Congressional Record, Volume 157 Issue 86 (Wednesday, June 15, 2011)

[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 86 (Wednesday, June 15, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H4202-H4239]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 300 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill,
H.R. 2112.

{time} 1304

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 2112) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other
purposes, with Mr. Bass of New Hampshire (Acting Chair) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Tuesday,
June 14, 2011, a request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered
by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Richardson) had been postponed
and the bill had been read through page 26, line 17.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Natural Resources Conservation Service

conservation operations

For necessary expenses for carrying out the provisions of
the Act of April 27, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 590a-f), including
preparation of conservation plans and establishment of
measures to conserve soil and water (including farm
irrigation and land drainage and such special measures for
soil and water management as may be necessary to prevent
floods and the siltation of reservoirs and to control
agricultural related pollutants); operation of conservation
plant materials centers; classification and mapping of soil;
dissemination of information; acquisition of lands, water,
and interests therein for use in the plant materials program
by donation, exchange, or purchase at a nominal cost not to
exceed $100 pursuant to the Act of August 3, 1956 (7 U.S.C.
428a); purchase and erection or alteration or improvement of
permanent and temporary buildings; and operation and
maintenance of aircraft, $770,956,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2013: Provided, That appropriations
hereunder shall be available pursuant to 7 U.S.C. 2250 for
construction and improvement of buildings and public
improvements at plant materials centers, except that the cost
of alterations and improvements to other buildings and other
public improvements shall not exceed $250,000: Provided
further, That when buildings or other structures are erected
on non-Federal land, that the right to use such land is
obtained as provided in 7 U.S.C. 2250a.

watershed rehabilitation program

Under the authorities of Section 14 of the Watershed
Protection and Flood Prevention Act, $15,000,000 is provided.

Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 27, line 23, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $15,000,000)''.
Page 80, line 2, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $15,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would eliminate one
of the 20 different conservation programs USDA currently operates, the
water rehabilitation program. The chairman of the subcommittee, my good
friend from Georgia, has stated during debate on funding for
agriculture programs that he hopes to see a reduction in the number of
Federal programs included in this bill.

[[Page H4203]]

I understand that some of my colleagues have a vested interest in
this program, but when we have a program that is funding projects in
only a handful of States, we must take a long, hard look at our
priorities.
Mr. Chairman, even the President did not request funding for this
program. It cannot be understated that we are facing unprecedented
fiscal challenges in our Nation. We just simply have to stop spending
money that we don't have, and we have to start creating jobs out in the
private sector. My amendment, by cutting this program, will help to
stop the bleeding economically that we're having. The consequences of
failing to reduce spending and the deficit jeopardize the current and
future stability of our Nation.
I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LUCAS. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to this
amendment, and I think it might be worthwhile to explain for just a
moment what the small watershed program is and what the small watershed
rehabilitation program is all about.
These were efforts begun in the 1940s and 1950s by this body in an
effort to address flooding conditions. Under this program, 10,000 small
earthen dams were built across the country, working in interlocking
series to prevent downstream flooding by capturing flood waters at the
source.
Now, like anything after 50 years, its life expectancy can be
expected to come to a conclusion. In 2000, we created the
rehabilitation program to extend the life of these structures by
additional time, and it now appears, based on the modern techniques
being used, engineering technologies, that these 50-year structures
will wind up with a 150-year total life expectancy in many instances.
This is a program where the rehabilitation resources are allocated
based on need as scored by USDA. It's not an earmark program. It's not
a targeted program. The money is made available, and as the structures
need work, they are prioritized. It's a wonderful way to address this
issue.
Now, if you look at the amount of property and life and
infrastructure that have been protected in the life of these programs,
it's almost incalculable. In Oklahoma, in the range of $81 million a
year worth of property has been saved.
My colleague alluded to programs that only affect limited numbers of
areas. I would note even in the great State of Georgia, there are 357
of these watershed structures. There are 69 that within the next 10
years will need the rehabilitation program. There are benefits in every
State.
I would just simply say, if you care and you believe that
infrastructure is a part of our responsibility, if you believe that
protecting every life below that dam all the way to the ocean is
important, and the property, then this is a wise, small use of
resources. What my friend attempts to do here is to zero out the whole
program. No money for rehab this year. No money for rehab this year.

{time} 1310

That would be a travesty. That would be a tragic use of resources in
the past. It's important, I think, that we continue this program.
Mr. KINGSTON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LUCAS. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. KINGSTON. As the chairman of Agriculture knows and is fully
aware, I wanted to underscore the point that you just made that the
ordinary mandatory authorization for this program is $165 million. That
has been zeroed out, and the only thing we're doing this year is this
$15 million. And so even at the current $15 million level, it's still
150 less than it ordinarily has been.
Mr. LUCAS. I would say, reclaiming my time, that the gentleman is
right. This is a dramatic reduction over what had been expected during
the farm bill. Yet this $15 million will do tremendous work, and it is
allocated on a 65-35 cost basis. Local and State government have to
come up with more than a third of the money to be able to implement
these rehabilitation programs.
For a few pennies, we do a great deal across the country based on
need, not anyone's political priorities but based on need. This is an
exceptional program. I would ask my colleagues to turn back this
amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
The amendment was rejected.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

TITLE III

RURAL DEVELOPMENT

Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development

For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary
for Rural Development, $760,000.

Rural Development Salaries and Expenses

(including transfers of funds)

For necessary expenses for carrying out the administration
and implementation of programs in the Rural Development
mission area, including activities with institutions
concerning the development and operation of agricultural
cooperatives; and for cooperative agreements; $161,011,000:
Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds appropriated under this section may be used for
advertising and promotional activities that support the Rural
Development mission area: Provided further, That not more
than $10,000 may be expended to provide modest non-monetary
awards to non-USDA employees: Provided further, That any
balances available from prior years for the Rural Utilities
Service, Rural Housing Service, and the Rural Business-
Cooperative Service salaries and expenses accounts shall be
transferred to and merged with this appropriation.

Rural Housing Service

rural housing insurance fund program account

(including transfers of funds)

For gross obligations for the principal amount of direct
and guaranteed loans as authorized by title V of the Housing
Act of 1949, to be available from funds in the rural housing
insurance fund, as follows: $24,845,666,000 for loans to
section 502 borrowers, of which $845,666,000 shall be for
direct loans, and of which $24,000,000,000 shall be for
unsubsidized guaranteed loans; and $58,617,000 for section
515 rental housing loans.
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: $40,000,000 for
502 direct loans; and $20,000,000 for repair, rehabilitation,
and new construction of section 515 rental housing: Provided,
That of the total amount appropriated in this paragraph, the
amount equal to the amount of Rural Housing Insurance Fund
Program Account funds allocated by the Secretary for Rural
Economic Area Partnership Zones for the fiscal year 2011,
shall be available through June 30, 2012, for communities
designated by the Secretary of Agriculture as Rural Economic
Area Partnership Zones.
In addition, for the cost of direct loans, grants, and
contracts, as authorized by 42 U.S.C. 1484 and 1486,
$12,500,000, to remain available until expended, for direct
farm labor housing loans and domestic farm labor housing
grants and contracts: Provided, That any balances available
for the Farm Labor Program Account shall be transferred and
merged with this account.
In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry
out the direct and guaranteed loan programs, $400,000,000
shall be paid to the appropriation for ``Rural Development,
Salaries and Expenses''.

rental assistance program

For rental assistance agreements entered into or renewed
pursuant to the authority under section 521(a)(2) or
agreements entered into in lieu of debt forgiveness or
payments for eligible households as authorized by section
502(c)(5)(D) of the Housing Act of 1949, $890,000,000; and,
in addition, such sums as may be necessary, as authorized by
section 521(c) of the Act, to liquidate debt incurred prior
to fiscal year 1992 to carry out the rental assistance
program under section 521(a)(2) of the Act: Provided, That of
this amount not less than $1,500,000 is available for newly
constructed units financed by section 515 of the Housing Act
of 1949, and not less than $2,500,000 is for newly
constructed units financed under sections 514 and 516 of the
Housing Act of 1949: Provided further, That rental assistance
agreements entered into or renewed during the current fiscal
year shall be funded for a one-year period: Provided further,
That any unexpended balances remaining at the end of such
one-year agreements may be transferred and used for the
purposes of any debt reduction; maintenance, repair, or
rehabilitation of any existing projects; preservation; and
rental assistance activities authorized under title V of the
Act: Provided further, That rental assistance provided under
agreements entered into prior to fiscal year 2012 for a farm
labor multi-family housing project financed under section 514
or 516 of the Act may not be recaptured for use in

[[Page H4204]]

another project until such assistance has remained unused for
a period of 12 consecutive months, if such project has a
waiting list of tenants seeking such assistance or the
project has rental assistance eligible tenants who are not
receiving such assistance: Provided further, That such
recaptured rental assistance shall, to the extent
practicable, be applied to another farm labor multi-family
housing project financed under section 514 or 516 of the Act.

multi-family housing revitalization program account

For the rural housing voucher program as authorized under
section 542 of the Housing Act of 1949, but notwithstanding
subsection (b) of such section, $11,000,000, to remain
available until expended, which shall be available for rural
housing vouchers to any low-income household (including those
not receiving rental assistance) residing in a property
financed with a section 515 loan which has been prepaid after
September 30, 2005: Provided, That the amount of such voucher
shall be the difference between comparable market rent for
the section 515 unit and the tenant-paid rent for such unit:
Provided further, That funds made available for such vouchers
shall be subject to the availability of annual
appropriations: Provided further, That the Secretary shall,
to the maximum extent practicable, administer such vouchers
with current regulations and administrative guidance
applicable to section 8 housing vouchers administered by the
Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Gosar

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 32, line 5, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $100,000,000)''.
Page 35, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $100,000,000)''.
Page 49, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $200,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I am offering an amendment that reduces the
funding for the billion dollar Food for Peace program. Regardless of
its perceived merits, our country is deep in debt, and we have problems
here in America, particularly rural America, that need to be addressed.
The Food for Peace program has been rightly criticized as a waste of
money and ineffective in achieving its stated goals. But the reason for
my amendments are more direct: the current budget funding for this
program is over $1 billion. We stand today with a $14.3 trillion
deficit, and at the same time, we have unmet needs in our own
backyards.
My first amendment cuts $200 million from this program and my second
amendment sets aside $100 million into the spending reduction account.
Then, of the $200 million cut in my first amendment, $100 million each
is directed into Rural Development, Title III, here in the United
States.
The reason for these amendments is straightforward. Parts of rural
America rival parts of some Third World countries where we send tens of
millions of dollars. We need to focus on our own people and our own
communities before we spend taxpayer money in foreign lands.
One example here in the United States is the area known as the former
Bennett Freeze area, an area consisting of 1.5 million acres of Navajo
Nation reservation land, where the housing units have been described as
``little more than hovels'' and ``80 percent of the homes have no
electricity'' and there are few paved road or communication structures.
How do we justify spending $1 billion in foreign countries when we have
so many unmet needs in the United States?
The Rural Development loan program would receive additional funding
under this amendment, a program that gets high marks for its success;
so, too, would the Multifamily Housing Revitalization Program. With
millions of people losing homes, they are moving into multiunit
housing. This program will help Americans.
It is easy to understand the emotional appeal programs like Food for
Peace may have, a program that would be reduced by this amendment. But
ultimately, we are using taxpayer money for charity. Improving
literacy, reducing hunger, and educating girls in foreign countries are
issues that are, in fact, charitable and emotionally appealing, but we
have our own literacy, hunger, and gender issues in our country. But at
a time when we have a $14.3 trillion public debt, massive unemployment,
and rural rates of poverty, illiteracy, and school underperformance, we
should focus our money here at home. We owe it to our constituents, the
taxpayers, to help them. Certainly one can see that this program has
laudable aspirations, but laudable aspirations will not help the U.S.
economy or the U.S. taxpayer. The problems in rural America are
staggering.
On June 9, 2011, President Obama issued an Executive order to create
a commission to study problems in rural America. In the Executive
order, the President stated:
``Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties.
Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the
future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead. These
communities supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural
resources, and are essential in the development of science and
innovation. Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they
also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an
important role to play in order to expand access to capital necessary
for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care
and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public
lands.''
I agree. But instead of just forming a committee to study the
problems, problems that are well-known and need no further study, my
amendment would do something about it and direct money to the
Multifamily Housing Revitalization Account Program for a rural housing
voucher program and the Rural Business Program Account, which provides
loan guarantees and grants for ``rural businesses development
programs,'' including business grants to Indian tribes and rural
economic partnership zones for farm and rural development.
Again, instead of just studying the problems of high unemployment,
lagging schools, lagging infrastructure and opportunities, let's do
something about it. The rural American poverty rate has exceeded the
national rate since 2001 by 3 percentage points. The child poverty rate
in rural America is 5 percentage points higher than urban-metro areas.
Why can't we invest millions in our rural communities instead? Why
should we tolerate poverty, unemployment, and a lack of infrastructure
in our rural communities while we send millions and billions of dollars
to build up other countries?
In good faith, knowing how hard so many people in my district work
and knowing how little they have to show for it at the end of the day,
I can't agree to send their money overseas to help others while they
suffer in our backyards. Knowing that infrastructure is lacking, this
amendment helps start the process of directing our money to the unmet
needs here in the United States.
I ask my colleagues to closely consider these amendments.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. KINGSTON. I wanted to make a few notes on it. I appreciate my
friend for offering it, and I think he's raised some very serious
philosophical questions, particularly about Pub.L. 490, the foreign
food program.
I wanted to point out we have reduced that by 31 percent in this
account, but we've also reduced the Multifamily Housing Revitalization
Account, as he's well aware, but his amendment would actually increase
that 10 times. It's at $11 million, and he would bring that up to $111
million. The highest funding level for that was in FY 2010 at $43
million, and so we have been ratcheting it down using a voucher program
but feel that it was overfunded.

{time} 1320

The Rural Business Program Account right now is about $64 million, so
this amendment almost doubles that. It doesn't quite double it. But
there again, we have brought that account down from a high of $97
million; and with his amendment, it would go up to $164 million. These
two accounts would go to higher levels than they historically had. And
in contrast, the PL 480, the foreign food program, is at one of

[[Page H4205]]

the lower levels that it has been at. So I have to say to my friend
that I'm sorry to reluctantly oppose you, but we are going to oppose
the amendment at this point.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FARR. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. FARR. I think the amendment is well intended. I think the author
is well intended. Rural America is hurting. Rural America is really
under a depression. We have not done a very good job of having a rural
strategy for America.
I applaud Secretary Vilsack for trying to pull together programs to
invest in rural America and make sure that the different agencies in
the Federal Government are working in collaboration. And I think this
amendment addresses some of those issues, not in a collaborative way
but just in putting more money into rural America. But unfortunately,
that good intent is offset by the evil done in taking it out of the
foreign ag account. And I can't support the amendment for that.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

mutual and self-help housing grants

For grants and contracts pursuant to section 523(b)(1)(A)
of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1490c), $22,000,000, to
remain available until expended: Provided, That of the total
amount appropriated under this heading, the amount equal to
the amount of Mutual and Self-Help Housing Grants allocated
by the Secretary for Rural Economic Area Partnership Zones
for the fiscal year 2011, shall be available through June 30,
2012, for communities designated by the Secretary of
Agriculture as Rural Economic Area Partnership Zones.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I rise to engage in a colloquy with my friend from
California (Mr. Farr) about cuts in this legislation.
As I have been analyzing the legislation coming before us, Mr. Farr,
it appears that the legislation, if approved in the form that is before
us, would have a really devastating impact upon American farmers,
families, and the environment. The legislation before us, as I
understand it, cuts nearly $1 billion from the five main conservation
programs, conservation programs that put money directly in the pockets
of family farmers.
Over the last 5 years, these programs have been so popular that the
list of farmers who want to participate greatly outweighs the
availability. Both the Conservation Stewardship Program and the
Environmental Quality Incentives Program have twice as many applicants
as they can serve. And the Wetlands Reserve Program and the Grasslands
Reserve Program combined have over 1 million acres waiting to apply.
These are not programs that are underutilized or ineffective. They
appear to be widely popular and provide a direct benefit to America's
farmers and ranchers. These would appear to be exactly the type of
programs we should be supporting. They provide support for family farms
and producers who are doing exactly the right thing, ensuring that we
use precious tax dollars not only to support farmers and ranchers but
to ensure clean water, clean air, and fertile productive soil.
They are a blueprint for a better path forward, a farm bill that
helps farmers add value and truly supports small- and mid-sized
operations. I was wondering if you would care to comment on my
concerns.
Mr. FARR. I appreciate my good friend from Oregon's (Mr. Blumenauer)
sentiments. And as ranking member of the House Ag Appropriations
Subcommittee, I am a strong supporter of these conservation programs
used both in Oregon and in my State of California. And I am distressed
by the proposed cuts to these programs.
I would like to point out that the Farm Bureau also opposes large
cuts to the important working lands program and the Environment Quality
Incentives Program. I find it especially disappointing that these
funding levels are low enough that the USDA will have to break current
contracts. That is an unfair result for our farmers and ranchers who
have counted on the support and technical assistance for the year
ahead.
The funding levels for the 2008 farm bill were carefully negotiated,
and it is frustrating to me and to many others to see the mandatory
funding for conservation programs decrease so drastically because this
bill was given such a low allocation.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the sentiments of my good friend from
California, as I appreciate his leadership on issues that relate to
both agriculture and protecting the environment.
Mr. Chairman, I am hopeful that Members will spend time looking at
what this means to farmers and ranchers in their communities and hope
that as the legislation works its way through Congress, we will be able
to reverse these efforts.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

rural housing assistance grants

(including transfer of funds)

For grants and contracts for very low-income housing repair
made by the Rural Housing Service, as authorized by 42 U.S.C.
1474, $32,000,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That of the total amount appropriated under this
heading, the amount equal to the amount of Rural Housing
Assistance Grants allocated by the Secretary for Rural
Economic Area Partnership Zones for the fiscal year 2011,
shall be available through June 30, 2012, for communities
designated by the Secretary of Agriculture as Rural Economic
Area Partnership Zones.

Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 33, line 12, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $20,480,000)''.
Page 80, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $20,480,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I rise to offer my amendment, which would
reduce the budget for the Rural Housing Assistance Grants Program by
over $20 million. My amendment would drop the allocation for this
program from $32 million to just around $12 million. This is a modest
request, particularly considering the President initially asked for a
funding level of just $12 million, and we would simply be dropping the
levels back down to what the administration, itself, requested.
It is absolutely critical that this Congress cut spending wherever
possible; and if the President could do without that extra $20 million,
so can we. I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FARR. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. FARR. It's very interesting that your colleague from Arizona (Mr.
Gosar) just a minute ago was trying to add money to this account
because of the catastrophe in rural America. This Rural Housing
Assistance Grants Program is primarily to repair very low-income rural
housing. This account was increased from the request of the President
by the committee. The effect of this amendment would be to knock it
back, and the reason the committee increased it was because of the need
out there.
We know what kind of a housing crisis we're having in America,
particularly when people have no other place to go. This allows the
lowest of income people in the poorest areas in the country, in rural
America, to have some assistance to upgrade their houses so that the
cost of high utility bills can be brought down with weatherization
upgrades and things like that. I mean,

[[Page H4206]]

this is not a smart cut. This will be hurting the people who can least
afford it and at a time when they most need it, and I would oppose this
amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
The amendment was rejected.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Rural Community Facilities Program Account

(including transfers of funds)

For the cost of direct loans and grants for rural community
facilities programs as authorized by section 306 and
described in section 381E(d)(1) of the Consolidated Farm and
Rural Development Act, $18,000,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That $3,000,000 of the amount
appropriated under this heading shall be available for a
Rural Community Development Initiative: Provided further,
That such funds shall be used solely to develop the capacity
and ability of private, non-profit community-based housing
and community development organizations, low-income rural
communities, and Federally Recognized Native American Tribes
to undertake projects to improve housing, community
facilities, community and economic development projects in
rural areas: Provided further, That such funds shall be made
available to qualified private, nonprofit and public
intermediary organizations proposing to carry out a program
of financial and technical assistance: Provided further, That
such intermediary organizations shall provide matching funds
from other sources, including Federal funds for related
activities, in an amount not less than funds provided:
Provided further, That of the amount appropriated under this
heading, the amount equal to the amount of Rural Community
Facilities Program Account funds allocated by the Secretary
for Rural Economic Area Partnership Zones for the fiscal year
2011, shall be available through June 30, 2012, for
communities designated by the Secretary of Agriculture as
Rural Economic Area Partnership Zones for the rural community
programs described in section 381E(d)(1) of the Consolidated
Farm and Rural Development Act: Provided further, That
sections 381E-H and 381N of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act are not applicable to the funds made
available under this heading.

Rural Business--Cooperative Service

rural business program account

(including transfers of funds)

For the cost of loan guarantees and grants, for the rural
business development programs authorized by sections 306 and
310B and described in section 381E(d)(3) of the Consolidated
Farm and Rural Development Act, $64,500,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That of the amount
appropriated under this heading, not to exceed $500,000 shall
be made available for a grant to a qualified national
organization to provide technical assistance for rural
transportation in order to promote economic development:
Provided further, That $2,250,000 shall be for grants to the
Delta Regional Authority (7 U.S.C. 2009aa et seq.) for any
Rural Community Advancement Program purpose as described in
section 381E(d) of the Consolidated Farm and rural
Development Act, of which not more than 5 percent may be used
for administrative expenses: Provided further, That
$3,400,000 of the amount appropriated under this heading
shall be for business grants to benefit Federally Recognized
Native American Tribes, including $250,000 for a grant to a
qualified national organization to provide technical
assistance for rural transportation in order to promote
economic development: Provided further, That of the amount
appropriated under this heading, the amount equal to the
amount of Rural Business Program Account funds allocated by
the Secretary for Rural Economic Area Partnership Zones for
the fiscal year 2011, shall be available through June 30,
2012, for communities designated by the Secretary of
Agriculture as Rural Economic Area Partnership Zones for the
rural business and cooperative development programs described
in section 381E(d)(3) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act: Provided further, That sections 381E-H and
381N of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act are
not applicable to funds made available under this heading:
Provided further, That any prior balances in the Rural
Development, Rural Community Advancement Program account for
programs authorized by sections 306 and 310B and described in
section 381E(d)(3) of such Act be transferred and merged with
this account and any other prior balances from the Rural
Development, Rural Community Advancement Program account that
the Secretary determines is appropriate to transfer.

rural development loan fund program account

(including transfer of funds)

For the principal amount of direct loans, as authorized by
the Rural Development Loan Fund (42 U.S.C. 9812(a)),
$14,758,000.
For the cost of direct loans, $5,000,000, as authorized by
the Rural Development Loan Fund (42 U.S.C. 9812(a)), of which
$750,000 shall be available through June 30, 2012, for
Federally Recognized Native American Tribes; and of which
$1,500,000 shall be available through June 30, 2012, for
Mississippi Delta Regional counties (as determined in
accordance with Public Law 100-460): Provided, That such
costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be
defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974: Provided further, That of the total amount appropriated
under this heading, the amount equal to the amount of Rural
Development Loan Fund Program Account funds allocated by the
Secretary for Rural Economic Area Partnership Zones for the
fiscal year 2011, shall be available through June 30, 2012,
for communities designated by the Secretary of Agriculture as
Rural Economic Area Partnership Zones.
In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the
direct loan programs, $3,500,000 shall be paid to the
appropriation for ``Rural Development, Salaries and
Expenses''.

Rural Economic Development Loans Program Account

(including cancellation of funds)

For the principal amount of direct loans, as authorized
under section 313 of the Rural Electrification Act, for the
purpose of promoting rural economic development and job
creation projects, $33,077,000.
Of the funds derived from interest on the cushion of credit
payments, as authorized by section 313 of the Rural
Electrification Act of 1936, $155,000,000 shall not be
obligated and $155,000,000 are hereby permanently cancelled.

rural cooperative development grants

For rural cooperative development grants authorized under
section 310B(e) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1932), $22,500,000 of which,
$2,000,000 shall be for cooperative agreements for the
appropriate technology transfer for rural areas program:
Provided, That, not to exceed $3,000,000 shall be for
cooperatives or associations of cooperatives whose primary
focus is to provide assistance to small, socially
disadvantaged producers and whose governing board and/or
membership is comprised of at least 75 percent socially
disadvantaged members; and of which $12,500,000, to remain
available until expended, shall be for value-added
agricultural product market development grants, as authorized
by section 231 of the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of
2000 (7 U.S.C. 1621 note).

rural energy for america program

For the cost of a program of loan guarantees and grants,
under the same terms and conditions as authorized by section
9007 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7
U.S.C. 8107), $1,300,000: Provided, That the cost of loan
guarantees, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall
be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974.

Rural Utilities Service

rural water and waste disposal program

(including transfers of funds)

For the cost of direct loans and grants for the rural
water, waste water, waste disposal, and solid waste
management programs authorized by sections 306, 306A, 306C,
306D, 306E, and 310B and described in sections 306C(a)(2),
306D, 306E, and 381E(d)(2) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act, $500,000,000, to remain available until
expended, of which not to exceed $497,000 shall be available
for the rural utilities program described in section
306(a)(2)(B) of such Act, and of which not to exceed $993,000
shall be available for the rural utilities program described
in section 306E of such Act: Provided, That $65,000,000 of
the amount appropriated under this heading shall be for loans
and grants including water and waste disposal systems grants
authorized by 306C(a)(2)(B) and 306D of the Consolidated Farm
and Rural Development Act, Federally-recognized Native
American Tribes authorized by 306C(a)(1), and the Department
of Hawaiian Home Lands (of the State of Hawaii): Provided
further, That funding provided for section 306D of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act may be provided
to a consortium formed pursuant to section 325 of Public Law
105-83: Provided further, That not more than 2 percent of the
funding provided for section 306D of the Consolidated Farm
and Rural Development Act may be used by the State of Alaska
and/or by a consortium formed pursuant to section 325 of
Public Law 105-83 for training and technical assistance
programs: Provided further, That not to exceed $19,000,000 of
the amount appropriated under this heading shall be for
technical assistance grants for rural water and waste systems
pursuant to section 306(a)(14) of such Act, unless the
Secretary makes a determination of extreme need, of which
$3,400,000 shall be made available for a grant to a qualified
non-profit multi-state regional technical assistance
organization, with experience in working with small
communities on water and waste water problems, the principal
purpose of such grant shall be to assist rural communities
with populations of 3,300 or less, in improving the planning,
financing, development, operation, and management of water
and waste water systems, and of which not less than $800,000
shall be for a qualified national Native American
organization to provide technical assistance for rural water
systems for tribal communities: Provided further, That not to
exceed $14,000,000 of the amount appropriated under this
heading shall be for contracting with qualified national
organizations for a circuit rider program to provide
technical assistance for rural water systems: Provided
further, That not to exceed $3,400,000 shall be

[[Page H4207]]

for solid waste management grants: Provided further, That of
the amount appropriated under this heading, the amount equal
to the amount of Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program
Account funds allocated by the Secretary for Rural Economic
Area Partnership Zones for the fiscal year 2011, shall be
available through June 30, 2012, for communities designated
by the Secretary of Agriculture as Rural Economic Area
Partnership Zones for the rural utilities programs described
in section 381E(d)(2) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act: Provided further, That sections 381E-H and
381N of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act are
not applicable to the funds made available under this
heading: Provided further, That any prior balances in the
Rural Development, Rural Community Advancement Program
account programs authorized by sections 306, 306A, 306C,
306D, 306E, and 310B and described in sections 306C(a)(2),
306D, 306E, and 381E(d)(2) of such Act be transferred to and
merged with this account and any other prior balances from
the Rural Development, Rural Community Advancement Program
account that the Secretary determines is appropriate to
transfer.

rural electrification and telecommunications loans program account

(including transfer of funds)

The principal amount of direct and guaranteed loans as
authorized by sections 305 and 306 of the Rural
Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 935 and 936) shall be
made as follows: 5 percent rural electrification loans,
$100,000,000; loans made pursuant to section 306 of that Act,
rural electric, $6,500,000,000; 5 percent rural
telecommunications loans, $145,000,000; cost of money rural
telecommunications loans, $250,000,000; and for loans made
pursuant to section 306 of that Act, rural telecommunications
loans, $295,000,000.
In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry
out the direct and guaranteed loan programs, $30,000,000,
which shall be paid to the appropriation for ``Rural
Development, Salaries and Expenses''.

distance learning, telemedicine, and broadband program

(including cancellation of funds)

For grants for telemedicine and distance learning services
in rural areas, as authorized by 7 U.S.C. 950aaa et seq.,
$15,000,000, to remain available until expended.

TITLE IV

DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services

For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary
for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services, $689,000.

Food and Nutrition Service

child nutrition programs

(including transfers of funds)

For necessary expenses to carry out the Richard B. Russell
National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.), except
section 21, and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C.
1771 et seq.), except sections 17 and 21; $18,770,571,000, to
remain available through September 30, 2013, of which such
sums as are made available under section 14222(b)(1) of the
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-
246), as amended by this Act, shall be merged with and
available for the same time period and purposes as provided
herein: Provided, That of the total amount available,
$16,516,000 shall be available to carry out section 19 of the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.):
Provided further, That section 14222(b)(1) of the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 is amended by adding at
the end before the period, ``except section 21, and the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), except
sections 17 and 21''.

special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children
(wic)

For necessary expenses to carry out the special
supplemental nutrition program as authorized by section 17 of
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786),
$6,048,250,000, to remain available through September 30,
2013: Provided, That notwithstanding section 17(h)(10) of the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786(h)(10)), of the
amounts made available under this heading, not less than
$14,000,000 shall be used for infrastructure, not less than
$50,000,000 shall be used for management information systems,
not less than $75,000,000 shall be used for breastfeeding
peer counselors and other related activities, and not less
than $7,500,000 shall be used for breastfeeding performance
awards: Provided further, That none of the funds provided in
this account shall be available for the purchase of infant
formula except in accordance with the cost containment and
competitive bidding requirements specified in section 17 of
such Act: Provided further, That none of the funds provided
shall be available for activities that are not fully
reimbursed by other Federal Government departments or
agencies unless authorized by section 17 of such Act.

{time} 1330

Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 44, line 19, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $604,000,000)''.
Page 80, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $604,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, this Nation has almost a $14.5
trillion debt. Forty cents of every dollar the Federal Government
spends, we're borrowing. We've just got to stop the outrageous spending
that's going on here in Washington. And both parties have been guilty
over the years.
This amendment would simply cut 10 percent out of a program--10
percent. Some people say, well, it's just a small amount of money. But
as I was doing a town hall meeting back, during last week, in Georgia,
in Hoschton, Georgia, one lady got up and said, $1 million makes a lot
of difference. It is a lot of money.
This does cut a great deal of money out of this program. But, Mr.
Chairman, we just have to stop spending money that we don't have. It's
just absolutely critical. The economy depends upon it. Creating jobs in
the private sector depends upon it. The future of our Nation depends
upon it.
We're in an economic emergency, Mr. Chairman, and if we don't stop
spending money that we don't have, we're going to have an economic
collapse of this Nation.
I'm a physician. I've worked in emergency rooms. I've seen a doctor
open up a man's chest and do open-heart massage in the emergency room
trying to keep a patient alive.
It's time for open-heart massage of our economy. We've got to stop
spending money that we don't have. We've got to put this country back
on the right financial course and start creating jobs out in the
private sector. And my amendment will be just one small step towards
that.
So, Mr. Chairman, I hope that my colleagues will support this
amendment so that we can put this country back on the right course, so
that we can create jobs in the private sector and can have a strong
economy again.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. FARR. I would be curious if, at your town hall meeting, you got
up and asked people would you rather take $604 million out of the
program that feeds women, infants, and children or would you like to
take $604 million out of the Defense Department for a war that we're
putting on a credit card, for an Afghan war that we're putting on a
credit card, the Iraq war we're putting on a credit card, or the
prescription drug program that wasn't paid for under the Republican
program? How about asking the people's choices?
We just authorized a defense bill in committee where we talked about
billions and billions of dollars, and those are all borrowed money. So
why don't we get our priorities straight?
We spent 3 hours here last night discussing what the implications are
of cutting the WIC program. I don't think this is a country that wants
to balance its budget on the backs of the poorest people in the United
States, on the people most vulnerable, on the people that need just
basic services. And that's what this amendment does.
Mr. Broun, I know you're interested in cutting, squeezing, and
trimming, but there are places to do that, and this is not one of them.
Certainly, if you were here on the floor listening to the passions of
last night, of 3 hours of debate on what the implications were for
cutting the WIC program--and it seems that none of that was listened to
by you because this is an amendment that goes right back to reducing
that account by $604 million.
Take the money out of the people most vulnerable in the United States
to write down the deficit and ignore the Defense Department, ignore the
spending for weapons programs, ignore the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,
ignore everything that is with DOD, and expose everything that's with
people in poverty.
This is a wrong amendment, and I hope it's soundly defeated.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. FARR. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

[[Page H4208]]

In answer to your question, I want to do both. I think every dollar
that the Federal Government spends needs to be looked at, and we're
spending money that we don't have, even in DOD. I think we would cut a
lot of funding there, particularly with the wasteful spending that the
Department of Defense does that we all recognize.
So I want to do it all. The thing is, if we continue down this road
that we're on economically, everybody's going to be poor. Nobody's
going to have money for any groceries. Nobody's going to be able to get
any health care. We're just going to be in a financial quagmire as a
nation. And so it's absolutely critical, in my opinion, that we do
emergent procedures to try to get this country back on the right course
economically.
So, to answer to your question that you asked me very graciously, I
answer, yes, we need to do all of the above, and I am eager to do both.
Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chair, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. KINGSTON. I think Dr. Broun has raised a lot of good points in
terms of our financial future. In America today, for every dollar we
spend, 40 cents is borrowed. The national debt right now is 95 percent
of the GDP. Clearly, we have to make some very difficult choices ahead.
And that's why, in this committee mark, we actually have reduced WIC
funding already $686 million.
Now, these numbers aren't random. WIC participation in 2010 was 9.2
million; in 2011, it's 8.9 million. Our committee mark for FY 2012
contemplates a participation level of 8.3 million. However, if the
economy does not improve and the number goes back up, with contingency
funds, we have enough money to fund a participation level of over 9
million.
But it's very difficult, Mr. Chairman, because, as we said many times
during yesterday's debate, the only budget that has actually passed
either House is the Ryan budget, and our 302(b) allocation funding
level comes from that budget. The President's own budget failed in the
Senate 97-0. The Democrat leadership in the Senate is unable to pass a
budget. They're not trying to pass a budget.
So using the 302(b) allocation which we have, we have come up with
these numbers, not done in random, not done with any recklessness at
all. We're trying to be very careful to make sure no one falls through
the crack.
But because this is a delicate card house, I rise in opposition to
the gentleman's amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.

{time} 1340

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will
be postponed.

Amendment No. 2 Offered by Ms. Foxx

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 45, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $75,000,000'').
Page 45, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $7,500,000'').
Page 80, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $82,500,000'').

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
The gentlewoman from North Carolina is recognized for 5 minutes in
support of her amendment.
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, my amendment today is an effort to save
taxpayers' hard-earned money by ending funding for an unnecessary
program that spends money coming to the Federal Government from our
hardworking taxpayers.
Mr. Chairman, I want to say that I very much believe in breast-
feeding. We wouldn't have a human race here today if it weren't for the
fact that breast-feeding has been in existence since the beginning of
time; however, I am opposed to the Federal Government funding breast-
feeding programs.
Under the special supplemental program for women, infants and
children, or the WIC program, Congress directed the United States
Department of Agriculture to create a national program for the
promotion of breast-feeding. In fiscal 2010, the Federal Government
spent $85 million to educate women on how to breast-feed.
We are facing a national debt of over $14 trillion. Spending taxpayer
money to promote breast-feeding is simply not the proper role of the
Federal Government and serves to illustrate just one reason--government
mission creep--that we are so deeply in debt.
In the last 10 years, administrative costs for the WIC program have
grown by 72 percent while enrollment has increased by only 26 percent.
It is difficult to understand how this program's bureaucracy has grown
three times as fast as its enrollment. Again, it's an accepted fact
that breast-feeding is good for infants and mothers, and I support
mothers who choose to breast-feed, but coaching women on breast-feeding
is not the role of Washington.
This program came to my attention earlier this year because of the
budget crunches that all levels of government are feeling. I was
contacted by counties in North Carolina about this program, and it was
brought to my attention that most of the money is being used to pay
salaries and benefits, some is being used for travel expenses, and some
is being used for cell phone use so that the peer counselors are
available 24 hours a day to the people that they are counseling.
My colleagues across the aisle will shout about this, and I may even
be opposed by my colleagues on this side of the aisle, but last year my
colleagues across the aisle cut more than $550 million from the WIC
program to fund unrelated activities at the USDA. These were totally
unrelated. It was obviously not a high priority then.
If we want to promote the health and well-being of women, infants and
children, then let's get serious about it by creating a job-friendly
environment that puts people back to work and allows American families
to keep more of what they earn. Let's stop spending money on every
well-intentioned program and return the Federal Government to its
constitutionally mandated purposes.
Mr. Chairman, the American people are tired of Washington taking
their hard-earned dollars in taxes and wasting it on a bloated Federal
bureaucracy. It's time we stop the culture of spending in Washington.
That's why I urge adoption of my amendment, which will save taxpayers
$82.5 million in just 1 year. The money will go into the Spending
Reduction Account. And I want to say my total concern here is the
spending of hard-earned taxpayers' dollars on a program that the
Federal Government has no business running.
Mr. Chairman, it has come to my attention that I need to ask
unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment and offer an amendment that
was not printed in the Record.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from North Carolina?
There was no objection.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Foxx

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 44, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $82,500,000'').
Page 45, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $75,000,000'').
Page 45, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $7,500,000'').
Page 80, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $82,500,000'').

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from North Carolina is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I will not take advantage of this mistake
that I made. I appreciate the indulgence of the ranking member and the
chair of the committee, and I will just say that I would appreciate
very much having the support for my amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.

[[Page H4209]]

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, again, how many times do they have to keep
attacking the WIC account, women, infant and children?
America has long decided that we ought to be taking care of the most
vulnerable people in America. There are women who are pregnant, low-
income, and what we've found is if you don't invest in teaching them
how to have proper nutrition during their pregnancy, you have a risk of
having a low-weight baby. A low-weight baby, as Dr. McDermott told us
yesterday on the floor, can cost up to a quarter of a million dollars
in incubation and hospital costs, and this is preventable with good
nutrition.
We go on to teach women, once that baby is born, how to breast-feed
that child. We know that is good health practices. And then we keep the
children with nutrition in the first 5 years. That's why it's called
women, infant and children; it's about pregnancy, birth and raising
that child. And this amendment wants to take $82 million out of that
program which instructs women how to do proper breast-feeding and works
with the States to do educational programs.
We spent 3 hours last night debating the consequences of these cuts.
And it's one of those penny-wise, super-pound foolish. It's also one of
those where you know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
There is a lot of value in keeping women well nourished during
pregnancy and certainly keeping that newborn child well fed and
nourished.
To strike money from this program is ill founded, and I strongly
oppose the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield to the
gentlelady from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx), who is an expert on this
topic and whom I rely on. And I want to thank the gentlelady for her
comments today.
Ms. FOXX. I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding to me.
I think it's unfortunate that our colleagues on the other side of the
aisle characterize our doing our best to bring fiscal sanity to this
country by saying that we do not care for people who are poor or
disadvantaged.

{time} 1350

Mr. Chairman, I grew up as poor as anybody in this body, and I know
what it means to be poor and to be hungry. I have no malice toward any
person in this country, none, no malice toward anyone in this body.
However, we are on the verge of a fiscal disaster in this country.
There are many things that could be done at the local level and the
State level, that should be done at the local and State level, but
absolutely should not be done at the Federal level.
Again, my colleagues across the aisle come here and say what a shame
it is that you are picking on the WIC program. Well, they took over
$500 million out of the WIC program last year, put it in a totally
unrelated program and said nothing about it. We didn't come to the
floor and say, you are mistreating poor and disadvantaged women and
children. No comments were made about that.
Again, I think it is very unfortunate that that is how we are
characterized. I believe that we have an obligation, an obligation
given to us by God, to help our fellow Americans who are less fortunate
than we are. But it is not our responsibility as Members of Congress to
tax hardworking Americans who are working all the time just to pay
their bills and survive and use that money to help other people. That
is not our job. Our job is to do everything we can to create a good
environment in this country for everyone to succeed, and that is the
direction that I want to go. By lowering our dependency on foreign
governments, we will make our country a better place to be.
As my colleagues have said over and over and over again in the debate
on this bill, we are borrowing 43 cents for every dollar that we spend.
We have a $14 trillion debt. There is a huge debate about our raising
the debt ceiling that is going to be facing us. Do we really want to
ignore the opportunity to save $82.5 million in a program that has no
business being run out of the Federal Government and help us deal with
the big issue that is facing us? That is what Congress should be
dealing with. We should be dealing with the big issues. We should let
these other issues be dealt with at the local and State level.
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. KINGSTON. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. KINGSTON. I want to thank my colleague from North Carolina for
putting this discussion on the table, because I think that it is
important for us to look at the WIC program and make sure we are doing
everything as efficiently and effectively as possible and we are
putting the money in the right direction.
We had a very thorough, about a 6-hour debate about WIC yesterday. It
is a delicate card house that we are trying to balance with our
committee mark. But I think the more sunshine we have, not just on WIC,
but on other Federal feeding programs, I think the better product we
are going to come up with. So she and I have had some discussions on
this. We are going to continue to have discussions on it. But I wanted
to say I think it is a good debate to be having, although I am not
supportive of the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield to my good friend, the
gentlewoman from North Carolina, Virginia Foxx.
Ms. FOXX. I thank my colleague from Georgia for yielding.
I just want to make a point in response to my other colleague from
Georgia. I agree with him. We are bringing light to many of these
programs, and I think it is very important that we do so.
I want to point out again, the WIC bureaucracy has grown three times
as fast as its enrollment in the last 10 years. This is an increase of
$800 million in administrative costs. If we are not prepared at least
to cut administrative costs and programs that have no business being
offered at the Federal level, then we are never going to get control of
our debt and our deficit. I want to encourage both my Republican and
Democratic colleagues to think about this. We have got to have
accountability and we have got to start cutting, especially in the area
of administration.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from North
Carolina will be postponed.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

supplemental nutrition assistance program

For necessary expenses to carry out the Food and Nutrition
Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.), $71,173,308,000, of
which $3,000,000,000, to remain available through September
30, 2013, shall be placed in reserve for use only in such
amounts and at such times as may become necessary to carry
out program operations: Provided, That funds provided herein
shall be expended in accordance with section 16 of the Food
and Nutrition Act of 2008: Provided further, That this
appropriation shall be subject to any work registration or
workfare requirements as may be required by law: Provided
further, That funds made available for Employment and
Training under this heading shall remain available until
expended, notwithstanding section 16(h)(1) of the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008: Provided further, That of the funds
made available under this heading, $1,000,000 may be used to
provide nutrition education services to state agencies and
Federally recognized tribes participating in the Food
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations: Provided
further, That funds made available under this heading may be
available to enter into contracts and employ staff to conduct
studies, evaluations, or to conduct activities related to
program integrity provided that

[[Page H4210]]

such activities are authorized by the Food and Nutrition Act
of 2008.

commodity assistance program

For necessary expenses to carry out disaster assistance and
the Commodity Supplemental Food Program as authorized by
section 4(a) of the Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act
of 1973 (7 U.S.C. 612c note); the Emergency Food Assistance
Act of 1983; special assistance for the nuclear affected
islands, as authorized by section 103(f)(2) of the Compact of
Free Association Amendments Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-188);
and the Farmers' Market Nutrition Program, as authorized by
section 17(m) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966,
$192,500,000, to remain available through September 30, 2013:
Provided, That none of these funds shall be available to
reimburse the Commodity Credit Corporation for commodities
donated to the program: Provided further, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, effective with
funds made available in fiscal year 2012 to support the
Seniors Farmers' Market Nutrition Program, as authorized by
section 4402 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002, such funds shall remain available through September 30,
2013: Provided further, That of the funds made available
under section 27(a) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7
U.S.C. 2036(a)), the Secretary may use up to 10 percent for
costs associated with the distribution of commodities.

nutrition programs administration

For necessary administrative expenses of the Food and
Nutrition Service for carrying out any domestic nutrition
assistance program, $125,000,000: Provided, That of the funds
provided herein, $1,500,000 shall be used for the purposes of
section 4404 of Public Law 107-171, as amended by section
4401 of Public Law 110-246.

TITLE V

FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS

Foreign Agricultural Service

salaries and expenses

(including transfers of funds)

For necessary expenses of the Foreign Agricultural Service,
including not to exceed $158,000 for representation
allowances and for expenses pursuant to section 8 of the Act
approved August 3, 1956 (7 U.S.C. 1766), $175,000,000:
Provided, That the Service may utilize advances of funds, or
reimburse this appropriation for expenditures made on behalf
of Federal agencies, public and private organizations and
institutions under agreements executed pursuant to the
agricultural food production assistance programs (7 U.S.C.
1737) and the foreign assistance programs of the United
States Agency for International Development: Provided
further, That funds made available for middle-income country
training programs, funds made available for the Borlaug
International Agricultural Science and Technology Fellowship
program, and up to $2,000,000 of the Foreign Agricultural
Service appropriation solely for the purpose of offsetting
fluctuations in international currency exchange rates,
subject to documentation by the Foreign Agricultural Service,
shall remain available until expended.

Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 48, line 11, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $175,000,000)''.
Page 80, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $175,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer my amendment
which would cut $175 million in FY 2012 by eliminating the Foreign
Agricultural Service. This is a corporate welfare program that
essentially gives handouts to private businesses that don't need
taxpayer dollars in order to grow their profits. It is essential that
we make significant cuts to our budget this year and focus on reducing
our deficit and tackle our debt. This is an unnecessary program and a
waste of money that we could use to reduce this fiscal burden.
I understand the position that my dear friend from Georgia is in. It
is true that the Ryan budget is the only budget to pass either House. I
supported the Ryan budget, and I supported the Republican Study
Committee budget, which would have reduced even more money from this
bill.
Regardless of how one voted on a particular budget, we all have an
obligation to move the debate in a direction that calls for more
serious spending cuts. It is critical for the economic future of our
Nation. It is critical for our children and our grandchildren. It is
critical in creating new jobs and having a stronger economy here in
America.
So I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will
be postponed.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

food for peace title i direct credit and food for progress program
account

(including transfers of funds)

For administrative expenses to carry out the credit program
of title I, Food for Peace Act (Public Law 83-480) and the
Food for Progress Act of 1985, $2,385,000, which shall be
paid to the appropriation for ``Farm Service Agency, Salaries
and Expenses'': Provided, That funds made available for the
cost of agreements under title I of the Agricultural Trade
Development and Assistance Act of 1954 and for title I ocean
freight differential may be used interchangeably between the
two accounts with prior notice to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress.

food for peace title ii grants

For expenses during the current fiscal year, not otherwise
recoverable, and unrecovered prior years' costs, including
interest thereon, under the Food for Peace Act (Public Law
83-480, as amended), for commodities supplied in connection
with dispositions abroad under title II of said Act,
$1,040,198,000, to remain available until expended.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Gosar

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 49, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $100,000,000)''.
Page 80, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $100,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona is recognized for 5
minutes.

{time} 1400

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment that would
cut $100 million from the billion-dollar Food for Peace program and
redirect it to the rural American communities, specifically to the
Rural Business Development Loan Program. This $100 million will provide
resources to rural business development loan programs. Small rural
businesses and Indian tribes and community organizations can use these
loans to jump-start businesses in our devastated rural comments.
I'll give you one example: the Bennett Freeze.
In the 111th Congress, we lifted the ban on this part of the Navajo
Nation last year. This ban prohibited any type of improvement to homes,
businesses and livelihoods. As a result of the Bennett Freeze, this
area is worse than in many Third World nations.
What we are trying to do is address this need, and we are trying to
provide some resources to this group of folks. We need to address the
high unemployment by empowering our rural communities. Please vote in
favor of this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FARR. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. FARR. This amendment reduces $100 million for Food for Peace. I
don't know if the gentleman from Arizona was here last night, but there
was a lot of discussion about the American image abroad. Certainly, at
a time when the world economy is hurting, this Food for Peace program
is exactly that.
We buy American goodwill. We buy this food from American farmers.
They produce it. We buy it. We ship it in American ships, and we
distribute it in a food program that buys a lot of goodwill for America
at a time when the conflicts of this globe are generated in cultures of
poverty, where people don't have access to proper nutrition, diet.
I know from being a Peace Corps volunteer that the first thing people
try to do is figure out where they're going to get enough food to eat.
You can't go to school with kids because you're

[[Page H4211]]

hustling to get firewood or you're hustling to get water or you're
hustling to find anything that will produce food for the day. A woman
can't do any of the other things, maybe raising livestock, if she is
just trying to hustle for food all-day long.
I mean, it just seems to me that the most basic investment in
preventing violence and war is the investment in nutrition and in
trying to get fed particularly those people in the poorest sectors of
the world. We've got Sub-Saharan Africa, and if people don't get fed
there, you're going to have migrations of millions and millions of
people, and there is going to be no place to put them. Nobody is going
to want a big immigration of starving people from other parts of
Africa. It's going to have an impact on us. Our intelligence agencies
tell us it's a security threat.
An investment in food for people at the basic level is absolutely
essential. This is food raised by American farmers, paid for by
American dollars and sent where it is most needed in the world. It is a
very good program, and it does, indeed, trade food for peace and
stability, so I think it would be unwise to cut it by $100 million.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I had an amendment following this
one that would have totally eliminated funding for this program and,
thus, would have presented a problem to the House. So I am going to
withdraw my amendment since Dr. Gosar has introduced his.
It is absolutely critical that we stop spending money we simply do
not have. Frankly, I don't like transferring money from account to
account, because I think the only transfer that we should do is the
transfer into the debt reduction program so that we can reduce the
Federal debt. It is absolutely critical for the economic future of this
Nation.
Since I am going to withdraw my amendment following this, I wanted to
get up and speak about this particular amendment and just say that I
really appreciate what my good friend from California (Mr. Farr) was
saying about poor people. I am a medical doctor, and I deal with
problems of nutrition for my patients. I appreciate what Dr. Foxx did
with her amendment about eliminating this breastfeeding program.
But you see, we are constrained by the Constitution--or should be--
and Congress has gotten way, way away from the original intent of the
Constitution. We cannot try to feed everybody in the world. We cannot
continue to try to be a nanny state for everybody, even in this
country. In the private sector, if we mobilized them, there would be
plenty of dollars to take care of the needs of American citizens as
well as those of the people around the world by leaving dollars in the
hands of the private sector--in people's hands, in churches, in
synagogues, in mosques, and in different areas--with the Salvation
Army, et cetera.
So I think we need to as a Congress start being fiscally responsible,
but we have been fiscally irresponsible for many years during Democrat
as well as Republican administrations, as well as under Democrat- and
Republican-controlled Congresses. We just have to stop spending money.
Mr. FARR. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I appreciate Mr. Farr, and I yield to the
gentleman from California.
Mr. FARR. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I just want to point out that you used the term ``nanny state.''
Since we're government, I don't think anybody wants to be responsible
for everybody, to be responsible to raise the whole society; but I do
think that this help that you give people from the Federal Government
and from local and State governments is absolutely essential.
When you don't have that infrastructure of social services and needs
there, I'll tell you what happens--people still have those problems.
Only they don't have a place to go get them. So do you know what they
do? They knock on your door. In America, we don't have to open our door
day after day, with somebody holding a baby, as I saw in the Peace
Corps. There were people all the time with dead babies, infants. There
were people who were begging for money to bury them properly or there
were people asking you for extra food after you finished your meal.
They know what time you eat, and ask, Can you give your leftovers to
us?
We don't have that in America because we have an infrastructure that
takes care of people. I think, if you totally wipe that out and say,
well, leave it to charity, charity is just voluntary. It doesn't always
work. When the markets crash, the charity isn't there. Poverty is still
there. The need is still there. You saw it as a doctor, and you know
you've serviced people who couldn't pay their bills; but you do have
Medicare reimbursements and other kinds of Medicare reimbursements so
that you can, even if they can't pay their bills, get some form of
payment. If it were all left up to voluntary, the doctors would have to
serve people who just have no money. I don't think all the poor people
in America would be taken care of.
So we do have to concern ourselves with how much care and spending we
do, but at the same time, don't wipe out the programs that are
essentially the life support systems of a society that is as rich as
America. We can afford to take care of the people most vulnerable,
whether they are aging or infants, and I think a lot of the discussion
here has been about trying to delete the programs that help people at
their most vulnerable stages of life.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Reclaiming my time, I appreciate your comments.
But, you see, when I was sworn into the Marine Corps and when I was
sworn into Congress--now three times--I swore to uphold the
Constitution. I believe in this document as our Founding Fathers meant
it, which means very limited government. In fact, we are destroying the
very thing that has made this country so great, so powerful, so rich as
a Nation, which is constitutionally limited government, the free
enterprise system, private property rights, personal responsibility,
the rule of law, and morality.
It is absolutely critical, if we are going to have a bright, shining
star of liberty over the heads of America, that we rebuild those
foundational principles. That's what I'm fighting for and will continue
to do.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I want to rise in opposition to a
previous amendment, to the Gosar amendment, which would eliminate the
Food for Peace program and transfer it to rural development.
I also was going to rise in opposition to the gentleman from
Georgia's amendment, which also goes after Food for Peace. I am glad he
is withdrawing it, but I find it astonishing that there are so many on
the other side who are attacking programs that I think are so vital to
our national security.
Mr. Gosar's amendment would tell farmers that we will take away from
them $1 billion in U.S. purchases of their crops so that we can borrow
money in the form of loans for other purposes. That's essentially what
he is proposing. Does that make sense to anyone?
So we tell U.S. farmers who have been selling wheat, rice, soybeans,
vegetable oil, beans, peas, lentils, and other commodities to the U.S.
Government that this market is closed to them. So long. Goodbye. Go
borrow money. Go into debt. Take out a loan to develop the rural
economy.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I support the Rural Development program, and I
obviously support the Food for Peace program. Both of them directly
benefit American farmers. Mr. Gosar himself said Food for Peace title
II (P.L. 480) merits support.

{time} 1410

Well, let's talk about why. It supports U.S. farmers, millers,
freight rail, truck, and shipping. Food aid provided by USAID is a
lifesaving measure for 11 million to 16 million vulnerable people
overseas. Our largest emergency food aid programs include Darfur and
southern Sudan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Haiti, and Ethiopia. U.S. food
aid not only helps people survive; it supports

[[Page H4212]]

U.S. national security interests. It promotes stability and goodwill,
especially in Libya, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Our emergency and
humanitarian food aid sends the clear message to desperate people in
need that the American people care. The Gosar amendment sends the
opposite message--that the American people don't care at all; go ahead
and starve.
We need to support Food for Peace, and we need to oppose that
amendment. But we also need to oppose amendments that gut essential
food and nutrition programs for poor people not only here in the United
States but around the world. This notion that somehow when we support
programs like Food for Peace, that it's just helping a bunch of
foreigners overseas, is just wrongheaded. It is American farmers that
produce much of the food that goes to support the hungry around the
world. It is American farmers that are so important in our battle
against terrorism because, quite frankly, I think these programs, as
Secretary Gates has said, do more to enhance our national security than
anything else.
I urge my colleagues who are coming to the floor with amendments to
gut these programs, to stop it. Enough. These are essential programs.
They help people who are helpless overseas but also help support our
economy here in the United States and help our U.S. farmers.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KINGSTON. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. KINGSTON. Number one, we have actually reduced this account 31
percent. Again, as I have said many times, passing an appropriation
bill that is building a card house, there's a delicate balance. I have
got my friend, Mr. McGovern, who believes that we've cut too much. I've
got my friend, Dr. Broun, who believes we haven't cut enough. And so
we're trying to move this legislation.
I wanted to talk a little bit about PL-480 and say a couple of
things. Number one, there is a national security interest in it. This
is not about international charity alone. We do have an interest.
America needs to be engaged around the world. When there is a natural
disaster or manmade disaster, if we're not there, who will be there?
And this is very important. My friend Mr. Dicks is here, former
chairman of the HAC-D Committee, and knows that in terms of the
national defense, we have soldiers right now as I speak in 60 different
countries around the globe. Now, they are engaged for a reason. It's
not a job-creation program. They're keeping an eye on national security
interests.
If you travel in Africa or travel in South America right now, you'll
see a new player that was not there 10 years ago, and that is the
country of China. China is not necessarily an immediate threat to us,
but it is a concern to us. China is rising as a military force and
certainly as an economic source, and they are engaged all over the
globe. Often our international programs, including food programs, keep
us engaged and gives us an opportunity to have some doors open which we
would not ordinarily have.
America provides 57 percent of the food aid in the world, followed by
the EU at 27 percent and Japan at 6 percent. Right now, China is not a
major player. The oil-rich Middle East countries certainly aren't major
players. But it is about engagement. And it's interesting that we have
a balance between developmental aid and emergency aid. Because if there
is a Haitian disaster, we're the first on the ground trying to get food
to the people. But we need to also be there with developmental aid to
make sure that these countries are independent and that these countries
do know how to grow their own food and have their own resources.
So I just want to emphasize again that this program has been trimmed
already 31 percent, and it seems to me the balance that will get this
bill over to the Senate so that we can negotiate further on it. We are
in many, many different countries around the world.
With that, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona, Dr. Gosar.
Mr. GOSAR. Thank you, my friend.
I would like to reiterate that there is an issue that we also have to
take care of folks at home. For example, I brought up the Navajo Nation
in the Bennett Freeze area. This is a treaty responsibility of the
United States in which we forbade different groups from even raising to
take care of a window pane or create economic certainty. We have to
take care of our own, or we'll not be able to help anybody across the
world. And that's why I actually rise in support of my amendment.
Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I do want to point out some of the things
that this program is doing in Pakistan, Haiti, the Sudan, and
Afghanistan. And I will submit that for the Record.

P.L. 480 Title II

History

For more than 50 years, the United States Government has
played a lead role in meeting emergency humanitarian food
needs through P.L. 480 Title II (Title II). Some of the first
U.S. food assistance resources assisted the war-devastated
economies of Europe. As these economies regained their
strength they began to pay for American farm commodities.
President Eisenhower signed P.L. 480 Title II into law in
1954 and it was later renamed the ``Food for Peace'' Act.

Current Need and Impact of Cuts

Currently, overall U.S. funding to WFP feeds on average 35
million people. A cut of Title II to $1,040,198, as marked-up
by the House Agricultural Appropriations sub-committee, would
mean that 15 million people--primarily women and children--
suffering from hunger as a result of conflict and natural
disasters would lose access to life saving food. These cuts
would significantly reduce the United States' ability to
address instability in volatile countries and decrease its
capacity to respond quickly to the needs of hungry people
affected by natural disaster or armed conflict.

Title II Assists People Affected by Natural Disasters

Pakistan

In July 2010, floods ravaged Pakistan, affecting millions.
WFP was able to reach people quickly and began to distribute
food just days after the record monsoon rains began. The
first food to reach the affected population was funded by
U.S. Food for Peace. The first helicopters that lifted food
to remote valleys in Swat and the northern regions were also
carrying U.S. food. Within the first month, WFP was able to
reach approximately 3 million people and then scaled up very
quickly to 7 million. Life-saving support was then followed
by early recovery activities which included school feeding
and nutrition support.
Story from the field: Razia Bibi and her family were badly
hit in the floods that devastated Pakistan last summer. Razia
lives in a little village called Chandia in central Pakistan.
She and her family lived on an embankment for a month last
summer as monsoon flooding flattened all the homes in her
community. As floodwaters subsided in September, they started
to pick up the pieces of their lives. Monthly food rations
from WFP have kept them going while they have rebuilt their
house and life has slowly returned to normality. Razia and
her husband sold their three goats, their last major assets,
to rebuild their house using high-quality bricks that would
be more resistant in case of another flood. In December 2010,
Razia picked up the family's last food ration. Now that her
husband is back at work and they have a house, she and her
family are able to support themselves. Their six children are
back at school and because of food assistance they were able
to get back on their feet.

Haiti

In Haiti, in the immediate aftermath of the January 12th
earthquake, WFP began providing assistance within 24 hours
and swiftly organized general food distributions. Only six
weeks after the quake, WFP assistance, through partners such
as World Vision, was reaching more than 4 million people, 35
percent of which was from the U.S. government. In the
following months, WFP also put in place safety net
interventions--including school feeding and nutrition.
Following the large general distribution, school feeding was
the quickest safety net intervention to scale up, reaching
over 500,000 school children. At the request of the
Government, WFP then scaled up to assist 1 million children.
In October, a take-home ration was also given to family
members to get children back in school, especially those who
had dropped out after the earthquake. WFP also launched a
blanket supplementary feeding program to all children five
years of age and under and pregnant/lactating women.
Story from the field: When the earthquake struck Haiti in
January of 2010 Cassandre Chery and her family were just
leaving their home. A piece of concrete fell and broke her
foot but otherwise they were uninjured. Her home, however,
was badly damaged. ``It's difficult to find work now,'' said
Cassandre who used to be a beautician. Her husband also has
trouble finding work. Their two girls, who live with them in
a tent in Port-au-Prince, were forced to go hungry some days.
But now Cassandre is back to work and she is rebuilding her
country with a food for work project with World Vision and
WFP. She receives food and cash to work clearing rubble from

[[Page H4213]]

roads and drainage channels. ``This works means a lot to
me,'' she said. ``It has helped me pay school fees and feed
my two daughters.''
Story from the field: At Sister Mary Bernadette's primary
school in Port-au-Prince, students began gathering after the
earthquake, though classes had not yet resumed. Most had lost
their homes, and a family member or friend. They came in
search of support and in search of something familiar. As
plans came together to begin makeshift lessons, WFP started
distributing daily meals to Sister Mary Bernadette's
students. ``They'd simply be too weak to study if they
weren't able to eat something at school,'' she says. ``It's
important for them to have a meal here. Most of them come
from very poor families.'' Sister Mary Bernadette says that
the food ``helps [them] to study and stay focused in class.
When they don't eat, they don't hear, they don't listen, they
don't see.'' A year after the earthquake, things in her
school are improving. During the summer break, crews tore
down the damaged building and workers are now putting the
final touches to temporary classrooms. The students seem to
be recovering too, said the school principal. ``Some of them
are still struggling though. When you lose a member of your
family, your mother or your father, you just can't forget.
But we do our best to help them.''

Title II Assists Those Affected by Conflict and Helps Restore and
Maintain Stability in Volatile Regions

Sudan

WFP assistance in Sudan, reaching 6.7 million people, has
been a critical stabilizing factor since the Comprehensive
Peace Agreement (CPA) was signed in 2005. In 2010, nearly
half of assistance to WFP in Sudan was generously provided by
the U.S. government. This assistance has provided stability
throughout the South Sudan referendum process. Readiness,
contingency measures and pre-positioning, has allowed WFP to
respond quickly to any situation, including the current
population displacements in Abyei (an area between south
Sudan and Sudan). WFP's strategic engagement for post-
referendum South Sudan is vital for ensuring a smooth
transition. WFP's engagement will support the restoration of
sustainable assets for the communities, infrastructure
(feeder roads), safety nets (school feeding, seed protection,
nutrition), strategic food reserve, Government capacity in
food security analysis, and support to smallholder farmers
through purchase-for-progress.
Story from the field: Food assistance has played a critical
role in southern Sudan over the last few years and has been
key in supporting families returning home. Grace Lado, a 25
year old mother of 2, fled fighting in Juba in southern Sudan
when she was only 7 years old. When her family decided to
move back a WFP food ration made it possible. In spite of the
deteriorating security situation, WFP is currently feeding
some 530,000 people across southern Sudan. In addition to
food assistance WFP is also helping to repair roads and
assist farmers across the region so that those the country
can get on a path to sustainable growth. Until then, however,
these lifesaving food rations are helping people to build a
stable and secure foundation in a country that is hopeful for
a brighter future.

Afghanistan

In 2010, the U.S. government supplied 36 percent of the
assistance to WFP in Afghanistan, enabling WFP to assist 7
million people (or 25 percent of the population) and, through
its strategic engagement, helps deploy an effective system of
safety net interventions and build sustainable assets for the
communities through food-for-education, food-for-work, and
food-for-training.
Story from the field: When Taliban forces arrived in their
village Jamila's husband lost both his legs during the
fighting. Jamila's family was forced to sell their farmland
to pay for his treatment and they suddenly found themselves
unable to feed their four children. ``I will never forget the
day I realized we had nothing to eat,'' Jamila said. Her
husband's family refused to provide assistance and told her
to marry off her teenage daughters in order to get dowry
money. Jamila's husband, frustrated, depressed and hungry,
often took his anger out on her. All of that changed,
however, when Jamila began a training program with WFP that
provided her with a new set of skills while her family
received food rations. Now Jamila is able to support her
family by selling children's clothes to a local shop. ``Now
that I have a skill and am providing for my family, all the
members of my family respect me,'' she says. By providing
food aid while Jamila received training she was able to stave
off hunger while she built a new life for her family.
Story from the field: For years the people of Dega Payan
had to travel five hours on foot or by donkey to the nearest
medical clinic. Travel by car was impossible as there were no
roads leading to their remote village in one of Afghanistan's
poorest provinces (Badakhshan) which has high level of
undernutrition and food insecurity. Now, as a result of a WFP
program that employed local villagers to build a road while
providing their families with much needed food assistance, a
road has been completed connecting Dega Payan to the larger
town of Ziraki, where there is a clinic. This has made the
village accessible by road and allows local farmers to get
their crops to markets more easily and allows traders to
bring supplies into the village that were not available
before.

McGovern-Dole International School Meals Program

Background

Approximately 2.7 million children receive McGovern/Dole
school meals through WFP, which helps them fight short-term
hunger, increase their concentration/performance in school,
encourages parents to send them to school, and helps girls to
get an education. A better educated girl will make more
informed choices and will grow up to raise a more food secure
family. Promoting girls education is crucial in countries
where there are serious gender disparities. Every $50 cut in
the program would deny a child access to food for a whole
school year. Without a daily meal, many poor children would
not attend class with long-term ramifications for the child,
the community and the country.
Story from the field: In Afghanistan WFP hands out take-
home rations of vegetable oil to approximately 600,000 girls
(in addition to the on-site meals) as an incentive for the
parents to send their girls to school. In a school in Laghman
Province, one of the teachers told WFP ``There are more girls
coming to school now because of the food. Before I had six
classes, now I have twelve.'' In the same region, girls'
enrolment increased by 40 percent by end of 2008 from the
baseline data 2 years earlier, and attendance rate for girls
improved by 30 percent from baseline. Families realize that
girls are bringing income by going to school. A girl at the
same school queuing for her oil ration said ``We are so happy
to get this oil. We are poor and our family is happy with us
since we can bring something of value to our homes''.

I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 49, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $940,198,000)''.
Page 80, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $940,198,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again, as I spoke on the previous amendment, we just don't have the
money. It's very altruistic of my friends on both sides to want to feed
people all over the world. I very much would like to be able to do so,
but we can't feed our people here at home. We've got a high jobless
rate. We just have to simply stop spending money that we don't have.
And this would just zero out the balance of the funds if my friend from
Arizona's amendment is indeed passed into this bill.
Mr. Chairman, as we look at where we're going as a Nation, we've got
to be focusing on jobs and the economy. We have to leave dollars in the
hands of businesses, particularly small businesses. Leave the dollars
in the hands of individuals so that they can take care of their own
needs and their own communities instead of building a bigger and bigger
Federal program to try to take care of everybody's needs all over the
world.
We just simply do not have the money. And it just has to stop. And
it's time to stop right now. We're headed toward an economic cliff in
this Nation. And it may be very soon where we're going to be off that
cliff, where everybody in this country except for the extremely wealthy
are going to be forced into just tremendous poverty.
We have a potential of having riots in the streets and bloodletting
in this country because of the great debt and spending that's going on.
We're destroying jobs. We're destroying our economy. And it just must
stop. The sooner, the better. My amendment would simply zero out the
rest of the funds in this program. I think it's critical for us just to
stop spending money.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA State Department
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Programmed food aid, 2010 Voting practices in the UN, 2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010--received food aid Votes only (%) Overall (%) Important (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Algeria......................................................... 30.4 81.7 16.7

[[Page H4214]]

Angola.......................................................... 30.6 81.9 33.3
Burkina Faso.................................................... 32.3 82.7 25.0
Burundi......................................................... 25.0 79.3 77.8
Cameroon........................................................ 44.7 88.9 60.0
Central African Rep............................................. 37.7 84.1 66.7
Chad............................................................ 0.0 66.7 0.0
Congo, Democratic Rep. of....................................... 46.2 87.2 75.0
Congo, Republic of.............................................. 37.9 84.3 42.9
Djibouti........................................................ 33.8 82.8 40.0
Ethiopia........................................................ 32.8 83.2 44.4
Gambia.......................................................... 31.3 82.0 40.0
Guinea-Bissau................................................... 31.3 82.2 40.0
Kenya........................................................... 31.7 83.0 57.1
Liberia......................................................... 35.9 83.9 54.5
Madagascar...................................................... 32.3 82.5 44.4
Malawi.......................................................... 35.3 83.2 50.0
Mali............................................................ 30.8 82.4 30.0
Mauritania...................................................... 32.4 82.4 30.0
Mozambique...................................................... 27.9 81.1 33.3
Niger........................................................... 32.8 83.1 33.3
Rwanda.......................................................... 50.0 86.9 57.1
Senegal......................................................... 31.8 82.7 33.3
Sierra Leone.................................................... 38.6 83.6 55.6
Somalia......................................................... 28.8 80.7 27.3
Sudan........................................................... 31.4 81.8 30.8
Tanzania........................................................ n/a n/a n/a
Uganda.......................................................... 8.6 76.3 60.0
Zambia.......................................................... 33.3 82.9 44.4
Zimbabwe........................................................ 30.4 81.3 30.8
Afghanistan..................................................... 34.3 82.4 46.2
Bangladesh...................................................... 32.9 82.2 77.8
Cambodia........................................................ 30.9 81.9 25.0
India........................................................... 25.4 82.6 14.3
Laos............................................................ 27.4 81.6 22.2
Nepal........................................................... 35.8 83.5 33.3
Pakistan........................................................ 21.3 81.2 22.2
Philippines..................................................... 31.3 82.7 33.3
Sri Lanka....................................................... 31.9 82.1 25.0
Tajikistan...................................................... 30.0 82.1 30.0
Yemen........................................................... 33.3 82.6 40.0
Colombia........................................................ 36.1 84.7 50.0
Dominican Republic.............................................. 36.4 83.4 36.4
Ecuador......................................................... 32.4 82.4 30.0
Guatemala....................................................... 37.9 84.2 62.5
Haiti........................................................... 31.8 82.6 30.0
Honduras........................................................ 63.4 83.6 60.0
Nicaragua....................................................... 30.4 81.7 15.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FARR. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. FARR. Again, I don't know how many times we have to reiterate
that these cuts, squeezes, and trims hurt the most vulnerable people in
America and abroad. My good friend talked about a fiscal disaster that
we are having in America and then just goes amendment after amendment
attacking the people that are most vulnerable. This one just wipes out
the entire program.
I wish the Member had been here to watch what happened in the early
part of this decade when a partnership with the rich was created in
this Congress to help in every tax way possible, in every expenditure
way possible, in building up the war machine to respond to Iraq and
Afghanistan. The rich got richer. The corporations that built all the
equipment for our men and women in uniform got a lot of profits. We did
that by putting it all on the credit card of the American taxpayer. We
just charged it up. Yes, we ran up an incredible deficit.

{time} 1420

The gentleman fails to look at the other side of the coin. He talked
about the fact he had been in the Marine Corps. The Marine Corps was
also put on that tax credit card. The uniform, the free medical service
he got, the food that he ate while he was a Marine, all those things,
thank God, we paid for. But then to say, okay, we're going to now
reduce this fiscal disaster by just attacking the most vulnerable
people in the world and wiping out the Food for Peace program.
Where are we? Where is the image of America? Where is that heart and
soul? Where is that feeling of people that love our country because of
the handouts we do give at a time of need? We're there to respond to
disasters. And we can't just be that responder that says, okay, we're
going to respond with our war machine. We've got to respond with our
heart and our soul and the character of American human beings, which is
very giving and very compassionate. To wipe out the Food for Peace
program is not a wise thing to do.
Mr. DICKS. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. FARR. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. DICKS. I would just say to the Chair and to the author of the
amendment, who's a doctor, a medical doctor, remember the Hippocratic
oath: Do no harm.
This amendment, if it is enacted, will deny millions of people
getting food. Millions of children's lives have been saved because of
this program and I hope the Broun amendment will be defeated.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. FARR. How much time do I have left?
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Schock). The gentleman has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. FARR. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
Mr. Dicks, I resent the fact that you accuse me of wanting to do
harm, because I do not----
Mr. DICKS. You don't think your amendment will do harm, sir?
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. No, sir. Actually, it will do good.
The thing is, we come to the crux of the problem here in that some
people in this body believe that the Federal Government ought to take
care of everybody in the world, and I would love to be able to do that.
There's no end of good things that can be done all over this world. But
for you to accuse me of wanting to do harm to people, I resent that.
Mr. DICKS. It's your amendment, sir. I didn't get up here and offer
an amendment that would cut funding.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Sir, I have the time.
I do resent the fact that you accuse me of wanting to do harm. Mr.
Chairman, I'm not sure if this comes to a point of order of taking down
the gentleman's words, but I bring forth a point of order.
Mr. FARR. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, in finishing, I would
just like to say, there is some inconsistency and insincerity here in
stating what you did as a profession and then cutting these programs,
because these go to the children that we think the medical profession
so much appreciates trying to care for. I mean, if you can't feed
children, if you can't feed women, and you can't feed infants, no
matter where in the world they are, problems are going to occur. Big,
serious problems. That is not fiscal conservative. That is just not
very intelligent.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I would like to bring a point of
order about the gentleman's accusations that I want to do harm. I
believe this meets the criteria of taking down his words, and I would
like a ruling from the Chair regarding that.
The Acting CHAIR. All Members will suspend.
The Clerk will report the words.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my point of order.
The Acting CHAIR. The demand is withdrawn.
Mr. DICKS. I will revise my words and make sure that it will not be
an insult to the gentleman.
I appreciate him withdrawing his point of order.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Washington
may revise his remarks.
There was no objection.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in very, very, very strong
opposition to this amendment gutting the Food for Peace program. Food
for peace.
I find it somewhat ironic that we have people who oppose food for
peace but support weapons for war without giving it a second thought.
The fact of the matter is that this amendment would do great harm to
some of the most helpless people in the world. I believe very, very
strongly on a bipartisan basis that this amendment should be defeated.
The Food for Peace program has saved the lives of millions and
millions of people. It is a good program. It is something we should be
proud of in this country, and on a bipartisan basis, I believe, we are
proud of the Food for Peace program. I think we need a big bipartisan
vote to defeat this amendment.
I appreciated the chairman's remarks earlier, and I thank him for his
comments on this issue.
Mr. DICKS. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McGOVERN. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. DICKS. We've already cut this program by 38 percent below the
President's budget request and 31 percent below last year. That is a
major cut in this program. To go any further, I think, would be a big
mistake.

[[Page H4215]]

I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. McGOVERN. I thank the gentleman. I would just say that, yes, we
need to get serious about the deficit and we need to find ways to bring
this deficit down. But taking food out of the mouths of children is not
the way to do this.
I can go through a litany of things that deserve to be cut, from some
of the subsidies that we provide some of the big agricultural
businesses to the subsidization of the oil companies to some of the tax
breaks for the Donald Trumps of the world. I would rather start there.
But to take, to denigrate this program, I think, is wrong. This is
something we should be proud of, and, in a bipartisan way, we should be
proud of this. Presidents, both Republican and Democratic, have
supported this program, and this is vital to the survival of so many
people around the world.
Again, I would reiterate what Secretary Gates said. These programs,
these developmental programs, are important to our national security.
I'm going to tell you, they do more to help improve our image and
protect our security around the world than a lot of these other
programs that we have that export military hardware all around the
world. This is important. This is real. This saves lives.
I would urge my colleagues on a bipartisan basis to soundly reject
this amendment and let us support food for peace. Let us support food
programs for the poor. That's who we are. That reflects well on this
country. I urge my colleagues to defeat this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Missouri is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mrs. EMERSON. I have been sitting back listening to all of the
discussion here on a subject that is near and dear to my heart, and it
has been near and dear to our family since the very first time my late
husband came back from Ethiopia having sobbed, as he told me, a story
about a child from Ethiopia who died in his arms.

{time} 1430

Now, I will say that there's been an awful lot of rhetoric on this,
and I think that the chairman, in spite of the fact that I don't like
the number, I don't like the numbers that we've been given, the
chairman, who also has traveled to Africa and has seen up close and
personal how these programs really do make a difference for those of us
who live here in the United States, how important these programs are
for our national security, as Mr. McGovern said and Mr. Dicks, and also
how important it is that America, which is still the richest country in
the world in spite of our financial difficulties, has respect and wants
to help others because we ourselves have been so well blessed.
So I rise in opposition to this amendment, and I want to thank my
colleagues from the other side and thank Mr. Kingston as well and hope
that as we proceed through the process that we might be able to find
some common ground, perhaps get a little bit more assistance for these
vital programs, but let's try to keep our emotions down a little bit
because everybody feels very strongly, but yet our common goal is to
lift this country up, and by helping others, we do that.
I yield back the balance of time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will
be postponed.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

commodity credit corporation export (loans) credit guarantee program
account

(including transfers of funds)

For administrative expenses to carry out the Commodity
Credit Corporation's export guarantee program, GSM 102 and
GSM 103, $6,820,000; to cover common overhead expenses as
permitted by section 11 of the Commodity Credit Corporation
Charter Act and in conformity with the Federal Credit Reform
Act of 1990, of which $6,465,000 shall be paid to the
appropriation for ``Foreign Agricultural Service, Salaries
and Expenses'', and of which $355,000 shall be paid to the
appropriation for ``Farm Service Agency, Salaries and
Expenses''.

mcgovern-dole international food for education and child nutrition
program grants

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 3107 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002 (7 U.S.C. 1736o-1), $180,000,000, to remain available
until expended: Provided, That the Commodity Credit
Corporation is authorized to provide the services,
facilities, and authorities for the purpose of implementing
such section, subject to reimbursement from amounts provided
herein.

Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 50, line 18, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $180,000,000)''.
Page 80, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $180,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer my amendment
which would zero out the McGovern-Dole program and save taxpayers $180
million in the coming fiscal year. We simply cannot continue to dole
out money that we simply don't have, particularly when we're
experiencing such a huge economic crisis and economic emergency here at
home.
It's important to make serious cuts wherever and whenever we can, and
this funding is not tied to a specific national security interest. So
we can afford to do without it. I think we should do without it, but
I'm offering my amendment, and I hope it passes.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, this is simply a bad amendment. It
eliminates funding for one of the U.S. signature programs to reduce
child hunger in the world. I helped establish the George McGovern-
Robert Dole International Food For Education Program, first as a pilot
project in 2000, and then as a permanent program in the 2002 farm bill.
It has always had strong bipartisan support, including from my
colleague and my friend Jo Ann Emerson and then-Congressmen, now-
Senators John Thune and Jerry Moran.
McGovern-Dole has one basic goal: provide at least one nutritious
meal to some of the world's most vulnerable children in a school
setting. It has reduced the incidence of hunger among school-age
children. It has increased school enrollment and attendance. It has
increased the support of families and communities for education,
especially for girls.
McGovern-Dole is a proven success. Instead of cutting its funding,
let alone eliminating it, we should be scaling it up. The cuts to
McGovern-Dole already in the bill would end school meals for more than
400,000 children. Eliminating the funding would literally take the food
out of the mouths of over 5 million of the world's most vulnerable
children.
Mr. Chairman, it's bad enough to ignore hungry children. It's even
worse to give a hungry child a meal, to give their parents hope for a
better future, and then take it away. These are not just numbers in a
bill. These are real living, breathing human beings, real children who
are in school, many for the very first time because the U.S. is working
with local communities to advance education and nutrition.
Now, I've visited some of these programs around the world. I
respectfully suggest to those who want to eliminate them to first go
and see with their own eyes what they are doing on the ground, look
these children, their parents, their teachers, their community leaders
in the eye, and make sure you want to tell them you don't care if they
go hungry or get a chance to go to school.
In Colombia, I visited a program in Soacha, on the outskirts of
Bogota. On barren hillsides, surrounded by shanties housing thousands
of internally displaced families, children were receiving a school
breakfast and lunch. Mothers and grandmothers were training as cooks,
preparing the meals. Clearly visible in the cafeteria were

[[Page H4216]]

USAID bags of grains, beans, and lentils.
One mother came up to me and said, Please thank the American people
when you go back home. I couldn't feed my children. I couldn't send
them to school. I was afraid my son--who was 11 years old--was going to
join the paramilitaries or the guerrillas just to get food. Now my son
is getting fed, and he's staying in school. Please tell the American
people thank you.
In Nairobi, Kenya, in the largest slum in the world, I went to a
McGovern-Dole breakfast and lunch program. I was amazed by the
students' energy and achievements. The school principal showed me how
they store and prepare the U.S. commodities that feed her students and
how all the students know that this is a program from the people of the
United States of America.
I ate a cereal mush made from yellow peas, grown by American farmers,
in a room full of children. The kids dug into this food like it was
manna from heaven. One little boy would take a bite and then scoop a
small amount out of his bowl and put it into his pockets. He was taking
food home to his younger siblings who don't get anything to eat at all.
Outside of Nairobi is Masai country and a school for girls where
McGovern-Dole provides a hot lunch. I helped cook and serve the meal of
U.S. bulgur wheat and locally grown vegetables. One student told me how
grateful she was to go to school and eat every day.
She grew up in a village over a hundred miles away. When she was 12,
her father told her that she had to marry a much older man. She
refused. Her father ordered her to go to her uncle's house, get his
machete, and bring it back to him. She knew that her father was going
to kill her. She ran away, walking alone for days, because she had
heard of this school. She was then 15, healthy, well-fed, and at the
top of her class. I knew I was talking to someone who could be
president someday. In the very best way, this young woman will never
forget us.
And in the very worst way, when we take food away from children,
families, and schools, those communities will never forget us either.
They won't forget that we took away their children's future. I wouldn't
forget it if it were my child. Would you?
Mr. Chairman, there are many ways to advance U.S. national security
and economic interests abroad. Education and child nutrition are very
much at the top of that list. It is important that we support the
McGovern-Dole program. This has enjoyed incredible bipartisan support,
and I'm going to tell you this does more to enhance our national
security than sending weapons to countries all over the world.
The people who benefit from this program know it comes from the
people of the United States of America. This is a good program. Support
the McGovern-Dole program. Reject this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. EMERSON. I move to strike the last word, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Missouri is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mrs. EMERSON. I'm not going to take the entire 5 minutes. I do want
to say a couple of things.
Number one, I totally associate myself with the remarks of my
colleague from Massachusetts, and it is quite true that taking away the
program funding would, in fact, literally take food out of the mouths
of 5 million hungry, hungry children.
I also want to add, because I know that people probably don't
understand this if you haven't been working with this program, is that
countries actually graduate from this program. This is not an ongoing
effort in every single country, whether Colombia might have graduated,
Nicaragua, and other countries.
But, you know, with so many threats against our Nation, I just think
it's important to share America's bounty with hungry children in other
places and in critical places around the world so that we can help
America feed their hungry bodies out of goodness.

{time} 1440

And it really is something that the entire Defense Department--you
ask any Army officer or any member of the armed services, when they are
in areas where these children's lives are being changed by a bowl of
mush, as Mr. McGovern said, it makes a huge difference. It makes them
able to go to school. It makes little girls have the only opportunity
they will ever get for any kind of education, and it is absolutely
ridiculous that people don't understand how important this is for the
security of our country.
I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. McGOVERN. I just want to thank the gentlewoman for her comments
and to thank her for her leadership not only on this issue but on some
of the other issues to help hungry children around the world.
I just want to also commend her for making the point that in the
McGovern-Dole program, there are provisions that require that countries
graduate out of the program. So this is not a permanent U.S. handout,
if you will. This is some support to help get established school
feeding programs that will, one, get more kids in school; and two, give
kids a nutritious meal.
Mrs. EMERSON. And if I could reclaim my time, the countries actually
take this program over. This is a jump-start and one that, you know,
for no other reason, little girls would never go to school. And to me,
it's just shocking. We take these things for granted in this country.
But it sets a very, very good example and gives these children and
their families an opportunity to do more for themselves with just a wee
bit of help from us.
Mr. McGOVERN. Will the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. EMERSON. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. McGOVERN. I also want to say that this program is named after
George McGovern and Robert Dole. So by the very naming of this program,
it shows the bipartisanship that has been involved in forming this
program from the very beginning. I think we all should be proud of that
in this Congress.
Mrs. EMERSON. And we should be. Elizabeth Dole took over for Bob
after he left the Senate. And this was a very important issue for her,
but it has always been one that is bipartisan and one that helps lift
other people up because we really do have so much here.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FARR. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. FARR. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
I just want to make one short comment. What happens in this program
is that we contract with countries to create these incentives to get
kids to go to school. And you have heard the incredible stories that
the gentleman from Massachusetts, Congressman Jim McGovern, just gave
us on his experiences in visiting these countries.
It's not only that these contracts are made with countries so they
have to put something into it, but they also have a way of working
themselves out. So it's not one of those, going back to Congressman
Broun's comment earlier about Nannygate--this is a ``work yourself out
of a program.'' You can get off the program by having it work. And then
you can move the moneys to another country. So I think it's an
outstanding program and worth keeping and certainly this cut would ruin
it all.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. DeLAURO. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Connecticut is recognized for
5 minutes.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this shortsighted
and I believe dangerous amendment that will increase suffering and
misery all around the world and put American men and women in danger.
And my colleagues have addressed that issue as well.
The appropriations legislation before us is already remarkably stingy
with regards to international food aid. It cuts the McGovern-Dole Food
for Education Program by 10 percent below the President's request and
Food for Peace by an astonishing $650 million. It is a 38 percent
reduction. Now Mr. Broun proposes to zero out McGovern-Dole entirely.
This is a program that, as you can tell by its name, has been a
hallmark of bipartisan leadership for over a decade now. It is a
linchpin in our diplomatic efforts in developing nations.
Make no mistake. Cutting McGovern-Dole endangers our national
security.

[[Page H4217]]

Zeroing out this program, as this amendment calls for, would needlessly
put the safety and the security of American families at risk.
For the first time in history, over 1 billion people--one in six--are
undernourished worldwide. Every 6 seconds, a child dies because of
hunger and related causes. And this hunger forces people into desperate
acts and dangerous pacts. Famine and starvation create the conditions
for militant extremism, the very extremism our troops fight in
Afghanistan and around the world.
And so McGovern-Dole, and the international food aid it provides, is
a crucial front in our efforts to combat global terror. We fight hunger
and poverty, and we undercut the recruiting base of those who would
threaten us. As former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger wrote in
The Los Angeles Times, ``Ensuring that no child goes to school hungry
is the single greatest investment we can make in building prosperous,
healthy, and stable societies.''
McGovern-Dole is that investment, and it works. Operating in 28
countries around the world, including Afghanistan and Pakistan,
McGovern-Dole provides at least one nutritious meal each day to
vulnerable children in schools. It has shown demonstrated success in
both reducing hunger and increasing school enrollment and attendance,
especially, as my colleagues pointed out, for girls. Otherwise, little
girls in these countries don't get any education, and they don't get
any food.
Last month, the GAO released a report on McGovern-Dole, and it called
for strengthening monitoring by the USDA, accelerating the timeframe of
reporting. It did not, however, call into question any of the
objectives of the program. This program works. Since becoming a
permanent program in the 2002 farm bill, it has reduced hunger and
violence, increased education and nutrition, and has become a vital
element in our international diplomacy. Zeroing out the program, as
this amendment demands, would not only destroy all these many benefits
for America and the developing world, it would mean 5 million kids will
go hungry again, 5 million children. And yet, even as this amendment
threatens to force millions into starvation, somehow the majority's
budget still finds money for oil company subsidies and tax breaks for
millionaires.
Cutting this funding is shortsighted in the extreme. McGovern-Dole
works. It works for America. It works for developing nations around the
world. It moves children from starvation to education. And it undercuts
the recruiting ability of those who would do America harm.
I urge my colleagues, stand with our troops. Stand against hunger
worldwide and oppose this disastrous amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will
be postponed.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

TITLE VI

RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

Department of Health and Human Services

food and drug administration

salaries and expenses

For necessary expenses of the Food and Drug Administration,
including hire and purchase of passenger motor vehicles; for
payment of space rental and related costs pursuant to Public
Law 92-313 for programs and activities of the Food and Drug
Administration which are included in this Act; for rental of
special purpose space in the District of Columbia or
elsewhere; for miscellaneous and emergency expenses of
enforcement activities, authorized and approved by the
Secretary and to be accounted for solely on the Secretary's
certificate, not to exceed $25,000; and notwithstanding
section 521 of Public Law 107-188; $3,654,148,000: Provided,
That of the amount provided under this heading, $856,041,000
shall be derived from prescription drug user fees authorized
by 21 U.S.C. 379h, and shall be credited to this account and
remain available until expended, and shall not include any
fees pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 379h(a)(2) and (a)(3) assessed for
fiscal year 2013 but collected in fiscal year 2012;
$67,118,000 shall be derived from medical device user fees
authorized by 21 U.S.C. 379j, and shall be credited to this
account and remain available until expended; $21,768,000
shall be derived from animal drug user fees authorized by
section 740 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21
U.S.C. 379j-12), and shall be credited to this account and
remain available until expended; $5,706,000 shall be derived
from animal generic drug user fees authorized by section 741
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 379j-
21), and shall be credited to this account and shall remain
available until expended; and $477,000,000 shall be derived
from tobacco product user fees authorized by 21 U.S.C. 387s
and shall be credited to this account and remain available
until expended; $12,364,000 shall be derived from food and
feed recall fees authorized by section 743 of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Public Law 75-717), as amended
by the Food Safety Modernization Act (Public Law 111-353),
and shall be credited to this account and remain available
until expended; $14,700,000 shall be derived from food
reinspection fees authorized by section 743 of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Public Law 75-717), as amended
by the Food Safety Modernization Act (Public Law 111-353),
and shall be credited to this account and remain available
until expended; and $36,000,000 shall be derived from
voluntary qualified importer program fees authorized by
section 743 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(Public Law 75-717), as amended by the Food Safety
Modernization Act (Public Law 111-353), and shall be credited
to this account and remain available until expended: Provided
further, That fees derived from prescription drug, medical
device, animal drug, animal generic drug, and tobacco product
assessments for fiscal year 2012 received during fiscal year
2012, including any such fees assessed prior to fiscal year
2012 but credited for fiscal year 2012, shall be subject to
the fiscal year 2012 limitations: Provided further, That in
addition and notwithstanding any other provision under this
heading, amounts collected for prescription drug user fees
that exceed the fiscal year 2012 limitation are appropriated
and shall be credited to this account and remain available
until expended: Provided further, That of the total amount
appropriated: (1) $799,820,000 shall be for the Center for
Food Safety and Applied Nutrition and related field
activities in the Office of Regulatory Affairs; (2)
$1,031,205,000 shall be for the Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research and related field activities in the Office of
Regulatory Affairs; (3) $327,651,000 shall be for the Center
for Biologics Evaluation and Research and for related field
activities in the Office of Regulatory Affairs; (4)
$157,874,000 shall be for the Center for Veterinary Medicine
and for related field activities in the Office of Regulatory
Affairs; (5) $321,171,000 shall be for the Center for Devices
and Radiological Health and for related field activities in
the Office of Regulatory Affairs; (6) $51,461,000 shall be
for the National Center for Toxicological Research; (7)
$454,751,000 shall be for the Center for Tobacco Products and
for related field activities in the Office of Regulatory
Affairs; (8) not to exceed $124,273,000 shall be for Rent and
Related activities, of which $37,073,000 is for White Oak
Consolidation, other than the amounts paid to the General
Services Administration for rent; (9) not to exceed
$177,130,000 shall be for payments to the General Services
Administration for rent; and (10) $208,812,000 shall be for
other activities, including the Office of the Commissioner;
the Office of Foods; the Office of the Chief Scientist; the
Office of Policy, Planning and Budget; the Office of
International Programs; the Office of Administration; and
central services for these offices: Provided further, That
not to exceed $25,000 of this amount shall be for official
reception and representation expenses, not otherwise provided
for, as determined by the Commissioner: Provided further,
That funds may be transferred from one specified activity to
another with the prior approval of the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress.
In addition, mammography user fees authorized by 42 U.S.C.
263b, export certification user fees authorized by 21 U.S.C.
381, and priority review user fees authorized by 21 U.S.C.
360n may be credited to this account, to remain available
until expended.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Stearns

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 51, line 18, insert after the dollar amount the
following: ``(reduced by $392,000,000)''.
Page 52, line 11, insert after the dollar amount the
following: ``(reduced by $392,000,000)''.
Page 54, line 6, insert after the dollar amount the
following: ``(reduced by $392,000,000)''.
Page 80, line 2, insert after the dollar amount the
following: ``(increased by $392,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5
minutes.

[[Page H4218]]

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, let me just briefly say, this is a very
simple amendment. It takes the Center for Tobacco Products back to the
2009 level. Now all of you should realize, this agency never existed in
2006. There have been prodigious increases in this center. We are
taking the funding for this Center for Tobacco Products back to the
2009 level.
Now under the President's plan, the budget for the FDA's Center for
Tobacco Products has simply exploded. The administration's budget
justification to Congress states, ``FDA is experiencing an
unprecedented and dramatic surge in staffing and facility needs that
will cause FDA facility requirements to exceed the scope of the 2009
master plan.''

{time} 1450

I understand that. The FDA is expanding, does good work. I'm not
criticizing it.
But one area of the FDA's budget that is growing way too fast under
this administration's budget is the brand-new Center for Tobacco
Products. Again, this agency, this center did not exist in 2006.
In the FY 2012 Agriculture appropriations legislation reported by the
committee, it continues the trend of major discretionary spending
reduction sought by the Republican majority. This same fiscal restraint
should be applied to the Center for Tobacco Products. We're talking
about appropriation levels going back to 2006, 2009, 2010. So all I'm
asking is let's move this back to 2009.
An FY 2012 budget that was requested by the FDA's Tobacco Act was
$454 million, an increase of $238 million from fiscal year 2010 enacted
levels of $235 million. So think of that: in 1 year it practically
doubled, 110 percent increase.
Now, this is when we have a deficit, $1.5 trillion every year, and we
have a debt that's approaching $15 trillion.
If we look at FY 2009, an $85 million funding, from the fiscal year
2009 there's been a 500 percent increase in this new Center for Tobacco
Products.
Tobacco regulation, obviously, is a new program at the FDA. They have
been just champing at the bit over there for the last 25 years to be
involved with the regulation of cigarettes and everything like that.
They want to regulate tobacco, and I think, frankly, you know, the
House voted for it. I accept that.
But we don't need to increase from 2009 up to what we're looking at,
these large increases. We've got to return some of these increases to
the debt and to the deficit. So a 500 percent increase in a budget is
way too large. I suggest that funding should continue at the 2009
levels.
We are rolling back funding for many other programs, and it's proper
to ensure that FDA also bears some of the burden during some of these
most austere budgetary times.
Now, all of us know that smoking is bad. And the question is, what is
the FDA doing through this Center for Tobacco Products? It's not clear
to me, but do they have to increase over the years almost 500 percent?
Reducing their funding to fiscal year 2009 levels will be a restraint
and will give the authorizing committee a chance to review the FDA
regulations and review how the FDA plans to implement the law. I simply
want to ensure that the FDA does not overreach with their authority,
and ensure that it is using the best approach to ensure that tobacco
harm is reduced. We all want to see it reduced.
But the question, we all have to take a sacrifice--doesn't the Center
for Tobacco Products also have to contribute? There's no reason for it
to have over these years a 500 percent increase.
And so, Mr. Chairman, I think this is a modest attempt to try and
save money. It's quite a substantial amount of money for a good cause,
which is reducing our deficit, our debt. In the long term, let the FDA
and this new Center for Tobacco Products move forward, but not at these
chomping, prodigious, gargantuan increases because they felt that it's
catch-up time. I mean, every agency down here can come and say it's
catch-up time. But obviously, under this economy and under this huge
deficit, we cannot continue to look at agencies like this over this
period of time getting a 500 percent increase in funding.
So I ask my colleagues to support my amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. FARR. First of all, I hope that we don't have more of these
ambush amendments that we haven't had a chance to really look at. And
this one really has serious implications. What it seems that this
amendment does is, first of all, reduce the tobacco industry's fees
that they have to pay the Federal Government. This is a big help to the
tobacco industry. It cuts fees that the private sector has to pay the
Federal Government. And what do those fees go into? Into campaigns to
reduce tobacco consumption and to treat the issues related to tobacco.
That's the way the amendment reads to us.
And I'd just like to remind the author that I represent California.
California has, time after time, put taxes on the ballot to increase
tobacco taxes, and they've passed overwhelmingly. And we use those fees
that would come from the industry from the sale of--not even the
industry, they come from the user to run very effective anti-tobacco
campaigns.
We reduced smoking in California almost to zero. I mean, it's
incredible. Most cities in California don't allow any smoking in public
places. The communities I represent on the coastline don't allow you to
even smoke on the beaches. You certainly can't smoke in public
buildings and in any other kind of public space, even in public places
that are privately owned.
So to do this, to ambush the anti-tobacco campaign with this
amendment is just--it's a giveaway to the tobacco companies and reduces
the fees they have to pay and hurts the ability to eliminate the
illness caused by tobacco; and anybody who's had cancer in their
family, as I've had, is very, very aware of the illnesses caused by
tobacco users.
I think this is a very dangerous amendment and, hopefully, the
gentleman will withdraw it. If not, we ought to oppose it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida.
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida will
be postponed.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I was going to introduce an amendment, but I
just want to make a statement and I'll withhold the amendment.
The statement I want to make is about what this underlying bill does
to FDA. It cuts FDA, Federal Drug Administration, by 21 percent, about
$580 million. On top of that, the FDA has to absorb another $37 million
in higher rent costs. So we're really talking about a reduction to FDA
of about $600 million. And yet we keep the law in place so they have to
continue all the current requirements and activities that are mandated
to them.
This kind of cut means that 2,000 fewer domestic and foreign
inspections of firms that manufacture food and medical products can be
made. This kind of cut means that more than 9,000 fewer FDA import
inspections to verify that imported food and medical products meet
safety standards. This kind of cut means there will be 4,000 fewer food
and medical product samplings to identify safety problems.
The amendment that I was going to introduce would have moved some
funds from the Commissioner's Office to the Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, or known as CDRH. The Center for Devices and
Radiological Health is responsible for bringing new technologies to
market, and to make the medical devices that are already on the market
safer and more effective.
The FDA has implemented a more streamlined process by which medical

[[Page H4219]]

devices can get to market called the Innovation Pathway. But with the
cuts to the FDA budget in this bill, the Innovation Pathway will become
Innovation Roadblock.
At a hearing at the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health on
February 17, 2011, the Director of CDRH, Dr. Jeffery Shuren, testified
that these cuts: ``The Innovation Pathway would be a non-option. And
for the rest of what we do, this would result in increased delays in
decisions. It would deny patients truly safe and effective innovative
technologies. And it will result in jobs being lost.''

{time} 1500

So moving funds, even nominal funds, to CDRH makes a point that we
would have to maintain a commitment to getting critical medical devices
to market and to patients.
The other point I wanted to make is the Center for Devices and
Radiological Health is also responsible in part for the FDA advances in
medical countermeasures. This medical countermeasures program extends
across several FDA offices. The program coordinates the appropriate
responses to national medical catastrophes. For CDRH, that means
putting in place the right medical responses to radiological threats,
threats like a dirty bomb, a rogue nuclear device, or even a natural
disaster like the one that occurred in Fukushima after the earthquake
and tsunami.
This isn't just a health concern. It's a homeland security concern.
Unless we are ready to handle these emergencies, many, many people
could die or be permanently disabled. We have to prepare. The CDRH can
do that for us, but not with a budget cut like the one the FDA is
facing. The 21 percent cut in the FDA budget means the public health of
Americans is put at risk, is put on hold. Medical safety devices are
put on hold. Medical countermeasures are put on hold. Radiological
treatment improvements, like new forms of x rays, PET scans and MRIs
are put on hold.
I say it again, the 21 percent cut in the FDA budget is not good for
America's health. I wish that we didn't have to adopt a budget with
that kind of a cut.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

buildings and facilities

For plans, construction, repair, improvement, extension,
alteration, and purchase of fixed equipment or facilities of
or used by the Food and Drug Administration, where not
otherwise provided, $8,788,000, to remain available until
expended.

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

commodity futures trading commission

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the
Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), including the
purchase and hire of passenger motor vehicles, and the rental
of space (to include multiple year leases) in the District of
Columbia and elsewhere, $171,930,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2013, including not to exceed $3,000 for
official reception and representation expenses, and not to
exceed $25,000 for the expenses for consultations and
meetings hosted by the Commission with foreign governmental
and other regulatory officials.

Farm Credit Administration

limitation on administrative expenses

Not to exceed $62,000,000 (from assessments collected from
farm credit institutions, including the Federal Agricultural
Mortgage Corporation) shall be obligated during the current
fiscal year for administrative expenses as authorized under
12 U.S.C. 2249: Provided, That this limitation shall not
apply to expenses associated with receiverships.

TITLE VII

GENERAL PROVISIONS

(including cancellations, recissions and transfers of funds)

Sec. 701. Within the unit limit of cost fixed by law,
appropriations and authorizations made for the Department of
Agriculture for the current fiscal year under this Act shall
be available for the purchase, in addition to those
specifically provided for, of not to exceed 461 passenger
motor vehicles, of which 456 shall be for replacement only,
and for the hire of such vehicles.

Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 56, line 18, insert ``231'' in place of ``461''.
Page 56, line 19, insert ``231'' in place of ``456''.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer my amendment,
which would reduce the fleet of passenger vehicles that the USDA is
able to purchase by half. Cutting the size of their fleet from 461 to
231 is a simple way to save our taxpayers some of their hard-earned
money.
Mr. Chairman, I know many of my amendments cut programs that are near
and dear to my colleagues' and their districts' hearts. We have heard
clearly from our friends on both sides regarding that. But together, my
amendments cut over $2 billion, and we accrue more than twice that
amount of debt every single day.
It's time to make the hard choices for the greater good of our
economy. We have to cut wherever we can, and cutting about 230 vehicles
out of the USDA's fleet is another way to save taxpayers money.
I encourage people to vote for my amendment.
Mr. FARR. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. FARR. I'm just curious. I have a point of inquiry for Mr. Broun.
Mr. Broun, do you lease a car?
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. No, sir, I do not.
Mr. FARR. You just drive your own private car?
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I do, indeed.
Mr. FARR. So you want to cut this account that is vehicles for the
Department.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. By 230 vehicles, yes, sir.
Mr. FARR. And how do you expect them to get around?
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Well, maybe they could ride share. That would
be a good way to save taxpayer dollars also.
Mr. FARR. Well, I don't think we can operate government on a maybe,
and I oppose this amendment.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
The amendment was rejected.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Sec. 702. The Secretary of Agriculture may transfer
unobligated balances of discretionary funds appropriated by
this Act or other available unobligated discretionary
balances of the Department of Agriculture to the Working
Capital Fund for the acquisition of plant and capital
equipment necessary for the delivery of financial,
administrative, and information technology services of
primary benefit to the agencies of the Department of
Agriculture: Provided, That none of the funds made available
by this Act or any other Act shall be transferred to the
Working Capital Fund without the prior notification to the
agency administrator: Provided further, That none of the
funds transferred to the Working Capital Fund pursuant to
this section shall be available for obligation without the
prior notification to the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress: Provided further, That of annual
income amounts in the Working Capital Fund of the Department
of Agriculture allocated for the National Finance Center, the
Secretary may reserve not more than 4 percent for the
replacement or acquisition of capital equipment, including
equipment for the improvement and implementation of a
financial management plan, information technology, and other
systems of the National Finance Center or to pay any
unforeseen, extraordinary cost of the National Finance
Center: Provided further, That none of the amounts reserved
shall be available for obligation unless the Secretary
submits notification of the obligation to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the
Senate: Provided further, That the limitation on the
obligation of funds pending notification to Congressional
Committees shall not apply to any obligation that, as
determined by the Secretary, is necessary to respond to a
declared state of emergency that significantly impacts the
operations of the National Finance Center; or to evacuate
employees of the National Finance Center to a safe haven to
continue operations of the National Finance Center.
Sec. 703. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current
fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
Sec. 704. No funds appropriated by this Act may be used to
pay negotiated indirect cost rates on cooperative agreements
or similar arrangements between the Department of Agriculture
and nonprofit institutions in excess of 10 percent of the
total direct cost of the agreement when the purpose of such
cooperative arrangements is to carry out programs of mutual
interest between the two

[[Page H4220]]

parties. This does not preclude appropriate payment of
indirect costs on grants and contracts with such institutions
when such indirect costs are computed on a similar basis for
all agencies for which appropriations are provided in this
Act.
Sec. 705. Appropriations to the Department of Agriculture
for the cost of direct and guaranteed loans made available in
the current fiscal year shall remain available until expended
to disburse obligations made in the current fiscal year for
the following accounts: the Rural Development Loan Fund
program account, the Rural Electrification and
Telecommunication Loans program account, and the Rural
Housing Insurance Fund program account.
Sec. 706. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may
be used to carry out section 410 of the Federal Meat
Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 679a) or section 30 of the Poultry
Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 471).
Sec. 707. None of the funds made available to the
Department of Agriculture by this Act may be used to acquire
new information technology systems or significant upgrades,
as determined by the Office of the Chief Information Officer,
without the approval of the Chief Information Officer and the
concurrence of the Executive Information Technology
Investment Review Board: Provided, That notwithstanding any
other provision of law, none of the funds appropriated or
otherwise made available by this Act may be transferred to
the Office of the Chief Information Officer unless prior
notification has been transmitted to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress: Provided further,
That none of the funds available to the Department of
Agriculture for information technology shall be obligated for
projects over $25,000 prior to receipt of written approval by
the Chief Information Officer.
Sec. 708. Funds made available under section 1240I and
section 1241(a) of the Food Security Act of 1985 and section
524(b) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1524(b))
in the current fiscal year shall remain available until
expended to disburse obligations made in the current fiscal
year.
Sec. 709. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any
former RUS borrower that has repaid or prepaid an insured,
direct or guaranteed loan under the Rural Electrification Act
of 1936, or any not-for-profit utility that is eligible to
receive an insured or direct loan under such Act, shall be
eligible for assistance under section 313(b)(2)(B) of such
Act in the same manner as a borrower under such Act.
Sec. 710. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for
the purposes of a grant under section 412 of the Agricultural
Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998, none
of the funds in this or any other Act may be used to prohibit
the provision of in-kind support from non-Federal sources
under section 412(e)(3) of such Act in the form of
unrecovered indirect costs not otherwise charged against the
grant, consistent with the indirect rate of cost approved for
a recipient.
Sec. 711. Except as otherwise specifically provided by
law, unobligated balances remaining available at the end of
the fiscal year from appropriations made available for
salaries and expenses in this Act for the Farm Service Agency
and the Rural Development mission area, shall remain
available through September 30, 2013, for information
technology expenses.
Sec. 712. The Secretary of Agriculture may authorize a
State agency to use funds provided in this Act to exceed the
maximum amount of liquid infant formula specified in 7 C.F.R.
246.10 when issuing liquid infant formula to participants.
Sec. 713. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be used for first-class travel by
the employees of agencies funded by this Act in contravention
of sections 301-10.122 through 301-10.124 of title 41, Code
of Federal Regulations.
Sec. 714. In the case of each program established or
amended by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008
(Public Law 110-246), other than by title I or subtitle A of
title III of such Act, that is authorized or required to be
carried out using funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation--
(1) such funds shall be available for salaries and related
administrative expenses, including technical assistance,
associated with the implementation of the program, without
regard to the limitation on the total amount of allotments
and fund transfers contained in section 11 of the Commodity
Credit Corporation Charter Act (15 U.S.C. 714i); and
(2) the use of such funds for such purpose shall not be
considered to be a fund transfer or allotment for purposes of
applying the limitation on the total amount of allotments and
fund transfers contained in such section.
Sec. 715. In carrying out subsection (h) of section 502 of
the Housing Act of 1949, the Secretary may use the authority
described in subsections (h) and (j) of section 538 of such
Act.
Sec. 716. Clause (ii) of section 524(b)(4)(B) of the
Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1524(b)(4)(B)) is
amended--
(1) in the heading, by striking ``fiscal years 2008 through
2012'' and inserting ``certain fiscal years''; and
(2) in the text, by striking ``2012'' and inserting
``2014''.
Sec. 717. Appropriations to the Department of Agriculture
made available in fiscal years 2005, 2006, and 2007 to carry
out section 601 of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7
U.S.C. 950bb) for the cost of direct loans shall remain
available until expended to disburse valid obligations made
in fiscal years 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008.
Sec. 718. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act or any other Act shall be used to pay
the salaries and expenses of personnel to carry out a program
under subsection (b)(2)(A)(iv) of section 14222 of Public Law
110-246 in excess of $948,000,000, as follows: Child
Nutrition Programs Entitlement Commodities - $465,000,000;
State Option Contract - $5,000,000; Removal of Defective
Commodities - $2,500,000; Disaster Relief - $5,000,000;
Additional Fruits, Vegetables, and Nuts Purchases -
$206,000,000; Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program -
$20,000,000; Estimated Future Needs - $196,713,000; and,
Administrative Funds - $47,787,000: Provided, That none of
the funds made available in this Act or any other Act shall
be used for salaries and expenses to carry out section
19(i)(1)(E) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch
Act as amended by section 4304 of Public Law 110-246 in
excess of $20,000,000, including the transfer of funds under
subsection (c) of section 14222 of Public Law 110-246, until
October 1, 2012: Provided further, That $133,000,000 made
available on October 1, 2012, to carry out section
19(i)(1)(E) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch
Act as amended by section 4304 of Public Law 110-246 shall be
excluded from the limitation described in subsection
(b)(2)(A)(v) of section 14222 of Public Law 110-246: Provided
further, That none of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available by this or any other Act shall be used to pay
the salaries or expenses of any employee of the Department of
Agriculture or officer of the Commodity Credit Corporation to
carry out clause (3) of section 32 of the Act of August 24,
1935 (7 U.S.C. 612c), or for any surplus removal activities
or price support activities under section 5 of the Commodity
Credit Corporation Charter Act: Provided further, That of the
available unobligated balances under (b)(2)(A)(iv) of section
14222 of Public Law 110-246, $150,000,000 are hereby
rescinded.
Sec. 719. Of the funds made available by this Act, not
more than $1,800,000 shall be used to cover necessary
expenses of activities related to all advisory committees,
panels, commissions, and task forces of the Department of
Agriculture, except for panels used to comply with negotiated
rule makings and panels used to evaluate competitively
awarded grants.
Sec. 720. None of the funds in this Act shall be available
to pay indirect costs charged against any agricultural
research, education, or extension grant awards issued by the
National Institute of Food and Agriculture that exceed 30
percent of total Federal funds provided under each award:
Provided, That notwithstanding section 1462 of the National
Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of
1977 (7 U.S.C. 3310), funds provided by this Act for grants
awarded competitively by the National Institute of Food and
Agriculture shall be available to pay full allowable indirect
costs for each grant awarded under section 9 of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638).
Sec. 721. None of the funds made available by this or any
other Act may be used to write, prepare, develop, or publish
a final rule or an interim final rule in furtherance of, or
otherwise to implement, the proposed rule entitled
``Implementation of Regulations Required Under Title XI of
the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008; Conduct in
Violation of the Act'' (75 Fed. Reg. 35338 (June 22, 2010)).
Sec. 722. The unobligated balances available for the
Natural Resources Conservation Service, Forestry Incentives
Program, as identified by Treasury Appropriation Fund Symbol
12X3336, $5,500,000 are rescinded, and the unobligated
balances available for the Natural Resources Conservation
Service, Great Plains Conservation Program, as identified by
Treasury Appropriation Fund Symbol 12X2268, $500,000 are
rescinded.
Sec. 723. Of the unobligated balances provided pursuant to
section 16(h)(1)(A) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008,
$11,000,000 is hereby rescinded.
Sec. 724. Section 1238E(a) of the Food Security Act of
1985 (16 U.S.C. 3838e(a)) is amended by striking ``2012'' and
inserting ``2014''.
Sec. 725. (a) Section 1240B(a) of the Food Security Act of
1985 (16 U.S.C. 3839aa-2(a)) is amended by striking ``2012''
and inserting ``2014''.
(b) Section 1241(a)(6)(E) of the Food Security Act of 1985
(16 U.S.C. 3841(a)(6)(E)) is amended by striking ``fiscal
year 2012'' and inserting ``each of fiscal years 2012 through
2014''.
Sec. 726. Section 1241(a) of the Food Security Act of 1985
(16 U.S.C. 3841(a)) is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
``2012,'' and inserting ``2012 (and fiscal year 2014 in the
case of the programs specified in paragraphs (3)(B), (4),
(6), and (7)),''; and
(2) in paragraph (4)(E), by striking ``fiscal year 2012''
and inserting ``each of fiscal years 2012 through 2014''.
Sec. 727. Section 1241(a)(7)(D) of the Food Security Act
of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3841(a)(7)(D)) is amended by striking
``2012'' and inserting ``2014''.
Sec. 728. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this or any other Act shall be used to pay the
salaries and expenses of personnel to carry out the
following:
(1) The Conservation Stewardship Program authorized by
sections 1238D-1238G of the

[[Page H4221]]

Food Security of Act 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3838d-3838g) in excess
of $634,000,000.
(2) The Watershed Rehabilitation program authorized by
section 14(h) of the Watershed Protection and Flood
Prevention Act (16 U.S.C. 1012(h)).
(3) The Environmental Quality Incentives Program as
authorized by sections 1241-1240H of the Food Security Act of
1985 (16 U.S.C. 3839aa-3839aa-8) in excess of $1,400,000,000.
(4) The Farmland Protection Program as authorized by
section 1238I of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C.
3838i) in excess of $150,000,000.
(5) The Grassland Reserve Program as authorized by sections
1238O-1238Q of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C.
3838o-3838q) in excess of 209,000 acres in fiscal year 2012.
(6) The Wetlands Reserve Program authorized by sections
1237-1237F of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3837-
3837f) to enroll in excess of 185,800 acres in fiscal year
2012.
(7) The Wildlife Habitat Incentives Act authorized by
section 1240N of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C.
3839bb-1)) in excess of $50,000,000.
(8) The Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentives
Program authorized by section 1240R of the Food Security Act
of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3839bb-5).
(9) The Biomass Crop Assistance Program authorized by
section 9011 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002 (7 U.S.C. 8111).
(10) The Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels authorized
by section 9005 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act
of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8105) in excess of $55,000,000.
(11) The Rural Energy for America Program authorized by
section 9007 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002 (7 U.S.C. 8107).
(12) The Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program
authorized by section 6022 of the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 2008s).
(13) Section 508(d)(3) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7
U.S.C. 1508(d)(3)) to provide a performance-based premium
discount in the crop insurance program.
(14) Agricultural Management Assistance Program as
authorized by section 524 of the Federal Crop Insurance Act,
as amended (7 U.S.C. 1524) in excess of $2,500,000 for the
Natural Resources conservation Service.
Sec. 729. The funds made available in Public Law 111-344
through February 12, 2012 for trade adjustment for farmers
are hereby rescinded.
Sec. 730. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act shall be used to pay the salaries and
expenses of personnel to carry out the emergency food
assistance program authorized by section 27(a) of the Food
and Nutrition Stamp Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2036(a)) if such
program exceeds $200,000,000.
Sec. 731. (a) Closure and Conveyance of Agricultural
Research Service Facilities.--The Secretary of Agriculture
may close up to 10 facilities of the Agricultural Research
Service, as proposed in the budget of the President for
fiscal year 2012 submitted to Congress pursuant to section
1105 of title 31, United States Code.
(b) Conveyance Authority.--With respect to an Agricultural
Research Service facility to be closed pursuant to subsection
(a), the Secretary of Agriculture may convey, with or without
consideration, all right, title, and interest of the United
States in and to any real property, including improvements
and equipment thereon, of the facility to an eligible entity
specified in subsection (c). If the Agricultural Research
Service facility consists of more than one parcel of real
property, the Secretary may convey each parcel separately and
to different eligible entities.
(c) Entities.--The following entities are eligible to
receive real property under subsection (b):
(1) Land-grant colleges and universities (as defined in
section 1404(13) of the National Agricultural Research,
Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C.
3103(13)).
(2) 1994 Institutions (as defined in section 532 of the
Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C.
301 note; Public Law 103-382)).
(3) Hispanic-serving agricultural colleges and universities
(as defined in section 1404(10) of the National Agricultural
Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7
U.S.C. 3103(10)).
(d) Conditions on Receipt.--As a condition of the
conveyance of real property under subsection (b), the
recipient of the property must--
(1) be located in the same State or territory of the United
States in which the property is located; and
(2) agree to accept and use the property for agricultural
and natural resources research for a minimum of 25 years.
Sec. 732. Section 9 of the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1758) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(l) Food Donation Program.--
``(1) In general.--Each school and local educational agency
participating in the school lunch program under this Act may
donate any food not consumed under such program to eligible
local food banks or charitable organizations.
``(2) Guidance.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of the enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall
develop and publish guidance to schools and local educational
agencies participating in the school lunch program under this
Act to assist such schools and local educational agencies in
donating food under this subsection.
``(B) Updates.--The Secretary shall update such guidance as
necessary.
``(3) Liability.--Any school or local educational agency
making donations pursuant to this subsection shall be exempt
from civil and criminal liability to the extent provided
under the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act (42
U.S.C. 1791).
``(4) Definition.--In this subsection, the term `eligible
local food banks or charitable organizations' means any food
bank or charitable organization which is exempt from tax
under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3)).''.
Sec. 733. Notwithstanding this Act or any other Act, of
the unobligated balances available to the Department of
Agriculture from prior appropriations, with the exception of
Rural Development and Domestic Food Programs, $63,000,000 in
appropriated discretionary funds are hereby rescinded:
Provided, That no amounts may be rescinded from amounts that
were designated by the 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.
Sec. 734. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available to the Department of Agriculture or the Food and
Drug Administration shall be used to transmit or otherwise
make available to any non-Department of Agriculture or non-
Department of Health and Human Services employee questions or
responses to questions that are a result of information
requested for the appropriations hearing process.
Sec. 735. (a) None of the funds provided by this Act, or
provided by previous Appropriations Acts to the agencies
funded by this Act that remain available for obligation or
expenditure in the current fiscal year, or provided from any
accounts in the Treasury of the United States derived by the
collection of fees available to the agencies funded by this
Act, shall be available for obligation or expenditure through
a reprogramming of funds, or in the case of the Department of
Agriculture, through use of the authority provided by section
702(b) of the Department of Agriculture Organic Act of 1944
(7 U.S.C. 2257) or section 8 of Public Law 89-106 (7 U.S.C.
2263), that--
(1) creates new programs;
(2) eliminates a program, project, or activity;
(3) increases funds or personnel by any means for any
project or activity for which funds have been denied or
restricted;
(4) relocates an office or employees;
(5) reorganizes offices, programs, or activities; or
(6) contracts out or privatizes any functions or activities
presently performed by Federal employees;
unless the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Health
and Human Services, or the Chairman of the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (as the case may be) notifies, in writing,
the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress
at least 30 days in advance of the reprogramming of such
funds or the use of such authority.
(b) None of the funds provided by this Act, or provided by
previous Appropriations Acts to the agencies funded by this
Act that remain available for obligation or expenditure in
the current fiscal year, or provided from any accounts in the
Treasury of the United States derived by the collection of
fees available to the agencies funded by this Act, shall be
available for obligation or expenditure for activities,
programs, or projects through a reprogramming or use of the
authorities referred to in subsection (a) involving funds in
excess of $500,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less, that--
(1) augments existing programs, projects, or activities;
(2) reduces by 10 percent funding for any existing program,
project, or activity, or numbers of personnel by 10 percent
as approved by Congress; or
(3) results from any general savings from a reduction in
personnel which would result in a change in existing
programs, activities, or projects as approved by Congress;
unless the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Health
and Human Services, or the Chairman of the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (as the case may be) notifies, in writing,
the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress
at least 30 days in advance of the reprogramming of such
funds or the use of such authority.
(c) The Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Health
and Human Services, or the Chairman of the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission shall notify the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress before implementing
any program or activity not carried out during the previous
fiscal year unless the program or activity is funded by this
Act or specifically funded by any other Act.
Sec. 736. None of the funds appropriated by this or any
other Act shall be used to pay the salaries and expenses of
personnel who prepare or submit appropriations language as
part of the President's Budget submission to the Congress of
the United States for programs under the jurisdiction of the
Appropriations Subcommittees on Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies that assumes revenues or reflects a reduction from
the previous year due to user fees proposals that have not
been enacted into law prior to the submission of the Budget
unless such Budget submission identifies which additional

[[Page H4222]]

spending reductions should occur in the event the user fees
proposals are not enacted prior to the date of the convening
of a committee of conference for the fiscal year 2013
appropriations Act.
Sec. 737. Unless otherwise authorized by existing law,
none of the funds provided in this Act, may be used by an
executive branch agency to produce any prepackaged news story
intended for broadcast or distribution in the United States
unless the story includes a clear notification within the
text or audio of the prepackaged news story that the
prepackaged news story was prepared or funded by that
executive branch agency.
Sec. 738. No employee of the Department of Agriculture may
be detailed or assigned from an agency or office funded by
this act to any other agency or office of the Department for
more than 30 days unless the individual's employing agency or
office is fully reimbursed by the receiving agency or office
for the salary and expenses of the employee for the period of
assignment.
Sec. 739. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to pay the salaries or expenses of personnel to--
(1) inspect horses under section 3 of the Federal Meat
Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 603);
(2) inspect horses under section 903 of the Federal
Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 1901
note; Public Law 104-127); or
(3) implement or enforce section 352.19 of title 9, Code of
Federal Regulations.

{time} 1510

Amendment Offered by Mrs. Lummis

Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 77, line 12, strike the semicolon and insert ``; or''.
Page 77, line 15, strike ``; or'' and insert a period.
Page 77, strike lines 16 through 17.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Wyoming is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would remove the
restriction only on the fee-for-service horse meat inspection portion.
Since fiscal year 2006, Congress has prohibited the use of Federal
funds to inspect horses. However, the USDA allowed for a fee-for-
service program for mandatory inspection of horses destined for food
until 2008, when Congress prohibited the program through an
appropriations rider.
Before these bans, horse processing was a $65 million a year industry
and owners could receive about $400 to $800 when selling a horse. I am
offering this amendment because owners should have the option of
selling their horse for processing under their personal property
rights. It is not the Federal Government's role to ban this option. The
decision to allow for processing should be made by the States.
The Senate Committee on Appropriations has directed GAO to examine
the effects of this ban on the welfare of horses and on the agriculture
industry. This report was expected by March 1 of 2010. Over a full year
later, we still have yet to be delivered a final report from GAO, but
expect one within weeks of this debate. It is important that this
analysis be considered when determining whether to consider this ban.
In particular, the GAO was asked to examine how many horses are now
being shipped to Mexico and Canada for slaughter, which outside
analysis has confirmed is increasing. With the increased exporting of
animals comes the concern of longer transportation times to slaughter
and reduced inspections by USDA of travel conditions. USDA has no
authority to ensure humane treatment once horses cross the border to
Mexico or Canada, and there is no reason to believe horses are
receiving better treatment by continuing this ban.
Additionally, there continue to be reports of increased animal abuse
during the reduced options for unwanted horses. I can assure you this
is true in my home State of Wyoming. Recently, 100 horses have been
seized from a western Wyoming ranch where they were being starved and
had to be transported to the eastern side of the State to the State's
Cheyenne stockyards. While the state veterinarian is caring for the
animals currently, the options for selling these horses are limited.
There is just no place to send unwanted horses, and neglect will
continue to rise across the country without a viable alternative. In
fact, the Wyoming legislature this year made it a crime to release a
horse on to public lands. Now, the reason people do that is because
there is no other way to get rid of an unwanted horse. There is no
opportunity to sell them into this meat market, so people are turning
them loose with the feral horses, the wild horses, further exacerbating
the Federal wild horse problem.
Congress needs to examine these concerns, and the GAO report should
provide us the information needed to make an educated decision on this
matter.
Now, I plan to withdraw my amendment after discussing this issue, but
would like to provide my colleagues with the opportunity to present
their States' concerns with this ban and to ensure moving forward we
examine the GAO report before finalizing any appropriations language
for fiscal year 2012.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Mexico is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlelady from Wyoming
bringing this amendment.
You know, many times people think that horse slaughter is just simply
inhumane. Somehow they think that horse starvation is somehow more
humane. The truth is that people are going to get rid of their horses
in some way, so what they do in New Mexico and in the Western States is
they simply take them out and turn them loose.
Right now we are struggling with an economy, an economy that is
having difficulties from every area, and too often we say it is just a
problem of the economy. We don't break it down to its individual
components.
One of the components in New Mexico is that we have completely
eliminated sheep from New Mexico. New Mexico used to be a large area of
sheep production. That piece of the economy is simply gone because of
regulations we in Washington and the States have put into place. New
Mexico also used to have a vibrant apple economy. That is now gone
because we have given favorable treatment to overseas products.
But then this is another element of the economy that has simply
disappeared. New Mexico used to have a vibrant horse trade. Prices were
high. Now prices on horses are low because people know they have no
option at the end of a horse's life, so it is simply doing away with
the horse market.
So we find that we in Congress are causing the economic decay of our
entire Nation, and the gentlelady's amendment simply says let's study
the facts. Let's understand what is going on that we ourselves are
causing. Let's understand the economic duress that Washington and the
States are putting on their own economies. It makes ultimate sense, and
for us in the West it should be absolutely reinstated. We should
reinstate the market there, because horses are being very inhumanely
treated in the guise of some more humane treatment. So I thank the lady
for her presentation.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. KINGSTON. I rise in support of the Lummis amendment. I am
disappointed that she is planning to withdraw it and that we will not
be having a vote on it. We had a vote on it in full committee. It was
actually Mr. Moran's amendment that pulled it out. I did not support
the gentleman from Virginia's amendment because I believe there is a
lot of emotion that goes on when we are dealing with a horse. It still
is a private property issue, a personal property issue, and while I do
not own horses, I have family members who own horses. I know that you
do have to have someplace to move the horse on to when it ages out on
you.
It is very emotional in America. We look down at other nations that
eat horses, but I have eaten horse before. In Kazakhstan I ate horse,
and it wasn't bad. But we as Americans, we have an obesity problem, so
we can pick and choose what we want to eat and what we don't want to
eat, and people feel like, well, we are too good to be eating horses. I
understand that, but the rest of the world does eat horses and I think,
frankly, that is a different discussion, as my friend from Virginia
knows. But I wish we were having a vote on it.

[[Page H4223]]

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

{time} 1520

Mr. MORAN. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. MORAN. I do rise in opposition to this amendment that would allow
horse slaughtering to resume in the United States.
The language that the gentlelady's amendment would strike was put
into the bill as a bipartisan amendment by two Republicans and a
Democrat--Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Whitfield and Mr. Spratt. What it did is to
restrict funding for Federal activities involved with meat inspection.
Thereby, it stopped horse slaughter for the purpose of human
consumption in any facility in the United States, and it stopped new
facilities from opening. It passed this body by an overwhelming vote:
269-158. Now, every year since, the language has been retained in the
Agriculture appropriations bill. There are six very good reasons for
doing this.
One, it's money badly spent. Only foreign corporations which deal in
horse meat for consumption in foreign markets would benefit from the
Federal inspection of U.S. horse slaughter plants. So we are using
American taxpayer money to inspect meat so that foreign corporations
can send it overseas so that people living in foreign countries can
consume it. There is a $37 million cut below last year's levels in the
Food Safety and Inspection Service. So here you are cutting $37 million
in food safety inspection. Yet you would be adding this additional
burden onto the Food Safety and Inspection Service, an additional
responsibility to inspect horse meat. Remember, this is meat that will
be exclusively consumed in foreign countries. Before the ban, most meat
was exported to France, Belgium and Japan. We should be using our
resources to focus on meat consumed by our constituents.
Secondly, the American public overwhelmingly does not support the
slaughter of horses for human consumption. Three-quarters of our
constituents across the country oppose the slaughter of horses for
human consumption.
Thirdly, American horse meat invariably contains harmful chemicals
because horses are not raised for human consumption. A recent FDA
toxicity report found any number of substances that could cause adverse
effects in humans. One example is phenylbutazone. It's known as
``bute.'' It is the most common anti-inflammatory given to horses. It
is difficult to know every substance given to every horse in the United
States. Because they're not intended to be raised as food, they're
given different chemicals. The only way to ensure that such harmful
substances don't make it into the food supply is to prevent horse meat
from entering the market.
Fourth, most horses sent to slaughter are, in fact, healthy.
Sometimes it's framed, as my friend from Georgia suggested, as a way to
dispose of unwanted horses. The facts don't support this claim. When
horse slaughter was allowed in the U.S., 92 percent of horses sent to
slaughter were healthy and could have continued to have been used as
productive animals. They weren't old and infirm, because sick and old
horses aren't used as a food source. People don't want to eat meat from
sick, old horses. So we are talking about primarily healthy horses.
Fifth, other, more humane options are available. A licensed
veterinarian can humanely euthanize a horse for $225. That is not cost-
prohibitive.
I want to underscore, too, that my very good friend was complaining
that there was too much emotion in this argument. What's wrong with
emotion? I mean, the horses inspire us. That's why most of the statues
around the U.S. Capitol are of horses and of heroes riding on horses.
Horses were critical to the expansion of the West. They aided in the
development of agriculture. They provide entertainment and recreation
similar to dogs and cats. They are treasured and loyal companion
animals, and we revere them. That's why the American public rejects
slaughtering them for human consumption.
So let's just summarize here.
A vote for this amendment is a vote to overturn established policy
that was enacted under Republicans and supported by the American people
to prevent horse slaughter to resume in this country. It would be
diverting inspection funding, which is being cut substantially, to
inspect meat that foreign corporations will be able to sell to foreign
consumers. That's not something this body should support.
With that, I can argue against every claim that was made, but I don't
think I will take up the time to do that.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I do want to clarify for the
record that this amendment is not about tax dollars. This amendment is
about adjusting some policy that was put into an appropriations bill
some time ago, long before the current makeup of Congress. We are
talking about a fee-for-service scenario that would allow the private
sector to ensure that there is safe, affordable horse meat to the
general public, to a market overseas that is very robust.
Let me also say that a GAO study on the effects of horse slaughter
plant closings on the welfare of horses and on the farm economy as a
whole was requested by the Senate Ag Appropriations Committee more than
a year and a half ago, and is overdue for a report.
The devastated horse industry continues to be attacked by
misinformation, and we certainly have a problem here because I would
allege that the economics of the ownership of horses are upside down.
Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, the result of this misguided campaign will
eventually be a Nation where very few can even afford to own a horse.
Without a secondary market, the value of horses at every level has
plunged. Fewer horses mean fewer jobs, fewer horse trailers sold, fewer
veterinary service dollars spent, fewer saddles sold--and the list
continues.
Destroying the U.S. horse industry closed the U.S. to a very robust
global market and gave other countries this economic opportunity. With
the ability to ethically produce horse meat under regulated, humane
conditions in the United States, we would almost immediately create
jobs and minimize suffering.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member seek recognition?
Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Virginia inadvertently
misrepresented the terms of this amendment. They only applied to the
fee-for-service component.
With that, Mr. Chairman----
Mr. DICKS. A point of order.
I think the gentlelady has already spoken on her amendment.
Mrs. LUMMIS. I am asking for unanimous consent to withdraw my
amendment.
Mr. DICKS. We never heard that. I object. If you withdraw the
amendment, I won't object.
Mrs. LUMMIS. Now I am not going to withdraw the amendment. I will ask
for a vote.
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Let me just say to the gentlelady that this is
an emotional issue, and those of us who do not agree with you feel
strongly about it.
Now, I believe, if you put that amendment in, it could very well
jeopardize the ag bill. I don't think you want to do that, so I hope
you will reconsider withdrawing this amendment. In committee, your
amendment was defeated. There are a lot of people in this country who
feel very strongly on both sides of this issue, but the American
public, whether or not you agree with them, feels very strongly, as Mr.
Moran said, so I hope you will change your mind.
Regarding some of the things I've heard about these horses starving
to death on the plains and everything--and I was not going to speak on
this--there are a number of people in this country who are willing to
put up millions and millions of dollars. In fact, I know some of them.
They have bought ranches and want to take these wild horses and put
them into an area where they will be safe, where they will be

[[Page H4224]]

protected, where they will be cared for. We are talking about, in
addition to the ranches, maybe another 600,000 or 700,000 acres that
would be used for these horses and for them to be able to survive.

{time} 1530

If you have ever looked at the way they transport these horses to
slaughter, they cram 20 horses into a truck that's built for 10. They
don't feed them. They don't water them properly. And those horses are
so mistreated, it's unbelievable, when they go to slaughter. And that's
why they close these slaughterhouses. In addition, you ought to see
what they do in these slaughterhouses for these horses. They hang them
up by a hook while they're still alive and they're squealing, and they
kill them in a very inhumane way.
I am not for changing our agricultural attitudes in this country. We
have to have the slaughter of pigs and cows and chickens and that sort
of thing. So a lot of times people say if we're against horse
slaughter, we want to do something to hurt the agriculture community.
That couldn't be further from the truth. We just want to make sure that
these animals are treated in a humane way, number one, and, number two,
that the American taxpayer is not paying for the French to get horse
meat.
So let me just say to the lady one more time, I sincerely hope that
she will reconsider. We have a disagreement. I hope you will reconsider
and withdraw this amendment because I don't think something of this
emotional status should impede or impair something as important as the
ag bill.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KINGSTON of Georgia. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. KINGSTON of Georgia. I rise in strong support of the amendment
and believe that while it may be an emotional issue--and as my friend
from Virginia said and my friend from Indiana said, emotion is good. I
think that there can be emotion on both sides. But there's also a lot
of logic in the gentlewoman's position, and that's why I'm a strong
supporter of it.
I yield to the gentlewoman from Wyoming.
Mrs. LUMMIS. Before I withdraw the amendment, I wish to correct that
this amendment has never been considered in committee or on the floor.
This amendment only applies to the two lines in this horse inspection
issue which deal with an individual's right to pay their own money to
have a horse inspected. There are no taxpayer dollars involved in this
amendment. I'm only striking the two lines that now you're even not
allowing people to pay their own money to have a horse inspected.
With that opportunity to correct the record, Mr. Chairman, I withdraw
my amendment.
Mr. KINGSTON. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BOSWELL. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the amendment offered by
Congresswoman Lummis.
As a farmer and senior member of the authorizing committee, I
appreciate the opportunity to discuss this issue and speak in
opposition to the language in section 737 of the agriculture
appropriations bill for FY 2012 and its attempt to limit state rights
and commerce with respect to horse meat, and the safe and healthy
inspection of those deceased animals.
The amendment before us would simply allow horse slaughter facilities
to use their own money for inspections.
While no one likes the idea of slaughtering horses we must deal with
the problem of abandoned and neglected horses in the United States.
We hear frequently on this topic the issue of humane treatment.
However, on average, adoption facilities used as a ``last resource''
can only house approximately 30 horses.
Often times these adoption facilities are so over-crowded that older
horses end up starving to death because the real last resort is
abandoning these horses, which happens all too frequently.
Each year there are almost 100,000 abandoned and neglected horses in
the United States. Opponent of horse slaughter often claim that
unwanted horses can be moved to adoption facilities.
I believe that current limits on horse slaughter set poor precedent
for legitimate livestock slaughter for reasons other than for food
safety or public health.
As a long time horse owner, I understand the emotional attachment one
can feel for an animal, however, currently with the over capacity of
animal adoption facilities I have concerns on what would happen to
abandoned and neglected horses each year.

Restore the Horsemeat Industry and Create Jobs

Two weeks ago, the House Appropriations committee voted to
reinsert language into the Agriculture Appropriations bill to
prevent funds for inspections--inspections that are required
by law--of horsemeat, continuing a logic-defying policy that
harms the welfare of horses, infringes on the rights of horse
owners, and cripples the horse industry. Most of all, it
prevents the immediate creation of hundreds of good, American
jobs. The unemployment rate just hit 9.1 percent and both
parties are blaming the other for it. In this instance both
are to blame for killing the highly regulated horsemeat
industry.
Before 2005, the horsemeat industry was a $65 million a
year business. In 2003, the two Texas plants employed a total
of 130 people to process 40,000 horses per year. One small
business that shipped the meat noted in a 2002 letter that it
employed twenty-one people, all of whom were heads of
households. Their annual horsemeat airfreight exports
generated $4 million for the airlines they used. These jobs
are all gone.
Instead, they are in Mexico and Canada. Now horses are
shipped much greater distances and at higher costs to
slaughter, and are slaughtered without USDA regulation. Last
year, over 150,000 horses were sent across the boarders to be
processed. Horse processing serves to set a floor price for
horses. The higher cost of shipping them to Canada and Mexico
has lowered the price owners receive for any horse, and the
effects ripple through the entire horse industry. Many U.S.
zoos use horsemeat to feed their animals because it's high in
protein and low in fat. Ironically, those zoos now have to
buy horsemeat--derived from American horses--from Mexico or
Canada.
Advocates in favor of this irresponsible policy, like my
former colleague, Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA), say that horse
processing is ``not humane.'' He's wrong, and the American
Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) and the American
Association of Equine Practitioners (AAEP) say he's wrong.
The U.S. plants used ``penetrating captive bolt'' to
euthanize horses before they closed, a technique common to
the beef industry and considered humane for horses by AVMA
and AAEP. As with processing plants for all animals, there
are laws on the books for humane slaughter methods for
horses, and FSIS inspectors present to ensure those laws are
followed.
Concerns about the safeness of horsemeat are misplaced.
Both USDA and the European Union regulate horsemeat
stringently, and the U.S. processing plants kept horses for
withdrawal periods depending on the drugs (if any) that had
been administered to them. The plants also performed constant
residue testing in their holding pens, and if a harmful
substance was detected the entire lot would be condemned. To
my knowledge, the EU has never had any issues with
``contaminated'' horsemeat imported from the U.S.
I believe the shuttering of the processing plants, combined
with the recession has led to an increase in abandoned and
neglected horses. Others disagree. GAO is planning to release
a report on the impact of the closing of the processing
plants on horses hopefully by the end of the month, yet the
House is scheduled to vote on Tuesday to continue this policy
without having the benefit of this report's conclusions,
whatever they may be. I think that is bad governing.
Let's be clear: horses are livestock under the law--not
companion animals such as dogs as Rep. Moran has said--and
are allowed to be deducted as diminishing assets and their
expenses written off accordingly. Horses are expensive to
maintain, and can cost $500 to $2,000 to euthanize by lethal
injection and bury--assuming you can find a place that is
willing to dispose of a 1,500 pound animal filled with drugs.
Horse owners deserve a humane end of life option for their
horses that has monetary value. Right now, Republicans and
Democrats are using emotional arguments to an ill-informed
public to deny horse owners their rights. In the process,
they are preventing the creation of American jobs and causing
more inhumane treatment of horses.
Charles W. Stenholm served the 17th U.S. House District of
Texas as a Democrat, 1979-2005. He is now a Senior Policy
Advisor with Olsson Frank Weeda Terman Bode Matz PC.

The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were
postponed, in the following order:
The amendment offered by Ms. DeLauro of Connecticut.
The amendment offered by Mr. Sessions of Texas.
The amendment offered by Mr. Farr of California.
Amendment No. 8 by Mr. Broun of Georgia.

[[Page H4225]]

The amendment offered by Mr. Chaffetz of Utah.
Amendment No. 4 by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
The amendment offered by Mr. Clarke of Michigan.
Amendment No. 9 by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
The amendment offered by Ms. Richardson of California.
Amendment A by Mr. Gosar of Arizona.
Amendment A by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
The amendment offered by Ms. Foxx of North Carolina.
Amendment No. 12 by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
Amendment B by Mr. Gosar of Arizona.
Amendment B by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
Amendment No. 6 by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
The amendment offered by Mr. Stearns of Florida.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in this series.

Amendment Offered by Ms. DeLauro

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 193,
noes 226, not voting 13, as follows:

[Roll No. 420]

AYES--193

Ackerman
Altmire
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Dent
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hanna
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

NOES--226

Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Amash
Austria
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Cardoza
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOT VOTING--13

Andrews
Bachmann
Bass (CA)
Chu
Eshoo
Frank (MA)
Giffords
Honda
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

{time} 1602

Messrs. STUTZMAN, AUSTRIA, JOHNSON of Ohio and HALL changed their
vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mr. WALDEN changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Ms. CHU. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 420, the DeLauro amendment to
increase funding for the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition
by $1 million, had I been present I would have voted ``aye.'' This
amendment would have improved food safety and protect the American
people from E. coli bacterial outbreaks.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Long was allowed to speak out of order.)

honoring missouri tornado victims

Mr. LONG. Mr. Chairman, I ask that the House observe a moment of
silence in honor of the victims of the tornado which hit Joplin,
Missouri, on May 22. As the Congressman representing Missouri's Seventh
District, which includes Joplin, I ask that we observe a moment of
silence for those effected by the EF-5 tornado that struck this town of
50,000 people on the 22nd of May. This horrific event led to a loss of
life of 153 individuals, from babies to folks in their nineties. Also,
they lost 54 percent of their school capacity, 8,000 homes, and 500
businesses.
The Acting CHAIR. Will the Members please rise and observe a moment
of silence.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Sessions

The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, 2-minute voting will continue.
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Sessions) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 226,
noes 199, not voting 7, as follows:

[[Page H4226]]

[Roll No. 421]

AYES--226

Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOES--199

Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Emerson
Engel
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Grimm
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--7

Eshoo
Giffords
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is less than 1 minute
remaining on this vote.

{time} 1609

So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Farr

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
(Mr. Farr) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 422]

AYES--352

Ackerman
Akin
Alexander
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Benishek
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blumenauer
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brooks
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Engel
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fitzpatrick
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gosar
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heinrich
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Mica
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Noem
Nugent
Nunnelee
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roe (TN)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes

[[Page H4227]]

Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stark
Stearns
Stutzman
Sullivan
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Webster
Welch
West
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Yoder
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOES--70

Adams
Aderholt
Altmire
Amash
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Buerkle
Burgess
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Carter
Chabot
Chaffetz
Conaway
Cuellar
Culberson
Duncan (SC)
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Harris
Heck
Hensarling
Huelskamp
King (IA)
Labrador
Long
Lucas
Matheson
McClintock
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Olson
Paul
Peters
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Quayle
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rooney
Royce
Scott (SC)
Thornberry
Tipton
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Westmoreland
Woodall
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--10

Eshoo
Giffords
Herger
Markey
Rangel
Rokita
Ruppersberger
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.

{time} 1613

So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. Broun) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 423]

AYES--120

Adams
Altmire
Amash
Bachmann
Bachus
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bono Mack
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Cantor
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cooper
Cravaack
Davis (KY)
Dent
Doggett
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Garrett
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Green, Gene
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Harris
Heinrich
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Himes
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Inslee
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
King (NY)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Larsen (WA)
Long
Lummis
Mack
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Nugent
Nunes
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peters
Petri
Pitts
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rigell
Rohrabacher
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Stearns
Stutzman
Terry
Upton
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
West
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Yoder
Young (IN)

NOES--304

Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Emerson
Engel
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Herger
Higgins
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Landry
Langevin
Lankford
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Marino
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neugebauer
Noem
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stark
Sullivan
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Webster
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--8

Bilbray
Eshoo
Giffords
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.

{time} 1618

Mr. TURNER changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Chaffetz

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Utah (Mr.
Chaffetz) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[[Page H4228]]

[Roll No. 424]

AYES--83

Adams
Amash
Bachmann
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Bilbray
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bono Mack
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Cantor
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Duncan (SC)
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Griffith (VA)
Hensarling
Herger
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Latta
Long
Lummis
Mack
Manzullo
McClintock
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Nunes
Paul
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Rohrabacher
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Stearns
Stutzman
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
West
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Young (AK)

NOES--338

Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellmers
Emerson
Engel
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gonzalez
Gosar
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Hunter
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Marchant
Marino
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quayle
Quigley
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Webster
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Yoder
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOT VOTING--11

Ellison
Eshoo
Gardner
Giffords
McHenry
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Sullivan
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining on
this vote.

{time} 1621

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 125,
noes 298, not voting 9, as follows:

[Roll No. 425]

AYES--125

Adams
Amash
Bachmann
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bono Mack
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Campbell
Cantor
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cooper
Dent
Doggett
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Garrett
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Green, Gene
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Harris
Heinrich
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Hochul
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Inslee
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
King (NY)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Larsen (WA)
Lewis (CA)
Long
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Nugent
Nunes
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peters
Petri
Pitts
Polis
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Quayle
Ribble
Rigell
Roe (TN)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Smith (WA)
Stearns
Stutzman
Terry
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOES--298

Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brooks
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Butterfield
Camp
Canseco
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Emerson
Engel
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fincher
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Lankford

[[Page H4229]]

Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Marchant
Marino
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neugebauer
Noem
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rivera
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Speier
Stark
Sullivan
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Webster
Welch
West
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

NOT VOTING--9

Eshoo
Frank (MA)
Giffords
Rangel
Rogers (KY)
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining on
this vote.

{time} 1624

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Clarke of Michigan

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan
(Mr. Clarke) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 426]

AYES--142

Ackerman
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Benishek
Berkley
Berman
Bono Mack
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Capito
Capps
Carnahan
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Critz
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Ellison
Engel
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harris
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Mack
Markey
Matsui
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Moore
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Pitts
Posey
Quigley
Renacci
Reyes
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schwartz
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NOES--282

Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonner
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capuano
Cardoza
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (CA)
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Farr
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Hinojosa
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Levin
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Moran
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Rothman (NJ)
Royce
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Loretta
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schilling
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Speier
Stearns
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Watt
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Woolsey
Wu
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOT VOTING--8

Cole
Eshoo
Giffords
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining on
this vote.

{time} 1628

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 9 Offered By Mr. Broun of Georgia

Recorded Vote

[[Page H4230]]

[Roll No. 427]

AYES--107

Adams
Amash
Bachmann
Bachus
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bono Mack
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Cantor
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coffman (CO)
Cooper
Cummings
Doggett
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Farenthold
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith (VA)
Hensarling
Himes
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Long
Lummis
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McClintock
McHenry
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Nugent
Nunes
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Perlmutter
Peters
Petri
Polis
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rigell
Roe (TN)
Rohrabacher
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Smith (WA)
Stearns
Stutzman
Tiberi
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
West
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (IN)

NOES--318

Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Emerson
Engel
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Gibbs
Gibson
Gonzalez
Granger
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Marino
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neugebauer
Noem
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Rivera
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Speier
Stark
Sullivan
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Webster
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--7

Eshoo
Giffords
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting Chair (during the vote). One minute remains in this vote.

{time} 1631

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Richardson

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Richardson) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 428]

AYES--200

Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Benishek
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Ellison
Emerson
Engel
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fitzpatrick
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Grimm
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hanna
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herger
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meehan
Miller (NC)
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rivera
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuster
Sires
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
West
Wilson (FL)
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)

NOES--224

Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boswell
Boustany
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Cardoza
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clyburn
Coble
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
DesJarlais
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter

[[Page H4231]]

Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Loebsack
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meeks
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mulvaney
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuler
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Webster
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Woolsey
Yoder
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOT VOTING--8

Brady (TX)
Eshoo
Giffords
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). One minute remains in this vote.

{time} 1634

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Gosar

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment A offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Gosar) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 429]

AYES--139

Adams
Akin
Amash
Bachmann
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Boren
Boswell
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Campbell
Canseco
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Conaway
Cooper
Cravaack
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gardner
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heinrich
Hensarling
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hochul
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
King (IA)
Kline
Lamborn
Landry
Lankford
Latta
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKinley
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Owens
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Pompeo
Posey
Quayle
Reed
Renacci
Richardson
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Tipton
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Webster
Westmoreland
Woodall
Yoder

NOES--285

Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Bucshon
Butterfield
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards
Ellison
Emerson
Engel
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Garrett
Gerlach
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hirono
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Labrador
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Long
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Noem
Nunnelee
Olver
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Ribble
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
West
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOT VOTING--8

Eshoo
Giffords
Herger
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). One minute remains in this vote.

{time} 1637

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment A offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Broun) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 430]

AYES--64

Amash
Bachmann
Bartlett
Black
Blackburn
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Cantor
Chabot
Chaffetz
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Flake
Fleming
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Griffith (VA)
Hensarling
Herger
Huelskamp
Hunter
Hurt
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
King (IA)
Lamborn
Long
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McClintock
McHenry

[[Page H4232]]

Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Paul
Pence
Petri
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Rohrabacher
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Walsh (IL)
Wilson (SC)
Woodall

NOES--360

Ackerman
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Barton (TX)
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Benishek
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Emerson
Engel
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Gosar
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Kucinich
Labrador
Lance
Landry
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Marino
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Mica
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quayle
Quigley
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sullivan
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Webster
Welch
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOT VOTING--8

Eshoo
Giffords
McDermott
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 1641

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Foxx

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from North
Carolina (Ms. Foxx) on which further proceedings were postponed and on
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 431]

AYES--119

Adams
Amash
Bachmann
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Carter
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Cole
Conaway
Culberson
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith (VA)
Hall
Harris
Hartzler
Hensarling
Herger
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
King (IA)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Lankford
Latta
Long
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McClintock
McHenry
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Myrick
Neugebauer
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Quayle
Renacci
Ribble
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Smith (NE)
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thornberry
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Webster
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (IN)

NOES--306

Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Edwards
Ellison
Emerson
Engel
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fitzpatrick
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibson
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Gosar
Granger
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hultgren
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Marino
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Posey

[[Page H4233]]

Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
West
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--7

Eshoo
Giffords
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 1644

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 432]

AYES--99

Amash
Bachmann
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Bilbray
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Cantor
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coffman (CO)
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Green, Gene
Griffith (VA)
Hall
Harris
Hensarling
Hultgren
Hurt
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Lamborn
Landry
Latta
Long
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McClintock
McHenry
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Price (GA)
Quayle
Ribble
Rigell
Roe (TN)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Stearns
Stutzman
Terry
Visclosky
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Webster
Woodall
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOES--324

Ackerman
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Bucshon
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards
Ellison
Emerson
Engel
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gonzalez
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hunter
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Kucinich
Labrador
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Marino
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Mica
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Paulsen
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rivera
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stark
Sullivan
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Yoder

NOT VOTING--9

Eshoo
Giffords
Herger
LaTourette
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 1647

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 432, I was unavoidably
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Amendment Offered by Mr. Gosar

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment B offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Gosar) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 433]

AYES--124

Adams
Amash
Bachmann
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Canseco
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coffman (CO)
Conaway
Cravaack
Culberson
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hensarling
Herger
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
King (IA)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Lankford

[[Page H4234]]

Latta
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McClintock
McHenry
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Renacci
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Tipton
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
Westmoreland
Woodall
Yoder

NOES--300

Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Bucshon
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Edwards
Ellison
Emerson
Engel
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gonzalez
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Marino
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
West
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOT VOTING--8

Eshoo
Giffords
Paul
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.

{time} 1651

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment B offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Broun) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 434]

AYES--108

Amash
Bachmann
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Bilbray
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bono Mack
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coffman (CO)
Conaway
Cravaack
Culberson
Duncan (SC)
Farenthold
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Hall
Harris
Hensarling
Herger
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Lankford
Latta
Long
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McClintock
McHenry
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Nugent
Nunes
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Sullivan
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Webster
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Yoder
Young (IN)

NOES--316

Ackerman
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Emerson
Engel
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gonzalez
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Hunter
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Marino
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Noem
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.

[[Page H4235]]

Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
West
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--8

Eshoo
Giffords
Paul
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is less than 1 minute
remaining in this vote.

{time} 1655

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 435]

AYES--120

Adams
Amash
Bachmann
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Bilbray
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bono Mack
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buerkle
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Conaway
Cravaack
Culberson
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Hall
Harper
Harris
Hastings (WA)
Hensarling
Herger
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Latta
Long
Lummis
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McClintock
McHenry
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nugent
Nunes
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Quayle
Ribble
Rigell
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Terry
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOES--303

Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards
Emerson
Engel
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gonzalez
Granger
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hanna
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Marino
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Noem
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sullivan
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
West
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Yoder
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--9

Ellison
Eshoo
Giffords
Paul
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.

{time} 1659

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Stearns

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Stearns) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 436]

AYES--164

Adams
Aderholt
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Black
Blackburn
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
DesJarlais
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Flores
Forbes
Foxx
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Harris
Hartzler
Hensarling
Herger
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
McCarthy (CA)
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
Mica

[[Page H4236]]

Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Nugent
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Pastor (AZ)
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Roe (TN)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Sullivan
Thornberry
Tipton
Upton
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Webster
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)

NOES--257

Ackerman
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Cantor
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cravaack
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards
Ellison
Emerson
Engel
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fitzpatrick
Fleming
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kingston
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Marchant
Marino
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Noem
Nunes
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Paulsen
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rivera
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
West
Wilson (FL)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--11

Burton (IN)
Eshoo
Giffords
Keating
Paul
Rangel
Rokita
Slaughter
Stivers
Weiner
Young (IN)

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.

{time} 1702

Mr. JONES changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chair, I was unavoidably detained and missed
rollcall vote Nos. 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429,
430, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, and 436. Had I been present, I would have
voted ``aye'' on rollcall vote Nos. 420, 422, 426, and 428. I would
have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote Nos. 421, 423, 424, 425, 427, 429,
430, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, and 436. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous
consent that my statement appear in the permanent Record immediately
following this vote.
Mr. LANCE. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR (Mrs. Myrick). The gentleman from New Jersey is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. LANCE. The language of section 740 is within the jurisdiction of
the Energy and Commerce Committee, on which I serve, and our committee
is the appropriate forum for considering such language. Having said
that, the House should know--and the Food and Drug Administration
should know--that we agree with the spirit of the language and the goal
of the members of the Appropriations Committee, who supported its
inclusion in the bill.
After speaking with the sponsors of the language, we know that
together we share a concern about what is happening at the FDA. We
believe that policy decisions at the FDA should be based on science and
not on any irrelevant consideration.
As much as officials at the FDA claim that their decisions are based
on sound science, their recent actions give us pause. For example, 2
months ago, Chairman Upton, along with Chairman Lucas and Chairman
Graves, sent a letter to the FDA regarding the potential ban of
antimicrobial animal drugs and the lack of scientific support for that
action. This potential ban has caused significant worry among our
Nation's producers, veterinarians, and consumers. The chairmen finally
received a response from the FDA last Friday, and the FDA refused to
answer the questions about the scientific basis of their action,
claiming that the matter is still, quote, under consideration. This
response is unacceptable and makes us wonder why the FDA refuses to
discuss the scientific basis for its conclusions.
We pledge that the Energy and Commerce Committee will explore whether
there are steps that Congress should take to prevent the FDA from
pursuing regulatory actions that are not based on sound scientific
analysis and fact. Those at the FDA should know that many in Congress
are watching and carefully studying whether the FDA's actions are
justified.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. REHBERG. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Montana is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. REHBERG. I rise to speak briefly about the language that is about
to be stricken from this bill, which has come to be called the ``hard
science amendment.'' I offered this language in committee on behalf of
ranchers in Montana. They sat across the table from me and shared the
significant concerns they have over the lack of a scientific basis
being used by the FDA in developing rules and regulations affecting
their ranches and the livestock industry. For me, this isn't faceless
regulation. The consequences of these regulations have faces. They wear
cowboy boots.
Agriculture is the number one industry in Montana. The State raises
2.6 million cows and calves annually, 180,000 hogs and pigs, 230,000
sheep, and I know of at least 600 goats. The cattle industry alone is
responsible for $1.4 billion in sales every year.
Ranchers in Montana and across the United States have a strong
incentive to preserve a healthy food supply for the American public,
and that means making sure their animals are healthy. The use of
antibiotics in livestock significantly improves the health of animals,
which in turn lowers the risk of food borne illnesses which may show up
later in the process.
FDA has refused to release risk assessments on the impacts
antibiotics may have on humans who consume these meats. And while they
have not released any credible evidence to support their efforts, FDA
bureaucrats are still pushing ranchers to remove these valuable
antibiotics from livestock production. This is of grave concern to
Montana ranchers, and I will keep fighting alongside Montana producers
to get this problem addressed. In fact, I would like to submit letters
from those organizations into the Record.
I hope to work with my colleagues on the Appropriations Committee as
well as the Energy and Commerce Committee to work with FDA in order to
ensure that they examine the facts before moving forward with
regulations that will significantly impact Montana's number one
industry.

[[Page H4237]]

National Cattlemen's

Beef Association,

Washington, DC, June 14, 2011.
Hon. Denny Rehberg,
House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative Rehberg: On behalf of the membership of
the National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA), I want to
thank you for your amendment during the House Appropriations
Committee markup of the Fiscal Year 2012 Agriculture
Appropriations Bill which would require the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) to use hard science in its regulatory
actions. For years now, the beef industry has seen many
rules, regulations, and guidances that have been based on
personal agendas and political science rather than hard facts
and data. As such, NCBA supports your amendment and will work
to keep it in the underlying bill.
The FDA has a huge impact on America's cattle producers.
From drug approvals and regulation, to feed and some foods
safety activities, our industry finds itself dealing more and
more with FDA. We believe that FDA has a role to help our
industry and to help keep our consumers safe, but we have
seen repeated attempts to strip cattle producers of the use
of fully tested and approved drugs and technologies. The
attack on ranchers' use of antibiotics to prevent and treat
disease in cattle is one of many instances.
It is time that Congress exercised its right to perform
regulatory oversight of Federal agencies, and your amendment
will go far in calling attention to the concerns we have with
FDA. It is our hope that FDA will heed this message and
return to using risk assessments, facts, and widely accepted
peer reviewed data in its regulatory decisions, rather than
allowing activist groups and some administration officials to
drive their personal and skewed views of science, food
production, and regulation.
Thank you for your efforts and we look forward to helping
you work to maintain this language in the bill.
Sincerely,
Bill Donald,
President.
____

Montana Pork,

Producers Council,

Jordan, MT, June 14, 2011.
Hon. Denny Rehberg,
House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative Rehberg: Montana's pork industry,
including over 48 Hutterite colonies engaged in a wide range
of agricultural operations, strongly support of your
amendment to the FY12 Appropriations Bill for Agriculture,
Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies, which urges the Commissioner of the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) to give the greatest weight to readily
available hard science data in making critical policy
decisions. The Montana Pork Producers Council needs to
science to come first in a wide range of jurisdiction
involving food supply, especially when such determinations
have the potential to affect Montana's agricultural
communities.
Montana's growing isowean market is testament to the care
provided to pigs here, in this case from birth to weaning,
and their disease-free status. We currently have 3 large
barns supplying pigs throughout the Midwest. The state's
isolation plays a distinct role in this, but so does a
responsible health program. Each year our producers have met
with your staff to discuss issues affecting the care and
well-being of their pigs, their communities and their
consumers. We strongly feel your commitment to these concerns
is expressed in your amendment to the FY12 Appropriations
Bill.
Antibiotics have been used to treat, control, and prevent
disease or promote growth in animals for more than 50 years.
Existing FDA regulations ensure adequate safeguards against
antibiotic resistance, and all of the animal drugs the pork
industry can utilize today have undergone rigorous FDA review
to ensure their safety for livestock, humans, and the
environment. Any regulatory decisions or legislative action
on antibiotic use in animals must be transparent and made
based on sound science and scientific risk analysis.
Recently, some in Congress and the FDA have attempted to
dismantle long-standing and effective industry practices with
regard to antibiotic use without a scientific and risk based
approach, putting animal health and well-being and pork
producers' livelihoods at risk without any proven benefit to
human health.
As our Representative, we ask that you continue to fight
for our industry and voice our concerns to FDA. We work daily
to produce safe and wholesome pork products for the American
consumer, and we do so using scientifically proven techniques
and innovative technologies. Overly expansive regulation of
antibiotics based on an unproven scientific theory promoted
by certain advocacy groups not only will undo long-standing,
effective production practices but will jeopardize the
collaborative relationship the pork industry has with FDA.
MPPC appreciates your support of the U.S. pork industry and
we thank you for championing this cause in the FY12
Appropriations Bill for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies. Please let us
know if there is anything we can do to move this issue
forward.
Sincerely,
Anne L. Miller,
Executive Director.
____

National Pork

Producers Council,

Washington, DC, June 2, 2011.
Hon. Denny Rehberg,
House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC. 20515
Dear Representative Rehberg: On behalf of America's 67,000
pork producers, I write in support of your amendment to the
FY12 Appropriations Bill for Agriculture, Rural Development,
Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies, which
urges the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) to give the greatest weight to readily available hard
science data in making critical policy decisions. The
National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) thanks you for your
focus on the need to allow science to dictate this nation's
policy decisions on antibiotic use in pork production.
As you know, America's pork producers are strongly
committed to providing for the well-being of their animals
and to raising them in a humane and compassionate manner. We
depend on safe and effective animal health products to
maintain animal health, prevent animal suffering, and ensure
that consumers have access to safe and wholesome pork
products.
Antibiotics have been used to treat, control, and prevent
disease or promote growth in animals for more than 50 years.
Existing FDA regulations ensure adequate safeguards against
antibiotic resistance, and all of the animal drugs the pork
industry can utilize today have undergone rigorous FDA review
to ensure their safety for livestock, humans, and the
environment. Any regulatory decisions or legislative action
on antibiotic use in animals must be transparent and made
based on sound science and scientific risk analysis.
Recently, some in Congress and the FDA have attempted to
dismantle long-standing and effective industry practices with
regard to antibiotic use without a scientific and risk based
approach, putting animal health and well-being and pork
producers' livelihoods at risk without any proven benefit to
human health.
We urge you to take up this issue and communicate our
concerns to FDA. Our industry works daily to produce safe and
wholesome pork products for the American consumer, and we do
so using scientifically proven techniques and innovative
technologies. Overly expansive regulation of antibiotics
based on an unproven scientific theory promoted by certain
advocacy groups not only will undo long-standing, effective
production practices but will jeopardize the collaborative
relationship the pork industry has with FDA.
NPPC appreciates your support of the U.S. pork industry and
we thank you for championing this cause in the FY12
Appropriations Bill for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies, and we look
forward to working with you on this important issue.
Sincerely,
Doug Wolf,
President.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I would like to express my thanks
to the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee and to the
gentleman from New Jersey for his comments in behalf of the committee
of their willingness to help find a solution to the issue that serves
as the basis for this point of order, these regulations.
We have cotton, peanuts and pecans in my district, and we also have
poultry. We have pork, and we have cattle operations. The decisions of
the FDA have an enormous impact on the farmers in my district at many
levels. Many of the producers in my district are worried about some of
the conclusions that FDA seems to have reached regarding antibiotics.
They're worried about what will come next. They conduct themselves
every day with the best interests of their animals in mind. A healthy
animal means healthy food for consumers.
If there is scientific evidence that shows that current practices are
not in the interest of public health, my farmers, of course, will
change their practices, but there should and there must be clear
evidence. Not unnecessary regulation. Certainly with the job situation
today and the state of our economy, the FDA must be very careful, very
precise, and very certain that any regulatory action they take is
supported by scientific evidence. I very much welcome the involvement
of the authorizing committee to help find a solution to this issue.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

{time} 1710

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

[[Page H4238]]

Sec. 740. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used by the Food and Drug Administration to write,
prepare, develop or publish a proposed, interim, or final
rule, regulation, or guidance that is intended to restrict
the use of a substance or a compound unless the Secretary
bases such rule, regulation or guidance on hard science (and
not on such factors as cost and consumer behavior), and
determines that the weight of toxicological evidence,
epidemiological evidence, and risk assessments clearly
justifies such action, including a demonstration that a
product containing such substance or compound is more harmful
to users than a product that does not contain such substance
or compound, or in the case of pharmaceuticals, has been
demonstrated by scientific study to have none of the
purported benefits.

Point of Order

Mr. LANCE. Madam Chair, I raise a point of order. Section 740
constitutes legislating on an appropriations bill because it requires a
new determination and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI of the
rules of the House and should be struck from the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of
order?
If not, the Chair will rule.
The Chair finds that this section includes language requiring a new
determination. The section, therefore, constitutes legislation in
violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.
The point of order is sustained, and the section is stricken from the
bill.
Mr. FINCHER. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Tennessee is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. FINCHER. Madam Chairman, the American taxpayers are crying out
for commonsense spending of Federal tax dollars and urging Congress to
review those rules and regulations which may stifle innovation and job
creation.
I introduced House Resolution 98, along with my colleagues from North
Carolina and Tennessee, to send a bipartisan, commonsense message to
the Food and Drug Administration to rely on scientific facts in its
development of rules and regulations.
We are supporting this resolution now because we understand that the
FDA may be contemplating some regulations in the future that may ignore
hard science when creating rules regulating food, drugs, medical
devices, and cosmetics, among other products. These regulations may
harm industry and hinder job creation in the future.
The FDA was set up to be a science-based agency; but American
farmers, people I represent in Tennessee's Eighth Congressional
District, are crying out for commonsense regulations and urging
Congress to review those rules and regulations which may hamper
innovation and American business.
I know that the FDA is well-intentioned in their efforts. However,
today's FDA is not putting science first. Instead, they are picking and
choosing which scientific studies they want to use to support their
original theory.
The FDA has been slowly expanding their efforts to regulate,
regardless if the science is there to back up their efforts. Therefore,
I also would hope that this body would be willing to investigate all
efforts, guidelines, and rules by the FDA, and review whether they
followed the science to get to their decisions.
The FDA is a needed agency, but Congress also needs to do its proper
due diligence of oversight to ensure American industries prosper and
the American population is safe.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Sec. 741. The Secretary of Agriculture shall reduce the
payment rate for upland cotton under section 1103(b) of the
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 8713(b))
as necessary so that reductions in the amount of direct
payments made to producers for upland cotton completely
offset the costs incurred by the Commodity Credit Corporation
to provide payments to the Brazil Cotton Institute.

Point of Order

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Chairman, I make a point of order against section
741 which begins on page 78, line 8, and ends on page 78, line 15, in
that it violates House rule XXI, clause 2, by changing existing law and
inserting legislative language in an appropriation bill.
I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
The Acting CHAIR. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of
order?
If not, the Chair will rule.
The Chair finds that this section includes language imparting
direction. The section, therefore, constitutes legislation in violation
of clause 2 of rule XXI.
The point of order is sustained, and the section is stricken from the
bill.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Sec. 742. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of
understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant
to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation
that was convicted (or had an officer or agent of such
corporation acting on behalf of the corporation convicted) of
a felony criminal violation under any Federal or State law
within the preceding 24 months.

Ms. DeLAURO. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Connecticut is recognized for
5 minutes.
Ms. DeLAURO. I rise in opposition to this bill because it puts the
interests of Brazilian farmers above the very real needs of American
women and children. It leaves the very next section of this bill,
section 743, subject to a point of order.
As everyone knows, the Women, Infants, and Children program provides
nutrition assistance grants to States for low-income, pregnant, breast-
feeding, and postpartum women, infants, and children up to the age of
five. It serves 9 million mothers and young children nationwide,
including 58,000 in my State of Connecticut.
Nearly half of the babies born in the United States every year
participate in this program. It is a short-term intervention, but it
can help to provide a lifetime of good nutrition and health behaviors.
While in our subcommittee, this appropriations bill slashed WIC
funding by $650 million. That means that as many as 300,000 women and
children will be turned away and forced to go hungry; and, in fact,
Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack has warned our subcommittee that this
number could be as high as 750,000.
To alleviate this glaring shortfall, my amendment to restore $147
million to the WIC program, paid for with $147 million currently
provided to the Brazilian Cotton Institute, passed with a bipartisan
vote during full committee consideration. But the rule for this bill
arbitrarily took away the pay-for and, instead, requires that $147
million be cut out from WIC or other programs in this bill already
woefully underfunded.
What are we doing here? We are giving the money back to Brazilian
farmers. The majority has decided that is more important. Where is our
sense of justice to women and children in the United States?
To be sure, there are many egregious cuts in this appropriations bill
and not just to WIC. Other vital nutrition programs like the
Commodities Supplemental Food Program and the Emergency Food Assistance
Program, school lunches, food safety, the CFTC, international food
aid--all of these basic, commonsense priorities of the American people
take a huge hit in this legislation, mainly so the majority can
preserve oil company subsidies and tax breaks for the rich.
To their credit, even the Republicans on our committee saw this $147
million handout to Brazilian farmers as a bridge too far. So they and
Democrats alike overwhelmingly approved the transfer of these funds to
WIC--until the Republican leadership stepped in and negated our vote.
We cannot be taking food out of hungry people's mouths here at home
in order to subsidize overseas cotton production. It makes no sense. As
my colleague Mr. Flake noted at the committee markup, it is quite
ironic that we would subsidize Brazilian agriculture so that we can
continue to excessively subsidize agriculture here.
I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to abide by the
overwhelming vote of our subcommittee, to stand up for American women
and children, and to reject this bill. This is not what we voted for
and not what the American people want.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Sec. 743. None of the funds made available by this Act or
any other Act may be used to provide payments (or to pay the
salaries and expenses of personnel to provide payments) to
the Brazil Cotton Institute.

[[Page H4239]]

Point of Order

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Chair, I make a point of order against section 743
which begins on page 78, line 24, and ends on page 79, line 2, in that
it violates House rule XXI, clause 2, by changing existing law and
inserting legislative language in an appropriation bill.
I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
The Acting CHAIR. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of
order?
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Chair, I wish to be heard.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized.
Mr. McGOVERN. Thank you, Madam Chair. Let me clarify what insisting
on this point of order means.
It means that the amendment that Ms. DeLauro offered in committee,
which was approved in the Appropriations Committee, is nullified, which
means that Brazilian cotton farmers get subsidies and poor pregnant
women and children do not get the money for WIC.

{time} 1720

I have nothing against Brazilian cotton farmers, but Brazil's economy
is doing pretty good right now.
The Rules Committee could have protected the money for WIC. The Rules
Committee waived points of order against a whole bunch of stuff in this
bill except for three provisions. So it wouldn't have been unusual or
extraordinary for the Rules Committee to protect this provision. Many
of us pleaded with the committee to do just that, to respect the work
of the Appropriations Committee when it came to protecting WIC, when it
came to protecting poor pregnant women and children.
Madam Chair, my friends on the other side of the aisle say all the
time that they're with us in trying to cut excessive subsidies and
putting the focus back on the people here in the United States who need
help. This would have been an opportunity. If not now, when are we
going to do this?
So, Madam Chair, I would hope that my colleagues on the other side of
the aisle would reconsider and not insist on their point of order. I
think poor pregnant women and children in this country who benefit from
WIC are more important right now than subsidizing Brazilian cotton
farmers.
Mr. KINGSTON. Madam Chair, I would like to speak to the point of
order.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized.
Mr. KINGSTON. The gentleman says, If not now, when? It is our
intention to restore this at the proper place in the bill, the DeLauro
amendment. I wanted to clarify that because we've discussed that, and
we intend to follow through with that.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair is prepared to rule.
The Chair finds that this section addresses funds in other acts. The
section, therefore, constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of
rule XXI.
The point of order is sustained, and the section is stricken from the
bill.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Sec. 744. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act or any other Act may be used to pay the
salaries and expenses of personnel of the Department of
Agriculture to provide any benefit described in section
1001D(b)(1)(C) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C.
1308-3a(b)(1)(C)) to a person or legal entity if the average
adjusted gross income of the person or legal entity exceeds
$250,000.

Point of Order

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Chairman, I make a point of order against section
744 which begins on page 79, line 3, and ends on page 79, line 10, in
that it violates House rule XXI, clause 2, by changing existing law and
inserting legislative language in an appropriation bill.
I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
The Acting CHAIR. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of
order? If not, the Chair will rule.
The Chair finds that this section addresses funds in other acts. The
section, therefore, constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of
rule XXI.
The point of order is sustained, and the section is stricken from the
bill.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Sec. 745. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of
understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant
to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation
that any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed,
for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been
exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a
timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority
responsible for collecting the tax liability.

spending reduction account

Sec. 746. The amount by which the applicable allocation of
new budget authority made by the Committee on Appropriations
of the House of Representatives under section 302(b) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 exceeds the amount of
proposed new budget authority is $0.

Mr. KINGSTON. Madam Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Conaway) having assumed the chair, Mrs. Myrick, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2112)
making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2012, and for other purposes, had come to no
resolution thereon.

____________________