so I will close.
Mr. Speaker, I think you know that as a result of your interpreting
existing policy relative to the unanimous consent requests on three
different occasions in an effort to get the original package here
before the body so they could vote up or down on H.R. 4899, I know that
I could speak for my own leadership, they certainly would agree to this
unanimous consent request. It would appear the leadership on the other
side, perhaps of the committee, I can't speak for the Speaker, of
course, but apparently the other side does not want us to have that
package before the body.
{time} 2200
Mr. Speaker, it is critical for us to remind ourselves continually in
the weeks and months ahead, the war on terror is very real. America has
been challenged at home and continues to be challenged abroad. The men
and women that our Commander in Chief have chosen to send to
Afghanistan are in need for supplemental funding. To have us
essentially water down those proposals by way of the amendments that
have been before us is absolutely unbelievable to me. If the public
could only know what the people's body is doing tonight to not just our
people here at home but our people overseas as well, I believe they'd
essentially make a decision that they ought to change the entire
Congress.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, at this moment we have close to 100,000 U.S. servicemen
and -women deployed in Afghanistan. The war has raged for nearly 9
years, and our mission has changed at least that many times. We have
lost over 1,000 of our brave soldiers. Thousands more have been
wounded. We are spending hundreds of billions of dollars in borrowed
money. In 9 years, neither George W. Bush nor Barack Obama nor this
Congress has seen fit to pay for the war. That's a burden we are
placing on our children and our grandchildren.
All of us, every single one of us, Republicans and Democrats alike,
are dedicated to defeating al Qaeda and holding to account those who
committed the horrible atrocities on September 11.
What we are proposing today in no way lessens our commitment to that
fight, but our current policy in Afghanistan is deeply flawed. We are
getting sucked deeper and deeper and deeper into a war with no clear
end. It is a war that will continue to claim the lives of our soldiers;
it is a war that will continue to bankrupt us, and it is a war that
will not enhance our national security.
My friends, we can no longer go along to get along. All of us have a
responsibility to make sure that we are doing the right thing. It's not
just the President's war. It's our war, too. We are the ones who voted
to put our soldiers in harm's way, and we are the ones who keep funding
it. My friends on the other side of the aisle who question, Why are we
asking questions? Why don't we just rubber-stamp what the Senate did or
rubber-stamp what the President sent us? Well, the reason why we
shouldn't do that is because that's not our job. We're supposed to
deliberate, and we are supposed to ask questions, and we're supposed to
figure out whether we're doing the right thing. They are our
constituents, our family members who are in harm's way.
We need to let this administration know that we want a way out. We
want a plan. That's not a radical idea. We want a plan. We want an exit
strategy. For the last 30 years, we said, Never again will we commit
our Armed Forces without a clearly defined mission, and that means a
mission with a beginning, a middle, a transition period, and an end.
Well, that's all we're asking for today, a clearly defined mission.
What's the plan?
We are dealing with the worst economy since the Great Depression. Our
citizens, our constituents are hurting, yet we're told that we cannot
afford to extend unemployment benefits to out-of-work Americans because
we cannot afford it. We are told we can't help more families afford a
college education or rebuild our roads and our bridges. But when it
comes to supporting a corrupt, incompetent Karzai government, we're
supposed to be a bottomless pit. Don't ask any questions. Just give
them all the money they want. Look the other way. That's not right.
That's not our job. I don't have all the answers, but I do know that it
makes absolutely no sense to quietly endure the status quo.
Ending a war is not easy. It requires courage and it demands action.
What this amendment requests is action, a strong signal to the
administration that we want a plan. It also signals the Congress will
no longer just sit back and hope for the best.
To those who say that asking the Afghan Government to stand up and
take responsibility is somehow a bad idea, I would remind them that
when we signaled to Iraq that we had a withdrawal plan, officials there
actually began to act like a real government.
Ensuring that the President gives us a plan by next April so we can
figure out by July what to do with the money slated for the war is not
too much to ask. We require, we deserve, and we should demand the
information we need to do our jobs.
Let me just close with this: There is a small sliver of America that
is directly impacted by this war in Iraq, and those are the people who
are fighting the war and who have family members who are fighting the
war. The rest of us are asked to do nothing, absolutely nothing. We are
not even asked to pay for it, hundreds of billions of dollars in
borrowed money. Well, the least we could do for these brave men and
women whom we have put in harm's way is debate this issue to make sure
we're getting it right, to make sure we're not sending these people on
a mission that commits itself to a war with no end. That is what we're
asking for here today, a clearly defined mission. I ask all of you,
every one of us here, to reengage in this policy.
This issue has been on the back burner for too long. We're at war.
Our constituents are dying. Each and every day we read about more
people who are killed in Afghanistan. We have an obligation to do
better. This policy is deeply flawed. We need a way out, and I ask all
of you today to vote for the McGovern-Obey-Jones amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will clarify that the procedural
posture for a unanimous consent request of the type recently broached
by the gentleman from Georgia is not dictated by guidelines for
clearances; rather, it is subject to managerial prerogative. In short,
such a request could be propounded only if the proponent of the pending
motion yielded for that purpose.
Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose more funding for a war
in Afghanistan that has cost too much and accomplished too little.
Over 1,000 soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan. The toll of this
conflict is not limited to the battlefield. This year, almost as many
American troops have committed suicide as have been killed in combat.
Our troops and their families are paying an extreme price to wage a war
that has no clear objective.
The war has also destabilized Afghanistan. Estimates from
international human rights organizations range from 10,000 to 12,000
Afghanis killed as a result of the war. Now, we are preparing to spend
$33 billion more in Afghanistan. We should spend this money on
infrastructure--like schools and roads--that will open opportunities
for all of Afghanistan. That is the best way to achieve peace and
stability in the region.
Every dollar we waste on war is one less dollar we can invest in our
children here at home. I support the Obey amendment that will add $10
billion in domestic education funds to the bill. These funds, though
inadequate, will protect hundreds of thousands of teacher jobs across
the country, including 167 in my district.
While I hope for the inclusion of this education funding, I cannot
support any more funding for the misguided war in Afghanistan. I urge
my colleagues to join me in voting no.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of H.R. 4899, the
Supplemental Appropriations for FY 2010.
[[Page H5403]]
As a member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, I,
along with many of my colleagues, have been integrally involved in the
oversight of our nation's funding and support of our efforts in Iraq,
Afghanistan, as well as other initiatives aimed at supporting our war
fighters.
The Senate's bill, which we are considering tonight, provides $58.8
billion in supplemental funds for FY 2010, including $37.1 billion for
the war and $5.1 billion for FEMA, as well as $13 billion in mandatory
funds to Vietnam Veterans exposed to Agent Orange.
While I do support the President's request for additional funding to
support our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is important that we
continue to monitor and assess our mission and role in both of these
countries, particularly given the array of investments we need to make
right here at home.
Since 2001, Congress has provided close to $1 trillion in direct
funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as part of 18 emergency
supplemental bills, not including the support we provided for the
efforts in our regular annual Appropriations bills. Combined, it's
estimated that we've spent between $1.5 trillion to almost to $3
trillion so far on these wars.
So I am very pleased that the amendments made in order by the rule
will also provide us an opportunity to provide additional funding to
the Senate passed bill for critical domestic programs, including $10
billion for education jobs, $5 billion for Pell grants and $701 million
for border security.
Of particular note, I am very pleased that the bill will include
funds to settle both the Cobell v. Salazar and Pigford v. Vilsack class
action lawsuits and it provides $1 billion for youth jobs.
Finally, the supplemental will also include funding which is vital to
an important segment of my constituency, our farmers and agricultural
producers. The bill provides the Farm Service Agency (FSA), which is
housed within the Department of Agriculture, with an additional $31.5
million to cover the costs associated with direct loans, guaranteed
loans, operating loans and administrative expenses, which are so vital
to our farmers, particularly in South Georgia.
The bill will require that the loans be made available to family
farmers who may not qualify for agricultural credit through other
commercial institutions in the tight credit market. While the FY2010
Agriculture Appropriations bill provided enough funding to meet demand
at the time it was passed last year, demand for the farm ownership and
operating loan programs has been dramatically higher than historical
levels due to the lack of availability of conventional credit.
Mr. Speaker, this Supplemental bill strikes, what I believe to be a
fair and balanced approach for the emergency needs of our war fighters
abroad and the critical domestic issues we face right here at home, and
I support the bill.
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the
supplemental war funding for Iraq and Afghanistan. After 9 years of
war, the time has come to bring our troops home.
I would like to thank Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic Leadership
for bringing this bill to the floor today in a manner that allows clear
up or down votes on funding for the war and other domestic priorities.
The challenges in Afghanistan are great. As the violence and attacks
on our troops continue to increase, we still do not have a clear path
forward or a way to measure progress there.
We cannot afford to sustain an open-ended commitment with no clear
definition of success.
Reports of corruption abound in Afghanistan, and without a true
partner in the Karzai government, our prospects for making real
progress have grown dim.
Our troops have fought with honor and professionalism in the face of
great challenges, and at great cost--I am truly humbled by their
service and sacrifice. These brave men and women in uniform deserve our
full support and commitment to return them home safely to their
families and loved ones.
I support the president and our military leadership in bringing this
war to a responsible end. President Obama did not start this war, and I
was among those who have spoken out in support of allowing for the time
necessary for a new strategy in Afghanistan to turn the tide.
But after years of war that has strained our military, their
families, and the country, I am unable to continue to support what
increasingly looks like an intractable situation in Afghanistan.
That is why I vote against this war funding today.
Despite my opposition to the troubling war funding, the bill does
include critical domestic funding that I will support. These include
saving teachers' jobs, Pell Grants, emergency food assistance for
hungry Americans, and disaster aid to respond to the Gulf oil spill
catastrophe.
For example, today we are providing $10 billion for an Education Jobs
Fund to provide additional emergency support to local school districts
to prevent impending layoffs. Estimates suggest that this fund will
help keep 140,000 school employees on the job next year.
Moreover, when we invest in education, we save jobs in other sectors
and spur economic recovery. According to the Economic Policy Institute,
for every 100,000 education jobs lost, another 30,000 jobs are lost in
other sectors due to reduced consumer spending and tax revenues.
The list of important programs this bill funds is both extensive and
impressive: Among other priorities, we are providing $304 million for
the Gulf Coast oil spill; $50 million for the Emergency Food Assistance
Program for food purchases to distribute through local emergency food
providers; $13.377 billion for the payment of benefits to Vietnam
veterans and their survivors for exposure to Agent Orange, which has
been linked with Parkinson's disease, ischemic heart disease, and hairy
cell/B cell leukemia; and $2.93 billion for Haiti.
These are extremely important priorities which are fully paid for and
which I support.
Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in
opposition to the amendment offered by my colleague, the Gentleman from
Wisconsin, Mr. Obey.
As we all know, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill has resulted in the
worst man-made environmental disaster in history.
As a result, tens of thousands of Gulf residents are sidelined. From
rig workers to commercial fishermen and shrimpers, these folks are
forced to watch their waters, their beaches, and their livelihoods
succumb to the oil spill.
My colleagues on the left will tell you that this amendment assists
those in the Gulf, providing $142 million for Oil Spill Unemployment
Assistance. But this is merely a token. The underlying bill provides
$2.93 billion in relief to Haiti, but this amendment only provides
Americans whose livelihoods hang in the balance only $142 million. Gulf
Coast Americans should be enraged. Almost $3 billion for Haiti and a
measly $142 million to Gulf Coast victims.
The Democrat leadership has filled this amendment with questionable
provisions diverting education spending, cutting federal charter school
programs, and paying back their union pals. And then they add
desperately needed Gulf assistance and say ``you either vote with us or
you vote for big oil.'' This is a false choice and it is playing
politics with all my Gulf residents who are out of work as a result of
this tragedy.
I oppose this amendment.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Obama
administration's war strategy in Afghanistan and to the war funding
contained in this bill. It is evident to me that this strategy is not
working.
Just this past weekend, CIA Director Leon Panetta said on national
television that, regarding Taliban insurgents, ``We have seen no
evidence that they are truly interested in reconciliation where they
would surrender their arms, where they would denounce al-Qaeda, where
they would really try to become part of that society.'' One day later,
General Petreaus--our newly named commander for the war in
Afghanistan--told the Congress ``. . . whether or not very senior
[Taliban] leaders can meet the very clear conditions that the Afghan
government has laid down for reconciliation I think is somewhat in
question. So in that regard, I agree with Director Panetta.''
Substitute ``Viet Cong'' for ``Taliban'' and ``South Vietnamese
government'' for ``Afghan government'' and you'll understand why all of
this sounds painfully familiar. It's because we've seen this before,
and we know how it ends.
I do not say these things lightly, as I voted for the authorization
for the use of force in 2001 in order to find and bring to justice the
al Qaeda leaders who organized the 9/11 attacks against our country.
Unfortunately, the previous administration did not put enough troops on
the ground to prevent bin Laden's escape, and nearly 9 years later he
and his key lieutenants whereabouts remain a mystery to our
intelligence community, as Director Panetta acknowledged last weekend.
In other words, the original rationale for going to Afghanistan is
gone.
We face a nationalist insurgency that we cannot defeat militarily and
that will not negotiate a political settlement with the corrupt Afghan
government. We have tripled the number of troops on the ground since
the beginning of 2009, and the violence has only soared. Every day we
remain only increases our national debt and subjects our troops to
needless peril. Indeed, every month we squander enough money on this
war that could otherwise be used to put an additional 38,000 police on
our streets for a full year, or to prevent massive teacher layoffs in
every state, particularly New Jersey. The cost of this war is directly
imperiling the hometown security of communities across this nation and
the economic security of our children and grandchildren.
[[Page H5404]]
Mr. Speaker, when President Obama asked us to support his new
strategy, I did so reluctantly and with this caveat: I would give the
President time to show his approach could work, but that my patience
had limits. In the nearly 18 months that President Obama has had the
opportunity to demonstrate his approach, we've tripled the number of
Americans in Afghanistan, our casualties have skyrocketed, and the
insurgency has deepened and spread across the country. My patience, and
now support for this strategy, have evaporated. We do more harm than
good by staying: more harm to our troops and our economy, and more harm
to innocent Afghans who too often are caught in the crossfire. It's
time for us to go, and I urge my colleagues to join me in voting to
bring our troops home by ending funding for this conflict.
The bill before us makes critical investments in education which are
fully paid for by cutting funds from existing programs.
The current economic downturn has hit school districts hard, and many
are being forced to cut services. Previously, the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act made several sound investments in public education to
keep teachers in the classroom and help school districts avoid painful
cuts.
Most, if not all, of this emergency funding has been spent. Further,
at this most critical time, Governor Christie made the wrong call in
cutting state aid to our local schools.
The $10 billion included for the Education Jobs Fund will help keep
teachers in the classroom and make sure that class sizes do not balloon
next fall. This much needed funding will help preserve 140,000 teaching
jobs nationwide.
This package also contains almost $5 billion, fully offset as well,
to ensure college students who receive Pell Grants, 8 million this
year, will have the financial support for college they need.
Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4899, the
Supplemental Appropriations Act.
While I am extremely disappointed that the House is not simply
passing the Senate-passed version of this bill and clearing it for the
President's signature, I will ultimately support this bill. It is my
belief that voting against this bill even in its current form would
send a terrible signal to our troops that we do not support their
efforts and that is unacceptable to me. And, while I still believe this
is the wrong vehicle for it, I am pleased that the domestic spending
that is included in this legislation is offset and will not add to our
deficit.
We must act as soon as possible to get critical military and Federal
Emergency Management Agency funding legislation to the President for
his signature. Our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and families across
America who have been affected by disasters cannot afford anymore
delays in funding.
Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support for key
provisions and amendment to H.R. 4899, the Supplemental Appropriations
Act of 2010. The bill provides a myriad of critical emergency funding
for disaster relief in Haiti, the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, as
well as fully paid for investments to meet domestic needs, such as
education jobs and Pell Grants. Unfortunately, this bill also includes
funding for the war in Afghanistan, the longest war in our nation's
history.
While I am grateful to the men and women who serve valiantly in our
Armed Forces, both at home and abroad, I strongly oppose any additional
funding for the war in Afghanistan. This war has gone on long enough
without a clear and sufficient exit strategy. My constituents and I can
no longer bear to see more Americans die or remain in harm's way, for
this fruitless war. The time is now to bring our troops home, stop the
unnecessary spending and stabilize our economy. That is why I support
the amendments offered by CBC Chairwoman Barbara Lee and James
McGovern, David Obey and Walter Jones.
I commend Chairwoman Lee for working diligently to bring her
important amendment for a vote. I agree we must begin to end the war by
limiting funds to the safe, timely withdrawal of US troops and military
contractors from Afghanistan. The people in my district demand it, I
morally oppose it, and time is of the essence.
I also want to commend the Chairman David Obey and the Members of the
Committee on Appropriations for their hard work on the House Amendment
to the Senate bill. In particular, I want to thank the Committee for
including funding for school districts, like those in New York City,
that are poised to receive high concentrations of Haitian child
refugees. These children are more likely to settle in already
overburdened school districts. Therefore, schools receiving these
children will undoubtedly need extra resources to accommodate this new
population. In April, I joined my colleagues on a letter to Chairman
Obey, expressing this very concern. I am grateful that this language
was adopted.
Additionally the Obey amendment provides major benefits to education
for all Americans. It includes $10 billion in aid to local school
districts avert massive teacher layoffs and $5 billion to help close
the current shortfall in Pell Grants for college students--the absence
of which would seriously imperil education funding for fiscal year
2011. This will affect thousands of teachers and students in my
district and in the Greater New York area.
I strongly believe that H.R. 4899 is a key tool for Haiti's
redevelopment. As the Representative of the second largest Haitian
population of first and second generation Haitians Americans, I am
greatly pleased that the bill includes $2.93 billion dollars for the
U.S. participation in the Haiti disaster relief, $130 million above the
President's request. The people of Haiti, its government, USAID and the
Department of State cannot move forward in their recovery and
reconstruction plans without the pledged financial support from our
government.
Mr. Speaker, I support our troops, veterans, and military families,
and in honor of them I voted to reunite our service members in
Afghanistan with their families here at home. My heart also goes out to
the people of Haiti and will continue to support our reconstruction
efforts there. Lastly, I am proud that the advocacy efforts of the New
York congressional delegation in pushing to save education jobs in New
York City have paid off.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Senate
amendments to H.R. 4899, the Supplemental Appropriations Act for 2010.
This legislation is critically important to providing funding to our
men and women in uniform who are serving in harm's way.
However, this legislation also provides funding that is important to
maintaining our strategic posture in the Pacific. The legislation
contains $50 million in transfer authority of Department of Defense
operation and maintenance funding to the Guam Port Improvement
Enterprise Fund at the Maritime Administration. The $50 million in
funding is critical for the Port of Guam, in consultation with the
Maritime Administration, to begin necessary infrastructure improvements
and modernization.
The Port of Guam, on many occasions, has been identified as a
potential chokepoint for the delivery of materials and supplies to
support the realignment of military forces to Guam and sustain economic
development on the island. Without these improvements the realignment
of military forces to Guam would be severely delayed, add additional
costs to future military construction and potentially harm our civilian
economic development. Moreover, these improvements are needed to
facilitate the requirements of being designated a strategic port, in
fact America's most forward located strategic port in the Western
Pacific.
The funding for the Port of Guam in this bill marks an important and
very positive step forward for the military build-up on Guam. I thank
the Obama administration for their support and leadership on this
matter. After Guam was overlooked for important Recovery Act funding,
the administration acted after repeated calls by our office for funding
for critical civilian infrastructure projects and requested the
transfer authority. I also thank Congressman David Obey, Chairman of
the House Committee on Appropriations; Congressman Norm Dicks, Chairman
of the Subcommittee on Defense, and Congressman John Olver, Chairman of
the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and
Related Agencies, for their support of this provision.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1500, the previous question is ordered.
The question of adoption of the motion is divided among the five
House amendments.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1500, the first portion of the divided
question is adopted.
The second portion of the divided question is, Will the House concur
in the Senate amendment with House amendment No. 2 printed in House
Report 111-522?
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on the second portion of the divided question will be
followed by 5-minute votes on the remaining portions of the divided
question, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 239,
nays 182, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 11, as follows:
[Roll No. 430]
YEAS--239
Ackerman
Adler (NJ)
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
[[Page H5405]]
Baldwin
Barrow
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boccieri
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Childers
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Giffords
Gonzalez
Gordon (TN)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kirk
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 (MA)
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McMahon
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Teague
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wilson (OH)
Wu
Yarmuth
NAYS--182
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Carter
Cassidy
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cooper
Crenshaw
Culberson
Dahlkemper
Davis (KY)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Djou
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
Fallin
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Jenkins
Jones
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Marshall
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Olson
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis (CO)
Posey
Price (GA)
Putnam
Rehberg
Reichert
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Snyder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tanner
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Visclosky
Walden
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Young (FL)
ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1
Miller, Gary
NOT VOTING--11
Bean
Capito
Conyers
Griffith
Hoekstra
Johnson, Sam
Radanovich
Rodriguez
Wamp
Woolsey
Young (AK)
{time} 2234
Mr. BRADY of Texas changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. SPRATT, Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida, and Mr. SHULER changed
their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the second portion of the divided question was adopted.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Ms. BEAN. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 430, the Obey amendment, had I
been present, I would have voted ``yes.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The third portion of the divided question
is, Will the House concur in the Senate amendment with House amendment
No. 3 printed in House Report 111-522?
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 25,
noes 376, answered ``present'' 22, not voting 10, as follows:
[Roll No. 431]
AYES--25
Clarke
Clay
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Ellison
Filner
Garamendi
Grayson
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Jackson (IL)
Johnson (IL)
Kucinich
Lewis (GA)
Michaud
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Paul
Pingree (ME)
Schrader
Serrano
Sires
Stark
Velazquez
Welch
NOES--376
Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Djou
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Driehaus
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Guthrie
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinojosa
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Jordan (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Maffei
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
[[Page H5406]]
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olson
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pelosi
Pence
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Quigley
Rahall
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schauer
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Wu
Young (FL)
ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--22
Baldwin
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cohen
Hinchey
Hirono
Jackson Lee (TX)
Kagen
Lee (CA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Maloney
McDermott
McGovern
Miller, George
Rangel
Sanchez, Linda T.
Schakowsky
Slaughter
Thompson (CA)
Waters
Watson
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--10
Capito
Conyers
Griffith
Hoekstra
Johnson, Sam
Radanovich
Rodriguez
Wamp
Woolsey
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are reminded there
are less than 2 minutes remaining in this vote.
{time} 2241
Mr. NADLER of New York changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the third portion of the divided question was not adopted.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The fourth portion of the divided question
is, Will the House concur in the Senate amendment with House amendment
No. 4 printed in House Report 111-522?
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 100,
noes 321, not voting 11, as follows:
[Roll No. 432]
AYES--100
Baldwin
Becerra
Blumenauer
Campbell
Capuano
Chaffetz
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Costello
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Doyle
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Ellison
Farr
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Grayson
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holt
Honda
Inslee
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (IL)
Jones
Kagen
Kennedy
Kucinich
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (MA)
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore (WI)
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Payne
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Quigley
Rangel
Richardson
Rohrabacher
Rush
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Schakowsky
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sires
Slaughter
Speier
Stark
Stupak
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Velazquez
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Yarmuth
NOES--321
Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Cao
Capps
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Childers
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Dahlkemper
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Djou
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Driehaus
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Fallin
Fattah
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Guthrie
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Hare
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hodes
Holden
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Israel
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jordan (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Nye
Olson
Ortiz
Owens
Pascrell
Paulsen
Pence
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Rahall
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schauer
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Spratt
Stearns
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Titus
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Wu
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--11
Capito
Conyers
Griffith
Hoekstra
Johnson, Sam
Radanovich
Rodriguez
Wamp
Watson
Woolsey
Young (AK)
{time} 2247
So the fourth portion of the divided question was not adopted.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The fifth portion of the divided question
is, Will the House concur in the Senate amendment with House amendment
No. 5 printed in House Report 111-522?
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 162,
noes 260, not voting 11, as follows:
[Roll No. 433]
AYES--162
Baca
Baldwin
Becerra
Berkley
Berry
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Coble
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
[[Page H5407]]
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutch
Doggett
Doyle
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Ehlers
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Grayson
Grijalva
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holt
Honda
Inslee
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Jones
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kucinich
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lujan
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (MA)
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Richardson
Rohrabacher
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Shea-Porter
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wilson (OH)
Yarmuth
NOES--260
Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (TX)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Chandler
Childers
Clyburn
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cooper
Costa
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Djou
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Driehaus
Edwards (TX)
Ellsworth
Emerson
Etheridge
Fallin
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Hill
Holden
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Israel
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson, E. B.
Jordan (OH)
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moran (KS)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Nye
Olson
Ortiz
Owens
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Putnam
Rahall
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Royce
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Snyder
Space
Spratt
Stearns
Sullivan
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Titus
Turner
Upton
Walden
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Wu
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--11
Capito
Conyers
Griffith
Gutierrez
Hoekstra
Johnson, Sam
Radanovich
Rodriguez
Wamp
Woolsey
Young (AK)
{time} 2254
So the fifth portion of the divided question was not adopted.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________