[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 105 (Thursday, July 14, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H5033-H5050]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT,
2012
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 337 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. 2354.
{time} 1239
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. 2354) making appropriations for energy and water
development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September
30, 2012, and for other purposes, with Mrs. Biggert (Acting Chair) in
the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Wednesday,
July 13, 2011, the bill had been read through page 62, line 2.
Mr. OLVER. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. OLVER. Madam Chairman, title V of the Energy and Water bill that
is before us today robs Peter to pay Paul.
Title V takes funds which were appropriated 2\1/2\ years ago for
transportation purposes and moves part of those funds to the Corps of
Engineers in today's Energy and Water appropriations bill. Title V
specifically rescinds all awarded but unobligated high-speed rail
dollars from the Recovery and Reinvestment Act and moves those dollars
to respond to the unprecedented flooding this spring in many States for
work to be done as it is designed and executed by the Corps of
Engineers.
Effectively this is a backhanded increase in allocation to the Energy
and Water Subcommittee for this bill at the expense of transportation
purposes.
I don't contend or even suggest that the Energy and Water bill is
well-funded. In fact, the allocations for the Energy and Water
Subcommittee and for the Transportation and HUD Subcommittee, of which
I am the ranking member, are both totally inadequate. But I do object
to killing projects in transportation that will create construction
jobs in the severely depressed construction industry and provide a
valuable transportation alternative in heavily congested corridors
among our largest metropolitan areas all over the country. And I do
absolutely support making the repairs to flood control systems as
quickly as they can be designed and built. That's an obligation.
In my 20 years, 10\1/2\ years under Democratic Presidents, 9\1/2\
years under Republican Presidents and under the control in the Congress
of either party--because it switched back and forth in those 20 years--
we have dealt with natural disasters on a bipartisan basis, on an
emergency basis, every single year. Most famously, that includes, in
September '05, the Katrina disaster which resulted in $15 billion for
recovery of New Orleans and the gulf coast on an emergency and on a
totally bipartisan basis. But this section takes from projects planned,
applied for and awarded but not yet obligated and kills those projects.
Roughly $6 billion of the $8 billion appropriated for intercity
passenger rail and high-speed rail projects in the Recovery Act are
already obligated, and half of those are already in construction. The
Recovery Act itself allowed until the 30th of September of 2012, the
end of the '12 fiscal year, to obligate those dollars. Of the roughly
$2 billion unobligated, 80 percent of those dollars arises from the
single decision just 3 months ago of the Governor of Florida to refuse
the $1.6 billion previously applied for and awarded for a project to
build true high-speed rail on a dedicated corridor between Orlando and
Tampa.
Now, Orlando lies roughly equidistant from Jacksonville, Tampa and
Miami. Those four, Jacksonville, Tampa, Miami and Orlando, are four of
America's 40 largest metropolitan areas. All have over 1\1/2\ million
people, all are growing by between 15 and 30 percent, and they are
among our fastest growing metropolitan areas. They represent a prime
example of the opportunity that high-speed rail offers in carefully
selected high-population corridors around the country to reduce
congestion and expedite travel.
When that money was refused by Florida, the Federal Rail
Administration re-awarded the $1.6 billion to projects in other States,
including, as examples, in the Northeast Corridor, which carries half
of all intercity rail passengers in America every day, nearly $800
million for work in that Northeast Corridor, and that work would bring
the speed up to 160 miles per hour in parts of New Jersey, and the work
would be done in New York and New Jersey. So that is $800 million.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. OLVER. I ask unanimous consent to be given 1 additional minute.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Massachusetts?
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I object.
The Acting CHAIR. Objection is heard.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. OLVER. Secondly, in the high-speed corridors that are based on
Chicago as their hub, to go to Detroit, to go to St. Louis, to go to
Indianapolis, to go to Milwaukee, for equipment that will allow those
high-speed corridors to function better.
Thirdly, in projects on the west coast as well. All of those projects
are jeopardized by this provision in this bill.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Chair, I am opposed to the misguided cuts to
high-speed rail funding in this bill that
[[Page H5034]]
will eliminate thousands of jobs, halt a large number of rail projects
across the country--and we are way behind every other nation almost,
industrialized nations, anyway--and hurt local and State economies.
This is the latest in the majority's agenda that can best be described
as penny-wise and pound-foolish.
In their Pledge to America, the majority made a promise to the
American people. ``We will fight efforts to use a national crisis for
political gain,'' they declared. Sadly, that's what they're doing
today. Using the tragedy of natural disasters in America's heartland as
a political tool to try to eliminate a job creation program, one of the
very few we have, is just wrong. Thousands of jobs and millions of
dollars in economic investment are at stake, and yet this fight brought
to us today is little more than an unnecessary ideological battle.
The high-speed and intercity passenger rail program is critical to
our country's competitiveness. It puts Americans back to work,
revitalizes our construction and manufacturing sectors, boosts the
domestic economy, and helps end U.S. dependence on foreign oil. It is
both unwise and ineffective to cut important funding from one project
in order to pay for disaster relief. We are a Nation that should be
able to both build for the future--in fact we must--and provide for our
fellow citizens in need today.
High-speed rail creates jobs. Every $1 billion of high-speed rail and
intercity passenger rail construction funding supports 24,000 jobs.
High-speed rail creates short-term jobs in construction, long-term jobs
in ongoing maintenance and operation, and indirect jobs by providing
regions with access to a larger labor pool and driving economic
development.
In my home State of New York, the United States Conference of Mayors
estimates at least 21,000 new jobs and $1.1 billion in new wages with
the construction of high-speed rail along the Empire Corridor from
Buffalo to Albany.
High-speed rail also creates the economic corridors of the future. A
high-speed rail line in western New York as currently planned would
reduce travel time significantly and expand the western New York labor
market to 955,562 workers. This would make us the 26th largest metro
area in the Nation, and that means new businesses will be drawn to the
area as we connect our cities to Montreal, Toronto, New York City and
the rest of the eastern seaboard; and for the first time in many areas,
we may even be able to go west.
In New York, high-speed rail will be our next Erie Canal. Nationally,
it is rightfully being compared to our national highway system. Both
spurred local development and brought millions of jobs to our State and
the Nation. At this point in time, we must not let this opportunity
slip away.
What's more, rescinding funds for high-speed rail now, after $5.68
billion have already been obligated by the Federal Railroad
Administration, will negate the unprecedented work already being done
by the FRA and its partners.
FRA, the States, Amtrak, and infrastructure-owning railroads have
made significant progress in reaching service outcome agreements to
ensure that intended project benefits are realized, while protecting
the public's investment and the railroads' operating interests.
The attempt to rescind this money is nothing but an opportunistic
attempt to gain politically from a human tragedy. The flooding that has
occurred in our Nation's heartland is being used as an excuse to
eliminate an investment in our transportation network of the future.
{time} 1250
This is morally reprehensible and economically irresponsible.
If we are to be a competitive global economy in the years to come, we
must dedicate ourselves to building the infrastructure that we will
need to compete. To rescind these funds now after so much progress has
been made and at a time when investments in our own infrastructure and
our country are so sorely needed is quite simply an act of foolishness.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the rescinding of
unobligated high-speed rail funds in the bill that we are considering
today.
During the full committee markup of the 2012 Energy and Water
appropriations bill, Chairman Frelinghuysen offered an amendment
providing $1.028 billion in emergency funding to the Army Corps of
Engineers to repair damage caused by recent storms and floods and to
prepare for future disaster events. It makes sense to spend money on
that; we have always given money for emergencies. But the funding is
offset in the chairman's amendment by a recision of all the remaining
unobligated high-speed rail funding that was originally approved in the
American Recovery Act.
The language of the amendment would rescind all unobligated high-
speed rail funding as opposed to just $1.028 billion to be spent for
the emergency. This provision jeopardizes several important projects
that are already underway, already in the planning stages, that support
good jobs and will make long-overdue improvements to our rail system.
Last May, the Department of Transportation awarded some of these
high-speed rail funds for major improvements on the Northeast Corridor,
such as $449 million for catenary improvements, which would allow
trains to reach 160 miles per hour on certain segments, and $294
million for the Harold Interlocking in Queens, which would reduce
delays for Amtrak and on the Long Island Railroad.
I've heard a lot of people complain about the trip times and
reliability on the Northeast Corridor and complain that even the Acela
is not true high-speed rail, and they're right. But these are the kinds
of projects that have to be done to prepare to make significant
improvements in the corridor and to prepare the way for true high-speed
rail later.
Make no mistake: These are projects that are happening now. This is
not money just sitting there waiting for a visionary high-speed rail
system to come about. This is money going to real infrastructure
investments now that support real jobs now and support real economic
development when we need it most.
I share the chairman's desire to provide funding to the Army Corps to
repair storm damage, but this is not the way to go about it. This is a
perfect example of why we have--or used to have--different rules for
emergency spending. If something unexpected happens, massive storms and
floods, we should be able to respond without jeopardizing other
funding. We always said that emergency funding didn't have to be paid
for by offsetting other reductions in worthy programs.
I am very concerned about the underinvestment in transportation and
infrastructure that seems to have taken hold on the other side of the
aisle. We have always had bipartisan agreement that investing in roads,
rails, bridges, highways, tunnels and transit is an essential
government function. And historically, it's what made the economy grow.
From Henry Clay's American system and the internal improvements and
Abraham Lincoln's transcontinental railroad, from the Eerie Canal of
DeWitt Clinton, in more recent times the interstate highway system of
Dwight Eisenhower, the economy of the United States was built on these
infrastructure developments.
As the Nation is embroiled in negotiations over the debt limit now
and how to address the long-term deficit, this is yet another example
of the misguided thinking that cutting government spending is somehow
the answer to these long-term economic challenges. It is unfathomable
that we would pass anything that would eliminate good jobs, and not
just the direct transportation and construction jobs but all of the
jobs dependent on the connectivity and efficiency of our transportation
system.
We need to make the investments necessary to put America on a path
toward long-term economic growth. We should be providing a lot more
money for high-speed rail, which is one of the connection systems of
the future. This bill that we will be considering today takes an extra
step backward by revoking funds already allocated--not necessarily
obligated, but allocated and
[[Page H5035]]
announced--for ongoing projects that are moving ahead. I urge my
colleagues to fix this provision.
Emergency funding is obviously warranted for the floods, but it
should not be done by eliminating already allocated funds for high-
speed rail in an area where we very much need those improvements on the
current transportation system.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TONKO. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. TONKO. Madam Chair, we must fund the Army Corps of Engineers to
repair damage caused by recent storms and floods and to prepare for
future disaster events, there is no question about it. But doing so by
cutting long-term investments in high-speed rail makes absolutely no
sense, and I rise in strong opposition to this offset. This reckless
recision will eliminate thousands of jobs, halt a large number of rail
projects across the country, and hurt local and State economies.
The program is critical to our country's competitiveness by putting
Americans back to work, revitalizing our construction and manufacturing
sectors, boosting the domestic economy, and ending the United States'
dependence on foreign oil. And it flies in the face of President
Obama's stated goal of connecting 80 percent of America by high-speed
rail in the next 25 years.
Should this recision pass in this House, the Capital Region of New
York State alone stands to lose three critical projects, thousands of
jobs, and millions in investments. Specifically, the bill, as written,
would eliminate over $150 million intended for the Empire Corridor
Capacity Improvements project, the Empire Corridor South: Albany to
Schenectady Second Track project, and the Empire Corridor South: Grade
Crossing Improvements project. This would lead to the loss of some
4,223 jobs.
Plain and simple, Madam Chair, we cannot afford these cuts at this
time.
Just a few weeks ago, the local chambers of commerce from the capital
region of upstate New York flew down to Washington, DC, to meet with
Members of Congress to discuss their areas of interest and attention.
It turns out that one of their top priorities was high-speed rail. Why
is that? It's plain as day. High-speed rail investments create jobs.
Jobs are the building block of our recovering economy, and a strong
economy leads to a reduced Federal deficit.
Madam Chair, why is it that Europe, Japan, China and other countries
can invest in 200-plus-mile-per-hour trains, but when the United States
wants to simply lay additional track, upgrade some crossings, and
guarantee timely, affordable, relatively average speed trains, we are
left out in the cold?
Let's not let shortsighted politics trump our long-term economic
viability. These are commonsense investments that have already been
committed to, have already increased reliability in our rail system,
and have already created jobs. Let's not pull the rug out from the feet
of our job creators, not now. We simply cannot afford it. We cannot
afford to deny the hope for jobs. We cannot afford to deny the American
pioneer spirit.
I would like to thank my colleague, Representative Slaughter from New
York, for her tireless advocacy on this issue and for having the vision
and determination to make high-speed rail in upstate New York and
across this State and country a reality.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last
word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I rise today in opposition
to the recision of funds from the high-speed rail program that was
unwisely included in the fiscal year 2012 Energy and Water bill
reported from the Appropriations Committee.
My home State of North Carolina has been working for many years to
advance the Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor from Charlotte to
Raleigh and Richmond, and ultimately linking the southeastern States
with Washington, D.C. and providing a connection to rail service in the
Northeast.
Over the last 15 years, North Carolina has invested approximately
$300 million in State intercity rail service capacity, including the
construction of new train stations and track improvements. These
strategic investments have already helped reduce travel time between
Raleigh and Charlotte by 1 hour. But over the last two decades, the
Federal investment in the Southeast or other high-speed rail corridors
has been very, very modest. The burden fell almost completely on the
States. In light of the enormous capital investments needed, while our
progress has been steady, it has also been very slow.
Madam Chair, this has been an area where President Obama has
demonstrated strong leadership, making major Federal investment in
high-speed rail one of his top priorities.
Competition for the billions of dollars allocated under the Recovery
Act was intense, and ultimately funds were distributed to 31 States,
with half a billion dollars awarded to North Carolina. These funds will
help our State achieve a goal set long ago--2-hour train service from
Raleigh to Charlotte--and I'm happy to report that work is already well
underway. And we know what comes next: Raleigh to Richmond.
{time} 1300
These planned rail investments will relieve congestion, reduce our
dependence on foreign oil, make our neighborhoods more livable and
environmentally sustainable, make our communities more attractive
places to live and do business in the long term, and create well-paying
construction and manufacturing jobs in the near term--20,000 jobs in
North Carolina alone, as a matter of fact.
Rescission of these funds is penny-wise and pound-foolish. It
undermines an infrastructure project that would create jobs and pay
dividends for years and years in the future. If we want to stay
competitive in the international economy, we cannot continue to lay
behind countries like China in developing a 21st century
infrastructure. Rather than cutting funds for high-speed rail, we
should be investing further in a high-speed rail network that will
enhance our Nation's overall transportation system, moving us forward
the way the highway system drove us forward in the mid 20th century.
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. MALONEY. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mrs. MALONEY. Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to an offset
included in this bill that would rescind all unobligated high-speed
rail funding. I support the gentleman from New Jersey's efforts to
address the flood, but it should not be taken from such an important
investment in the economic strength of our country. It is also an
investment in moving us to energy independence.
I would like to address my comments particularly to the Northeast
Corridor, that is the corridor between New York and Washington and New
York and Boston. This corridor is the most heavily traveled not only in
the United States but probably in the world. And the MTA says that the
corridor between New York and Boston, on day one, if we had high-speed
rail, hundreds of thousands of people would travel it, and it would
absolutely be a positive revenue source. It would literally make money
because of the ridership that is in that area and also in the area
between New York and Washington.
In the money that was allocated, the MTA is focusing on high-speed
rail between New York and Boston. And they are supporting the $294
million for the Harold Interlocking Amtrak Bypass Routes, which would
create, according to analysis, well over 9,000 jobs immediately, as it
is shovel-ready and ready to go. This is an investment towards high-
speed rail, but it's needed right now to move three lines: the Long
Island Railroad, Amtrak, and the New Jersey Transit. In this one area,
the Interlocking has over 783 trains moving through this each day from
the three different transit systems. So this obviously needs to be
upgraded to take care of delays and to be able to move people and
commerce faster. Because of the way the Harold Interlocking is
currently constructed, conflicts among
[[Page H5036]]
the three rail lines are frequent and result in delays, disruptions at
Penn Station, and over the entire northeast corridor.
So this critical funding will be used to construct a bypass that
would allow these trains to move conflict-free and quickly. It is fully
designed, has undergone extensive environmental review, including a
final environmental impact statement. This project is shovel-ready and
will be completed--if not interrupted by this action on the floor--by
2017, and will, very importantly, move us towards high-speed rail
between two of the major commerce centers in our country, between
Boston and New York. It would literally make money. To rescind this
money would be penny-wise, pound-foolish, and would move us backwards.
We should be investing in the economic corridors of our country, which
is our rail, our high-speed rail.
I strongly, strongly support the high-speed rail and urge my
colleagues for the economic strength of our future to vote against this
amendment, this section that would rescind the money for the very
needed high-speed rail that would move us into the 21st century to be
able to compete and win in the 21st century, move our people, move our
commerce, create jobs not only in the railroad but in the commerce that
is between the two centers. We cannot afford to fall behind in our
transportation system. It's one of the things that made this country
great. It is an important investment. It is an investment that would
literally make money in the Northeast Corridor, and it would be
absolutely tremendously foolish to rescind this investment towards the
economic future of our country.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. EMERSON. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Missouri is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mrs. EMERSON. Madam Chairwoman, first let me say that I deeply
respect the words that all of my colleagues have talked about with
regard to high-speed rail. And I understand very much the concerns that
the funding for emergency flood restoration and rebuilding would come
at a cost to future years of high-speed rail development, keeping in
mind that this money has not been specifically obligated.
But first, let me talk about the flooding that's started in North
Dakota, going all the way down to Louisiana, down the entire Missouri
River system and the entire Mississippi River system. We're talking
about more than one-third of the entire watershed of the United States
of America. We're talking about farmers. We're talking about the people
who work for the farmers. We're talking about the hardware stores and
the implement dealers and all of the communities that have been
devastated by flooding. And these folks have no recourse.
We're talking about billions of dollars in lost economic activity,
and we're talking about the safety and the protection of people, their
families, their children, and the folks who worship with them at
church. If we don't have the emergency ability to make it possible for
these people to regain their lives and their livelihoods, then we're
talking about billions of dollars of lost economic activity for this
country. And for people who say, Well, you know, it's farmland, and
it's not important. We're talking about farmland. Well, guess what,
people, we have the most abundant, safest food supply in the world. We
pay less money than any person in any country of the world for our food
policy. We pay 9 cents on the dollar. And if we don't restore the
livelihoods of these people, if we don't restore our levees and our
bridges and our roads and the economic activity of these communities,
then we're going to be paying a whole lot more for food, and people are
going to be screaming about that. But at the end of the day, isn't the
government's role to protect the lives of people?
I just want to say that it wasn't an easy decision for the
subcommittee to make, to be able to protect people's lives. But when
we're talking about money that is unobligated, that has been returned
to the Treasury, and it's that pot of money that can help people be
safe, safe from water, safe from flooding so that they could be
rebuilding their homes and producing a lot of economic activity--and,
yes, a lot of jobs, because there is not a lot of difference between
farming and hiring of people and producing and the ripple effect on the
economies, and a factory. It's the same thing. It's just a little
different.
So I have great respect, as I said earlier, for the arguments that my
colleagues are making. But at the end of the day, I think that it's
critical that people's lives and people's livelihoods be protected. We
must rebuild and we must restore these levees before the next big flood
comes again so we can protect our wonderful food source in the United
States.
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1310
Ms. RICHARDSON. Madam Chairwoman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. RICHARDSON. I rise in strong opposition to the fiscal year 2012
Energy and Water Appropriations bill, which includes an amendment that
would rescind the remaining unobligated high-speed rail funding that
was originally approved in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
In listening to my colleague who just spoke, I don't think anyone
here on this floor disagrees that we support the farmers, we support
the people who have been impacted by flooding. But the question is
whether these particular funds are the appropriate funds that should be
dedicated to address that particular issue.
I would venture to say that while I believe it's important that the
Army Corps of Engineers has access to funding necessary to prepare for
future disasters, I would say that because I am the ranking member of
Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications. But when you
consider our long overdue efforts to be able to develop a high-speed
rail network that would create jobs and bring rail infrastructure into
the 21st century for the United States, that also is a priority as
well.
I am proud to be vice chair of the bicameral High-Speed Rail and
Intercity Passenger Rail Caucus, and I am glad that we are working to
increase the visibility on this issue. I have long fought for bringing
transportation systems into the 21st century. After all, that's
important to Americans' lives as well. Because if we're not able to
traverse from one side of the country to the other, if we're not able
to do it in an efficient manner, eventually we will also find ourselves
without more jobs and without being able to have appropriate living
conditions.
Consider that high-speed rail pays for itself, significantly reducing
$700 billion a year of oil purchased that could be dealt with regarding
our trade deficit. High-speed rail pays for and saves lives. We are
talking about lives. What about the 43,000 Americans who die each year
in car accidents? What happens when we talk about that high-speed rail
pays for its efficiency and mobility by being able to move people and
goods without delay and waste? And also when you consider that high-
speed rail pays by improving air quality, which also helps and saves
lives.
Thirteen countries around the world are investing hundreds of
billions of dollars into their systems. And for years the United States
has failed to keep up. Finally, we have an administration that is
actually focused on this issue and has made a commitment to this
funding. However, when you consider that in the United States we only
have one high-speed rail corridor, that's the Acela Express, operated
between Boston and Washington, D.C., and even in our one corridor the
trains only reach 150 miles per hour, far below what we would really
call a true world class high-speed rail.
So when we consider being in the High-Speed Rail Caucus and what our
efforts are today, thankfully we are looking at a situation where we do
have funding that's been allocated. So when we say it's unallocated
funds, let's talk about that. Actually, what's happened is the
administration has done an excellent job in considering areas that have
said they are not ready to do high-speed rail at this time. So rather
than our wasting money as we did in the past, years in the past, of
building bridges to nowhere, what we've said is, if a particular area
is not ready, let's put the money back where it can now be reallocated.
[[Page H5037]]
So it's not that the funds are totally unobligated. We are now in the
process of putting them in the areas that are ready to build high-speed
rail now. We must be forward thinking and proactive to position our
country to compete in the global economy. That's about American lives
as well. Nowhere is it more important than in the area of high-speed
rail to take that broad step.
It will cost about $40 billion to bring high-speed rail to areas like
mine in California. But with it comes really a revolution in travel in
a way that we have not touched before.
Madam Chairwoman, I cannot support this bill in its current form in
light of the amendment that's been brought forward, and I urge my
colleagues to vote against these draconian cuts. We had an opportunity
to do more funding for Army Corps, and on this very floor many of my
colleagues chose not to do so.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Louisiana is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam Chairman, the question is, just how important is
the Mississippi River? The Mississippi River system connects
approximately 30 States in our Nation's heartland with the
international markets. Sixty percent of all U.S. grain exports are
shipped from the Mississippi River. Twenty-five percent of all large
commercial bulk ships that arrive in the U.S. come to the mouth of the
Mississippi River. U.S. Customs and Border Protection estimates that
the river system facilitates between $85 billion and $104 billion
annually in foreign trade through the Mississippi River system. And
one-third of the Nation's oil comes up the river to refineries in
Louisiana.
This year's historic flooding carried an estimated 60 million cubic
yards of sediment down the Mississippi River. This sediment doesn't
just float on out into the gulf; it settles. It settles all along the
river, from Missouri to Lake Providence, Louisiana, on down to New
Orleans, where currently 5 extra feet of sediment has built up over the
normal levels. Five feet. And for every foot that's taken away from the
draft of a ship, it costs that ship $1 million. Madam Chairman, one
doesn't have to be a mathematician to tell that that's pretty expensive
to our economy.
The flood has not only highlighted a need for dredging, it has also
damaged levees and floodways all along the Mississippi. The Corps of
Engineers estimates that on the river alone it will have to spend an
additional $1 billion to $2 billion to repair levees and floodways
damaged by the recent floodwaters. This is work that must be done to
allow these levees to again protect Americans from future floods.
Madam Chairman, I know that there aren't many out there speaking
against the Mississippi River and the need for maintenance. They are
just arguing that the money does not need to be offset since we could
call it emergency funding. And yes, we could go that route. But as we
are in the middle of negotiations and debate about raising the debt
ceiling, the last thing we should be thinking of is adding more to the
pile of debt. We cannot continue to do this, Madam Chairman, especially
when we have seen the national debt increase at an average of $3.9
billion per day, especially when the Treasury Department now projects
that the U.S. debt will exceed the GDP by the end of this year.
The Congressional Research Service study reports that if supplemental
operations had been fully offset over the last three decades, the
Federal debt could have been reduced by at least $1.3 trillion. That
translates to a reduction of public interest payments of $57 billion
per year. Ignoring the need to offset spending is a mistake, Madam
Chairman, a mistake that our children cannot afford for us to make.
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. Madam Chairman, included amongst a multitude of
misguided policies in this bill the Republican majority has on the
floor today is the rescinding of high-speed rail funds that would
otherwise create good middle class jobs, strengthen our economy, allow
us to build a 21st century infrastructure that we need to compete with
the other economic power centers around the world.
Over 6 months in the majority and my Republican colleagues have
proved very capable of ending Medicare, rolling back health care
reforms, namely for women, and choosing to reduce the deficit on the
backs of working middle class families and the most vulnerable.
One thing they have chosen to do is to zero out job creation. And, in
fact, by cutting funding for high-speed rail projects in this bill, the
majority is threatening as many as 60,000 jobs. This is the majority's
answer to last week's extremely disappointing jobs report that showed
that we are mired in unacceptably high 9.2 percent unemployment after
adding only 18,000 jobs in June, with a construction sector that has
16.3 percent of its workers unemployed.
{time} 1320
This is the majority's answer to the 14 million unemployed in this
country, real people, real families looking to wait their way through
this crisis.
In Connecticut, the majority's decision to rescind a $30 million
investment--and I might tell my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle--this $30 million has been obligated. It is an investment in the
New Haven-Hartford-Springfield line and would seriously limit the
ability to expand one of the best intercity passenger rail networks in
the country. The line represents a critical component of a larger
regional plan for passenger rail to integrate the New England rail
system, connect it to New York, the middle-Atlantic States and to
Canada.
The improvements that would be made with the investments my
colleagues on the other side are seeking to eliminate are essential to
meeting the needs of the entire region and achieving the benefits of
the Federal and State investments that have already been made there.
High-speed rail is desperately needed in Connecticut. This is the
most heavily trafficked commuter region in the country. New England's
traffic has increased two to three times faster than its population
since 1990, and 80 percent of the Connecticut commuters drive to work
alone.
When it's completed, the line is expected to reduce the number of
vehicles on the road by approximately 4,000 cars a day, saving a
billion gallons of fossil fuel a year and reducing carbon emissions
over that time by 10,000 tons.
Just as important, the line has been a high priority for Connecticut,
for its Representatives on both sides of the aisle for many years. It
means opportunities for economic development and expansion throughout
our State.
But expanding the economy, creating jobs is simply not a priority for
the majority. They appear perfectly content to allow us to fall behind
our global competitors like China, with its plan to invest a trillion
dollars in high-speed rail, highways and other infrastructure in 5
years.
And the short-sightedness is further exemplified by what has been put
forward this week in a $230 billion 6-year surface transportation bill
that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce calls unacceptable as the cuts will
destroy, rather than support, existing jobs, which would be devastating
to construction and related industries, leading to a less competitive
economy and a drag on the GDP due to underperforming infrastructure.
Now, I want to say to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, I
have a great appreciation for disaster assistance, a great appreciation
for the commercial value of the Mississippi River. I am there. I have
been there for disaster assistance.
Now, if you don't want to do an emergency declaration, then let me
tell you where you can get some of the money from in order to do this:
$40 billion to the oil industry every year in a tax subsidy. Nobody
here believes that they are suffering as the farmers in our country are
suffering. They don't need money for the levees. They don't need any
money at all; but, no, the other side doesn't want to take any money
from that $41 billion to do something about those who are suffering in
these States due to natural disaster.
Or what about the $8 billion we provide to multinational corporations
to
[[Page H5038]]
take their jobs overseas? Let's take that money and use it for the
people of this great Nation who are in difficult straits, difficult
times and their jobs, yes, and their levees need to be dredged. Let's
get that money to the Army Corps of Engineers.
Finally, we support Brazilian cotton farmers. We give them $147
million every single year. I suggest we take that money from the
Brazilian cotton farmers and spend it on the folks in our country who
are in desperate need.
Don't take it from high-speed rail. Don't commit us to planned
obsolescence.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Missouri is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Madam Chair, I would like to congratulate the
Appropriations Committee and the chairman for their fine work on making
some difficult choices.
Obviously, our budget times are tight. We have to prioritize our
spending, and we have some emergencies here in this country which are
abnormal, extremely abnormal from the standpoint that our weather
patterns have changed dramatically this past year and as a result we
have a lot of our citizens that are really suffering right now.
In my district, I have the Mississippi River along the one side, I
have the Missouri River running through the area as well, so both of
those have been dramatically impacted by the massive rain storms that
have run through the area as well as some of the tornados that have
gone through the area as well.
So I want to put a face on some of this for just a moment. You know,
we have today a number of farmers who no longer can drive to their
homes. They have to take a boat to their homes. They have 5 feet of
water. Some of them are looking at the roofs instead of their homes,
and their crops are gone. And when they are gone, whenever a flood
occurs, it doesn't just occur and wipe out that year's crops. Quite
often times it takes 2 or 3 or 4 years. And sometimes the ground is
damaged to the point where it can never be reclaimed.
The gentlewoman from the southeast portion of our State, some of her
area that was devastated by some of the levees that were blown up,
those crop lands may never return to fertile ground because of what
happened. Again, well, people say, well, it's just farm land. No, it's
not. This is the business of farming. This is their business location.
And if you look at their farms, it's not just land that's laying out
there. They have irrigation systems, they have thousands and thousands
and thousands of dollars in irrigation systems and the berms and the
ground that's been cultivated and excavated in a way that it can
utilize all the waters that they irrigate with or whatever.
So they have a huge investment in this property. It's not just land.
It's a huge investment in their business. We are interested in
continuing to help those folks rebuild those levees, rebuild their
lives, rebuild their businesses because this is what they are about.
One of the things that has happened in my area right now is with,
basically, a tsunami coming down the Missouri River basin. In Montana
they had an unusual amount of snow that fell this year, a late snow
melt. And then on top of that they had a whole year's worth of rain in
a 2-week period, and we have literally a tsunami coming down the
Missouri River basin.
Fortunately, we had a flood control set of dams in there that have
minimized it; but even at that, this is a 100- to 500-year flood that
is devastating everything in its path. And so those folks, in fact,
right now from Kansas City on north, there isn't a single private levee
that isn't either breached or topped.
Let me repeat that: There isn't a single private levee north of
Kansas City that is not breached or topped. That's how severe and how
devastating this situation is this year.
When we start talking about the uses of the river, it's important to
note that barge traffic on rivers--the gentleman from Louisiana a
moment ago talked about the usage of how much corn and grain goes up
and down the Mississippi. The normal barge can carry 900 trailer loads
of grain, 900 trailer loads of grain.
Think of all the vehicles we are taking off the roads. Think of the
environmental impact of none of those vehicles being on the road. It's
very significant.
Yet, in our area, the Missouri River is being underutilized because
of some of the new mandates that are being put on it by different
bureaucrats here in D.C. with regards to trying to worry about a fish
or a bird that lives along the shore and/or for recreational purposes.
So we have some interesting debates going on right now. Those we will
decide at a later date, but the problem we are facing today is the
devastation that it has had to life and property and the safety of
those. We believe that these funds are necessary for people to recover
from this devastation that has occurred.
And just as a side light here, we also would like to thank the
Appropriations Committee for not only finding a way to do this,
prioritizing Federal funds without adding to our debt, but there is an
interesting fact here as well. I want to note, it was from a report
back in January of 2009 with regard to the Congressional Research
Service that said had supplemental appropriations been fully offset--
which this is since 1981--Federal debt held by the public could have
been reduced by at least 23 percent, or $1.3 trillion. This could have
reduced interest payments to the public by $57 billion a year.
I think while it's difficult, I know that our friends across the
aisle and some of the folks here discussing the prioritization this
morning are not happy with this. I think these are difficult times. We
all have to realize that reprioritizing things sometimes is not easy.
But in this situation I believe that it's justified, and we certainly
support what fine work the Appropriations Committee has done.
I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1330
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Chairwoman, I move to strike the last
word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
(Mr. AL GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Chair, it is just a matter of time
before we will rue the day that we did not build out the infrastructure
across the length and breadth of our country. Our President has
proposed that we have an infrastructure bank such that we can take care
of the needs on this side as well as the needs on this side. We will
rue the day that we did not build out our transportation
infrastructure.
One example, in 2005, in Houston, Texas, Rita hit the gulf coast. We
had thousands of people being evacuated from a major urban area, and as
they were moving away, the highways became clogged. They were stopped
on the highways. People spent nights on the highways. Trains are a part
of the emergency evacuation system in this country, and we need more
rail so that we can evacuate people in times of emergencies.
9/11/01, who can forget? The skies were clear. There was a full
ground stop. More than 4,000 planes were grounded. No one could fly.
Trains became a part of the emergency evacuation system so that people
who could not fly could still make their destinations.
It is time for us to wise up and realize that the President is right.
It is time for us to, in the parlance and vernacular of those in the
streets of life, to 'fess up and tell the truth. We should not put
Peter ahead of Paul. We should not rob one to pay the other. It is time
for us to take a holistic approach and show some vision.
Let's move to create jobs across the length and breadth of the
country with this infrastructure program. Let's give architects who
have offices and business and laborers and engineers jobs. Let's give
them jobs to do.
And the good news is you cannot export these jobs overseas. You don't
have to worry about them being outsourced, because they will all be
done right here in the United States of America.
Let's rebuild this country.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SCALISE. Madam Chairwoman, I move to strike the last word.
[[Page H5039]]
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Louisiana is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. SCALISE. Madam Chair, I first want to congratulate and thank the
chairman of the Energy and Water subcommittee for setting as a priority
making sure that our waterways, especially the Mississippi River, are
restored after the devastating floods that we experienced throughout
our country. It wasn't just in a few States; it was throughout many
parts of the Midwest, South, and other parts of our country that
experienced tornado damage and experienced unprecedented flooding going
back to 1927.
But now if you look at where we are and you look at what is being
done here, this is not money that is adding to the deficit. We are at a
point right now as we face this debt ceiling--and there is a divide in
Congress; there is a divide in Washington. And the question is: Are we
going to start living within our means and truly setting priorities in
this country or just continue going down this spending binge acting as
if nobody is going to pay the tab?
And, of course, I think what the chairman, the full chairman of
Appropriations and so many other members of this new majority have said
is that game is over. The game of spending money we don't have is over,
and we've got to make the tough choices of setting priorities in this
country.
So if you look at some of the money that was moved over from high-
speed rail--and there were billions of dollars set aside in the
stimulus bill that was such a failed disaster, over $787 billion of
money that we don't have with the promise that unemployment wouldn't go
over 8 percent. It's very clear that that failed. But what we're saying
is let's take some of that money and move it over into something that's
much more important right now, and that is getting our economy back on
track, getting people back on track and getting their families back
together.
Look at what happened on the Mississippi River. Just a few weeks ago,
I flew over the Morganza Spillway and looked at the Atchafalaya Basin
where some of that flooding happened where you literally had people who
were in harm's way and their areas were flooded to keep other people
from flooding. And it was one of those terrible choices no one wants to
have to make, but those families were put in that situation and their
communities were flooded so other communities wouldn't.
The extra silt that came down the Mississippi River now threatens to
impede the ability for us to move commerce through 30-plus States of
this country so that we can get those exports, so that we can create
more jobs and be able to be competitive with foreign countries. If
you're a farmer in Iowa, if you're trying to move commerce in Missouri
down the Mississippi River, if you don't have the ability now because
we're not able to dredge the river, all of a sudden now Brazil is going
to get that contract for that product because you can't be competitive
anymore.
Not only are we talking about tens of thousands of jobs, but we're
talking about priorities. If you look at the high-speed rail projects,
many States have turned the money down. Why? Because they realize it's
a money loser. They lose money on the deal because it just doesn't pay
for itself. Of course, States have balanced budgets. Most of those
States have to balance their budget every year, so they can't just take
what looks like free money to go and engage in a process that's
ultimately going to cost them money every year that they don't have.
But because they have to balance their budget, many of them have turned
that money away.
And so you look here in Washington, there is no balanced budget
requirement, and it shows you, frankly, one of the reasons why we need
a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution so that we are forced
to live within our means, too, so we can't just keep spending money as
if there is no consequence, because there is consequence. Our children
and our grandchildren are counting on us to make those responsible
decisions and to set the priorities. We cannot just tell everybody that
comes in the door, You've got an idea, here's some money; you've got an
idea, here's some money. Nobody has the money. We'll just go print it,
raise the debt ceiling and just keep giving it as if it's not going to
have an effect. At some point, it has a real effect; it has a real
impact. And so we've got to make the tough choices and set the
priorities.
So there was devastating flooding throughout our country. You had so
many States that saw tornado damage and flooding damage, and they're
trying to get back on their feet. And then there is this high-speed
rail money. And so much of the money in the stimulus bill went to waste
and was squandered. We have nothing to show for it. The promise of no
more than 8 percent unemployment didn't work. It was a failure, and
everybody recognizes it. And so we're saying we're going to make those
tough choices.
None of these choices are easy, but we didn't come up here to make
easy choices. We came up here because we've got to set the priorities
of this country, and that means balancing our budget and not just
saying everything can get all the funding it wants. If something is a
priority, then that means we've got to find the money somewhere else.
And so that's what's being done here. And that's why I commend the
chairman for making that tough decision. And, yes, we're going to have
to have a fight over this. We're going to have to have a discussion
over this, as we should. This is the people's House.
That's what this discussion is about. It's about setting our
priorities and shifting from the old way of doing business of just
spending more money we don't have on every idea that sounded good. We
can't keep doing that. So that's why I support what the chairman is
doing.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. BROWN of Florida. Madam Chairwoman, I move to strike the last
word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
(Ms. BROWN of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and
extend her remarks.)
Ms. BROWN of Florida. First of all, I want to be clear that I support
the funding to protect the citizens of the Midwest from flooding. And,
in fact, Louisiana has gotten more money than probably anybody else.
I come from Florida. We have disasters, natural disasters, all of the
time. But the reason there is no funding for flood protection is
because the Republican leadership cut the funding and the Republican
Members supported it.
Let me be clear. I support the funding for the disaster. As the
ranking member of the Transportation Subcommittee on Rail, I find that
these funding cuts which would block all of the remaining unobligated
high-speed rail funding approved by the economic stimulus entirely
unacceptable.
And I am sick and tired of Members coming to the floor saying that
the stimulus money was a disaster. It is not a disaster that we put
people to work in Florida and throughout this country. And, in fact, if
it wasn't for the stimulus dollars, teachers would have lost their
jobs. In one area, we kept firefighters and police officers employed.
And that is a job while this economy is turned around.
And let's not forget how we got in this mess. Institutional memory is
in order. When you have your head in the lion's mouth, you pull it out,
you ease it out. What happened? How did we get here? When Bill Clinton
left, we were operating with a surplus. But we had 8 years of Bush and
two wars. And do you think this mess started 18 months ago? No, it did
not.
{time} 1340
We have been practicing what I call reverse Robin Hood for 8 years.
Nobody remembers that, when you kept giving tax breaks to the rich and
billionaires. What happened here in December? Almost $800 billion that
you gave to the not just millionaires, billionaires. And yet you come
up saying in June and April, we can't send the pension checks.
Yes, we're spending money up here, but it's the priorities you have.
You don't have the priorities of taking care of the elderly people. You
want to cut Medicaid and Medicare and Social Security while you give
billionaires--billionaires--tax breaks, and millionaires. And now you
want to cut money for high-speed rail. But we know for every billion
dollars that we spend for high-
[[Page H5040]]
speed rail, it generates 44,000 permanent jobs. But yes, we have some
Governors that are shortsighted, like my Governor Rick Scott of Florida
that sent back almost $3 billion. We have 11 percent unemployment. What
was he thinking about? I guess he was thinking he didn't want to see
those people going to work and making Barack Obama look good, even
though we have the most congestion in that area, and that our
competition is there. If you look at Spain, if you look at France, you
look at Germany, 200 miles, 1 hour and 15 minutes. That is the future
of our country. But we have some shortsighted people here, people who
only want to see, you know, well, we need to balance the budget. Well,
where were you when they were giving tax breaks to millionaires and
billionaires? And you do it over and over again. That's the sad thing.
If you put it on the board, put it on the board today, you would have
the same vote. You would have the exact same vote. And every
opportunity you have to vote, you vote to give millionaires and
billionaires tax breaks. So, you know, we started the rail system, and
we are now the caboose, and we don't even use cabooses any more.
I am hoping that the American people will wake up. It is shameful
that over and over again in the people's House, in the people's House,
we attack the people who do not have lobbyists on Capitol Hill. And so
I yield back the balance of my time, but I do know that elections have
consequences. The American people are watching you. I have voted five
times to raise the debt ceiling. Why did I do it under Bush? Because I
knew it was in the best interest of this country and not the politics
of the time.
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR. Members are reminded to address their remarks to
the Chair.
Mr. WOMACK. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WOMACK. Madam Chairwoman, I think we are going to have to extend
the space shuttle for an extra day to retrieve the thought process, it
got so far out there in orbit. Let me just be very clear, to kind of
bring this back to the subject matter at hand.
We're talking about taking funds that have been designated for a
project in the future, near term or long term, but in the future, to
satisfy an emerging issue that is in the present. Future versus
present.
In my district of Arkansas, the cresting of the Illinois River has
ripped apart roads, washed out bridges. Floods have taken the lives of
constituents of mine, young people who will grow up without a mother or
father. We have people living in tents. We have an urgent issue that is
facing us today. The flooding has done damage across our entire State,
leaving hundreds of Arkansans without homes, and crop losses estimated
at over $500 million. It has even been asserted by the other side that
it is ``just farmland.'' Just farmland.
Well, let me say to the people who make that argument, don't make
that argument with your mouth full.
It has also caused about $100 million in damage to dams, parks,
roads, and waterways under the control of the Army Corps of Engineers,
and if left unrepaired, will only result in additional devastation in
the next season.
But it isn't just about what happened in Arkansas; the entire
Mississippi River and its tributary system has been imperiled by these
tragedies. They are the lifeblood of our Nation's commerce, and
bordering farmlands are rich with fertile soil able to provide food for
so many of the American people. Allowing these lands to be so
vulnerable to future flooding will only imperil our Nation's food
supply.
Offset or not to offset; it is an emerging issue. And on offsets, as
you have already heard from my colleague from Louisiana, my colleague
from Missouri, that supplemental appropriations, if fully offset over
the last three decades, would have reduced by at least $1.3 trillion
the debt and reduced the public interest payments on this debt of $57
billion a year. Now, my friends, $57 billion in interest payments would
build a lot of high-speed rail.
I congratulate the chairman for his work on this Energy and Water
bill. I support it. It is prudent. It is wise. It is necessary. And I
commend it to the leadership and to this entire House to pass it and
restore the fiscal integrity of our country and give relief to the
people who need it so desperately.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HONDA. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HONDA. Madam Chair, I have a written prepared statement I will
include for the Record. It talks about California and the need for
investments, and I don't think anybody is going to argue with the need
for this country to invest in its country or its infrastructure. We
have had that argument.
I'm trying to figure out a way how to make my comments without making
anybody wrong. The chairman is faced with a difficult task of trying to
balance a budget. He faces that challenge with limited funds. It is a
terrible job. But I think we ought to look at the process and be
thoughtful and explain to the people out there who are watching us, the
young people here who are watching us, that we can be smart. We can be
compassionate, and we can do that without allowing ourselves to be
fighting among ourselves and trying to make decisions between jobs, the
economy, infrastructure, and taking care of those who need to get back
on their feet. I have no arguments with that.
My mother used to say when unexpected guests came to our house during
dinnertime, you don't turn them away, you just add more water to the
soup, and then you enjoy each other's company.
Congress is a living organism responsible for its past, its present,
and its future.
In the past, according to the GAO, we spent about $150 billion just
on Katrina. In Afghanistan, we spend $325 million a day. And in Iraq,
we spend about $100 million a day. That's almost a $1 billion a day. We
are talking almost a billion dollars in light rail. We can be both
right and smart and compassionate if we do the right thing.
In our budgeting process, we should have a fund for unforeseen
circumstances. We should learn from Katrina. We are looking at about $4
billion in terms of the Army Corps of Engineers. I think our
leaderships need to get together and just say ``we can do this''
without fighting among each other, without making each other wrong,
because that's wrong. In the eyes of the public, they want us to do the
job that needs to get done and have our leadership do that.
So my plea is that we can be fiscally responsible and we can be
compassionate, and we do that with good planning and good budgeting
processes, including having contingency funds that should have been
there. And so we have an opportunity right now to show the public that
we can do all of these things and still come out winners for those who
need the help, and those who need jobs, and still take care of the
Nation's infrastructure needs. That's what America is all about. It's a
can-do spirit without having to fight within our own families.
Madam Chair, I rise in opposition of the underlying bill that
rescinds over one billion dollars in high-speed rail investment to pay
for emergency disaster relief due to storms and flooding in the
Midwest--emergency disaster relief that should be funded through
emergency appropriations.
The Majority appears proud to say they are offsetting the funds
needed to help our citizens in the Midwest recover from the storms and
floods that have devastated their communities.
But what the Majority is doing is really not something to be proud
of.
The Majority is offsetting jobs and offsetting investments into our
Nation's infrastructure.
Put bluntly, Madam Chair, with this bill the Majority is offsetting
our Nation's future.
This bill would specifically rescind $68 million intended for the
Next Generation Passenger Rail Equipment Purchase in my State of
California. During these difficult economic times, rescinding these
funds would result in the loss of as many as 1,892 jobs.
Earlier this year, the President released his annual budget request
for Fiscal Year 2012, which calls for a $53 billion, 6-year investment
in high-speed rail. I applaud the President's vision for a sustainable
future.
Every other industrialized country in the world, except the U.S., has
shifted its intermediate range travel, or 50 to 600 miles, to
[[Page H5041]]
high speed trains. Are they all wrong and only the U.S. right?
Madam Chair, polls show over 70 percent of Californians support the
800-mile, double-track, grade-separated, fast, clean, quiet, and safe
high speed trains that will link San Jose with Sacramento, Los Angeles,
and San Diego. California must lead the Nation into the future.
Let's not forget, Californians voted for $9.95 billion for this
project in 2008, a major reason over $3.7 billion in Federal funding
has been granted for our State's starter project. Those funds, with the
President's proposal and private investments in discussion, could kick-
start the Silicon Valley extension, the first major job destination for
California's system.
The investment proposed by the President directly impacts my
constituents in Silicon Valley. Those funds could bring the California
High-Speed Rail Authority's starter construction project, already-
funded between Bakersfield and Fresno, through the Pacheco Pass to
Silicon Valley.
Benefits to Silicon Valley are profound; mobility, employment,
cleaner air, and international competitiveness.
Mobility: California's high speed rail project connects to many
feeder modes at the Diridon Station, across from the HP Pavilion and
the proposed A's baseball park in the heart of the Silicon Valley. When
finished by 2020, the Diridon Station will be one of the Nation's
largest multimodal hubs, with over 600 trains per day including high
speed rail, BART, CalTrain, the Capital Trains, Altamont Express,
Amtrak, light rail, bus lines, an automated shuttle to the Mineta
International Airport, and more.
Employment: Return-on-investment is the first rule for Silicon
Valley. Research proves investments in high speed rail return more than
twice the cost, in tax revenue, over the life of the projects. And,
with 30% construction unemployment, investment in high-speed rail means
jobs, right now, in our State. Engineers estimate the project will
create over 160,000 construction jobs, for as much as 30 years. An
additional 450,000 jobs will be stimulated by the economic vitality
created around the 26 down-town stations. Those jobs are in California,
for Californians, and cannot be off- shored.
Clean Air: Research indicates over 90% of the future riders currently
use single passenger cars or short-hop airlines, both major polluters.
The electric trains are committed to use non-polluting renewable
energy. The U.S. comprises 4% of the world's population but creates
almost 25% of the world's greenhouse gasses. High speed rail is a
powerful tool the rest of the world is already using to fight climate
change.
Competitiveness: The emerging economic engines in Europe and Asia are
rapidly overtaking the U.S. and California. They move people to work
and products to the market more efficiently. China invested over $80
billion in high speed rail last year alone, over $1 trillion in the
last decade, completing over 7,500 kilometers of their planned 13,000
kilometer system in just 9 years. The EU's dozen lines are similarly
successful, and Japan is also expanding its system dramatically. Many
of those systems are now operated profitably by private companies.
How is it possible for every other industrialized country, and many
emerging economies, to afford state-of-the-art high speed rail systems
and claim that the world's richest country cannot?
Madam Chair, Americans support investments in our county's
transportation infrastructure. A recent Rockefeller Foundation survey
found 91% of the national sample agreeing that, ``our generation has a
responsibility to the future to invest in America's infrastructure--
just as our parents and grandparents did.''
The foresight of our forefathers, who ensured that our highways,
waterways, and railways promoted our economy, must not be lost now. We
too must be good ancestors. High-speed rail is the future. The time to
invest in that future is now.
I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1350
Mr. NUNNELEE. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Mississippi is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. NUNNELEE. I want to thank the subcommittee chairman and the
committee chairman for bringing this bill forward in the way that
they've done it.
I particularly want to thank them for the fact that this bill
provides $1 billion in emergency funding for the Army Corps of
Engineers to repair the damage caused by recent storms and floods and
to prepare for future disaster events. This funding is offset by a
rescission of the remaining emergency high-speed rail funding that was
originally allocated in the stimulus bill.
Our friends on the other side have told us they're not opposed to the
emergency funding because of the storms and floods--they just don't
like the offset. In fact, I've heard it said, We've always done it this
way. When an emergency comes up, when a disaster occurs, we've always
just funded it without a spending offset.
Madam Chairman, on April 26, 2011, the people of Smithville,
Mississippi, had hopes; they had dreams and they had plans. Some of
those plans were budgetary and financial, but on April 27, at
approximately 3 p.m., those plans changed. They changed drastically.
When an historically devastating storm swept through the Southeast,
Smithville, Mississippi, was struck by an EF5 tornado, and was
literally wiped off the face of the Earth.
Let me make it quite clear. The people of Smithville are very
grateful for the outpouring of food, of supplies, of materials that
have come from around the Nation. They're grateful for the outpouring
of help that has come from the various agencies of the Federal and
State governments, but those same people have also redirected plans and
priorities in their own lives. They didn't proceed forward with the
plans that they had the day before.
Madam Chairman, if the men and women in Smithville, Mississippi--many
of whom are living in trailers, many of whom have seen their lives
disrupted and houses destroyed--are making the difficult choices in
their own lives, they have every reason to expect their government to
do the exact same thing.
That's the basis for budgeting: deciding how to allocate available
resources for both planned and unplanned events. They continue to say,
But we've never done it that way.
Madam Chairman, over the past three decades, if we'd had leadership
in this body like that of the leader of this subcommittee and the
chairman of the committee and if we had done it in the way that they're
doing it today, our national debt would be at least $1.3 trillion
lower, and we would not even be in this debate about considering to
raise it.
I want to thank the chairmen for their leadership, and I urge the
passage of this bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. COSTA. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. COSTA. I rise in opposition to the underlying bill and to a
provision of this bill that, I think, is highway robbery, plain and
simple.
Once again, my friends on the other side of the aisle are ignoring an
opportunity to invest in their infrastructure, to create more jobs and
to build a modern, 21st century system of transportation that utilizes
our highways, our air transportation system and, yes, our rail in the
state of high-speed rail systems that are part of America's future.
I support providing, like I think the majority of my colleagues do,
the funding for the Mississippi Delta--we should and we must--as we
have with every area that has experienced a disaster over the history
of our Nation, but there are other ways to provide that funding.
In May of this year, Secretary Ray LaHood--a colleague of ours, a
Republican--announced that $368 million of our tax dollars would go to
California to invest in the San Joaquin Valley in order to construct
the Nation's first true state-of-the-art high-speed rail system. It's a
system in California that the people support. In 2008, Californians
went to the polls, and voted overwhelmingly for a $9 billion bond
measure to construct high-speed rail that will create hundreds of
thousands of jobs throughout the State and that will create economic
opportunities not only in the San Joaquin Valley but throughout
California.
But this provision steals that money and the promise of new jobs
right from the hands of the people it is intended to benefit.
The Great Recession hit my region of the country probably harder than
almost any other place in America, with double-digit unemployment
levels that exceed 20 percent. Too many people can't find jobs to keep
roofs over their heads or can afford decent, healthy diets; but at a
time when everyone in Washington says we should be focused
[[Page H5042]]
on job creation, this provision is the only one I can see that's about
job destruction.
High-speed rail will create over 600,000 construction jobs over the
life of the project over the next 10 to 20 years in California, but
this provision says ``no.''
High-speed rail will create 450,000 permanent jobs over the next 25
years, but this provision just says ``no.''
High-speed rail will spur economic development by connecting our San
Joaquin Valley with the Bay Area and southern California to create a
system that will provide high-speed rail for 80 percent of California's
population, but this provision just says ``no.''
High-speed rail will improve our air quality and will reduce traffic
that clogs our freeways. Of course, this provision just says ``no.''
High-speed rail has proven to be a smart investment over the five
decades that it has been developed in Europe and Asia, but this
provision says ``no'' to America and ``no'' to California.
High-speed rail will ensure that California is competitive well into
the 21st century, but this would attempt to block that area to move
into the next phase of a 21st century system of transportation.
The people of California want high-speed rail--they voted for it and
the jobs that it will create--but this provision, of course, just says
``no.''
Now, we've talked about our current financial situation. These are
difficult times for America. There is no doubt about that. We must
focus on our deficit, and we must come together in a bipartisan
fashion. Yet I submit to any of you to tell me that we have a more
difficult time today than we had in the 1860s, when our Nation was
being torn apart by the Civil War--when inflation was running rampant,
when deficit spending made our situation today look tame by comparison,
when we had the first issue of paper money, and when a lot of people
doubted the credibility of that paper currency.
Yet we had a great Republican President, the Emancipator, during that
time in our Nation's history when our country was being torn apart--who
had boldness and a vision and who had decided we were going to build a
railroad across the country and invest in our Nation even though we
were in that Civil War. That's what he did.
So this provision attempts to take on an effort, notwithstanding the
difficult financial challenges that we have, to in essence say what
President Lincoln said in the 1860s: We can do better. We can build a
transcontinental railroad.
President Obama believes we can get ourselves out of this financial
situation by working together and, at the same time, by investing in
our Nation's infrastructure, just as President Eisenhower did in the
1950s when he decided to embark upon the effort to build interstate
freeway transportation that we all benefit from today.
This provision was slipped into law. So, ladies and gentlemen, I ask
that we defeat this provision and that we keep our faith to the voters
of California.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CRAWFORD. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CRAWFORD. I would like to congratulate and recognize the
tremendous work of the Appropriations Committee in responding to the
flooding disasters during a time of tight budget restrictions. There
were tough choices that had to be made, but I believe the committee
effectively prioritized the needs of the American people.
Madam Chair, my district in Arkansas was severely impacted by the
recent floods that wrought devastation in the Mid-South and the Lower
Mississippi Valley. Preliminary estimates of crop damage surpassed a
half a billion dollars, and communities were evacuated because the
levees struggled to retain the floodwaters.
{time} 1400
The St. Francis levee district suffered the most damage because the
water levels were so high the water enclosed entire areas and almost
completely flooded Cross and Woodroof Counties in my district. In St.
Francis County alone, hundreds of homes were underwater and tens of
thousands of acres of farmland were flooded as well.
In another part of my district, heavy flooding devastated all areas
of Des Arc in Prairie County. The community of Spring Lake, which is
home to 32 families, was completely flooded with several feet of water.
So far, only three of those families have moved back into their homes.
The community of Smith Road, which is home to 18 families, was
completely flooded as well. So far, not one of those families has been
able to move back to their homes. On top of the damage to these
communities, more than 50,000 acres of farmland were flooded. The
entire corn crop was wiped out and most of the rice crop as well.
Mr. Chair, the flood disasters across the Mid-South have taken a huge
toll on our way of life and have touched nearly everyone in my
district. We must ensure we retain the vital funding to the Corps of
Engineers so that we can repair and reinforce our levees so that
citizens in the lower Mississippi Valley and the Mid-South can live in
safety and our economy can recover.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Dold). The gentleman is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Thank you.
This has been an interesting debate. I've been able to sit down here
and listen to a lot of folks on both sides talk about really
investments that we need to make in the United States. I'm glad that
there are some investments that our friends on the other side actually
think are important to the country, because it seems in many ways the
national narrative is that there isn't anything the government can make
investments in that is important for our country.
To hear some Members talk about natural disasters and to hear some
Members talk about the barges going up and down and farmland, there's a
huge subsidy program where billions of Federal dollars are spent to
support farmers. There are obviously dams that need to be built, and
that is Federal money. When it applies to certain Members' districts
where they are actually affected and families affected, it's their
responsibility to come to Washington, D.C., and advocate for those
investments.
I think what you're seeing here on our side is that we have Members
on this side of the aisle who believe that investments need to be made
in our communities, too, and that over 30 years, if you take cities
like Youngstown or Cleveland or Detroit, you will see cities that need
investment. We may not have had a natural disaster, but over the last
30 years we have had an economic disaster where we have had a lack of
private investment. I am rising here to say that high-speed rail can be
a force multiplier in our economic improvement in our community and
across the country.
The gentleman from California just cited the number of jobs, the
billions of dollars that could be invested. In Youngstown, Ohio, we
would be linked up to a Pittsburgh to Cleveland corridor that would
then go over to Toledo and Detroit and that would make its way over to
Chicago. This is essentially connecting the United States of America.
You would be taking an economic region like ours with two major
powerhouses in education and in health care that would be connected by
high-speed rail. In Ohio, we gave away the high-speed rail money, too.
Our Governor gave it away. And there were hundreds of millions of
dollars in private investment that was going to follow the public
investment that needs to be made. But if we're going to connect, if
we're going to try to resuscitate some of these older areas in our
country, high-speed rail is a way to do it.
These are investments that can be made. We can connect the Cleveland
Clinic with the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. We can connect
Case Western Reserve with Carnegie Mellon, and they can partner in
research, get on the train, and help lead some economic development and
commercialization of products. You could take a region of our country
and connect it through high-speed rail.
The problem is--and I will end with this--all of these investments
need to be made. This is the dirty little secret in Washington, D.C.
We're only spending 2 percent of our GDP on our infrastructure, while
China and India are spending 10 percent of their GDP reinvesting back
into their country. We
[[Page H5043]]
will lose the future if we do not make these investments. These are
critical to the competitiveness of the United States. The dams that
need to be built and the high-speed rail and the roads and the combined
sewer and the airports and the ports and the highways and the bridges,
we need to invest in all of these things.
Our country is crumbling. We can't have Members say, We only need to
make this one investment for this one dam because it's in my district
and because I know families who have been hurt. We've got to elevate
ourselves and look at what needs to be done in the entirety of the
whole country and how we are going to compete against China, how we are
going to compete against India, how we are going to be globally
competitive.
All of these investments need to be made, including the economic
development and the private investment that can be drawn in through
high-speed rail.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the chairman, and I really do want
to thank our appropriators. This is a tough, tough business. I
certainly want to thank the ranking member whom I've had the privilege
of working with and thank the chairman as well, because this is a tough
dilemma that we are facing.
I think I come with a unique perspective. I live in hurricane and
flood country. Houston is the site and was the recipient of hundreds of
thousands of Katrina survivors coming in from New Orleans. We have
faced our own ups and downs, most recently with Hurricane Ike, and I
walked the beach with both former President Clinton and former
President Bush when we went down to Galveston and looked at the amazing
devastation.
So many of us were concerned about the tragedy in Joplin, Missouri,
and other places, and then the constant flooding. I have talked to
Members of Congress where there is flooding going on in their district
as we speak. But here is the dilemma that we have and the reason that I
rise to raise the question of the recapturing of already designated
funds and to realize that these are not funds that were just sitting in
a pile unused. These funds are not only already designated--I would
like to say appropriated--high-speed rail dollars but, as well, these
funds will generate thousands of jobs.
As I read the amounts of moneys that were designated, $450 million
were going to be utilized for necessary repairs in New Jersey. That
means that my friends on the floor of the House have made a sacrifice,
and I appreciate that, but high-speed rail is a valuable and necessary
investment in America's future.
I truly believe that there could have been a compromise, where
resources could have been used for the flooding problems in the area
that my colleagues have spoken about, the needy areas, and still leave
an amount that would have been shared for high-speed rail. Let's create
jobs together. That is the restoration of those flood areas, and I
would almost ask the question without knowing as a member of the
authorizing committee for Homeland Security, what other opportunities
might have been in place to be able to utilize those dollars for the
disaster that has occurred.
But I will tell you, it is no doubt as you go across Europe and see
the value of high-speed rail, new technology, that America is far
behind with its high-speed rail investment, the new technology, the new
science, the new kinds of cars that are being produced that will create
jobs, in essence putting the cars together, manufacturing the cars but
then the assembling of the cars now being placed in cities around
America. Those are real jobs, long-term jobs.
The decision that the administration made was a thoughtful decision.
Let me thank Secretary LaHood for understanding the value of high-speed
rail, and I would suggest that the proposal that we have for Texas does
impact rural Texas. It is a proposal for high-speed rail from Houston
to Dallas, going through our rural communities, creating the
opportunities for jobs but creating the opportunities for investment in
the purchase of land and the growth of business. All of that has an
impact in creating jobs.
{time} 1410
That's what we are all here for. We are here to be the rainy day
umbrella for Americans who are in trouble, and as well we're here to
create jobs, which Americans are so desperately in need of.
So I am disappointed that we didn't find the happy balance, and I
believe that we could; that we couldn't measure the amount of resources
that might have been able to be utilized for our friends that have just
experienced a disaster and not completely gut monies that are already
designated, appropriated. It's almost as if we came in and said there's
a pile of cash, and I'm not going to bother to identify what it's
supposed to be used for.
I would hope that there would be a method of reconsideration. These
are fair gentlemen on the floor of the House. I've worked with all of
my colleagues here. And I would just raise the question of why would
we, in essence, zero out high-speed rail, not only for our urban
centers but for our midwestern areas that are desperately in need of
jobs, and for the southern areas that now are looking to the future for
high-speed rail to create jobs and to create the quality, excellent,
superior mobility system that Americans deserve--not the country of
America, but the people of America deserve.
I would argue vigorously for a reconsideration of the funding and the
restructuring of the funding to ensure that we have high-speed rail,
create jobs, and deal with our friends who are in need.
Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of funding for high speed rail,
and the importance of ensuring that money designated for high speed
rail by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is utilized to build
high speed railways.
I must express my concerns about the offset in the amendment offered
by the gentleman from New Jersey. There is no doubt that recent
flooding in the Midwest has devastated communities and greatly impacted
the region's economy.
The Army Corps of Engineers must have the resources to address the
damage wrought by the flooding of the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers,
but I urge my colleagues to consider the source of this funding.
The funding allocated for high speed rail in the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act will do more than update our Nation's
transportation system; high speed rail creates jobs, increases tourism
and is environmentally sustainable.
The Department of Transportation recently awarded $15 million for a
high speed rail project in Texas. The funding was awarded for
engineering and environmental work to develop a high-speed rail
corridor linking Dallas and Houston, where I represent the 18th
Congressional District.
The demand for high speed rail in the state of Texas is significant.
The second most populous state in the Nation, Texas' population is
forecasted to grow by an additional 9.4 million people by 2035, a 38.9
percent increase over projected 2010 levels.
Additionally, the population growth is not going to be spread evenly
across the state. According to the Texas State Data Center, 92 percent
of the 2010-2035 population growth will occur in the existing
metropolitan counties. High speed rail is an investment in the future
of the state.
Receiving this funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act was a tremendous opportunity for Houston, and the entire state of
Texas. The award will allow our state to make critical investments in
infrastructure that will increase mobility and allow for better
commercial and private growth of our cities.
A long time supporter of high speed rail, I supported the Safe
Highways and Infrastructure Preservation Act, and secured $150 million
dollars for the metro solutions light rail project because high-speed
rail projects and other transportation investments represent the
potential to create hundreds of jobs, enhanced mobility, and future
economic development for Texas, and the entire Nation.
I commend the Chairman for recognizing the need for emergency funding
in flood stricken areas. However, there are plenty of places from which
my colleagues can offset funding. I cannot support an amendment that
offsets funding from critical infrastructure projects that create jobs.
I urge my colleagues in the Majority to explain why they would rather
take funding from projects that create middle class jobs than raise
taxes for billionaires.
We must repair the damage done by flooding, but we must also invest
in the future of America. Other nations around the world have shown us
that the future is high speed rail. It
[[Page H5044]]
is our responsibility to make critical investments in infrastructure
projects, like high speed rail.
I urge my colleagues to think about the consequences of continuing to
provide tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans at the expense of middle
class jobs and improvements to our Nation's infrastructure. Offsetting
funding for high speed rail for emergency disaster relief is not a
responsible course of action.
My Republican colleagues constantly talk about creating jobs, yet
time and time again, they turn away from opportunities to do so. The
time for rhetoric has passed; what the country needs, what our
constituents need is action. Offsetting funding for high speed rail,
slashing funds that will create jobs is the wrong action, and I urge my
colleagues to reconsider.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CLARKE of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CLARKE of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I am urging this House to spend
the high-speed rail money on what it's designated for, high-speed rail
projects.
Much of this money, or a good portion of it, was turned down by
Governors of other States. So I'm here as a representative of
Michigan's 13th District, and I want to go on the record right now of
claiming that money because Michigan and metro Detroit, the district
that I represent, we need jobs, jobs that will be created by the high-
speed rail project, jobs that will be created when that high-speed rail
that links Detroit to Chicago is tied into a regional transit system
around metro Detroit. That's going to attract businesses all around
that system. Companies and employers are more likely to stay in
Detroit, move to Detroit when they realize they can have close access
to Chicago and other midwestern areas. But jobs not only as an indirect
result of this transit system and high-speed rail system, but by
manufacturing the rails and the passenger cars that are going to be
used. By creating jobs, that is the most effective way to create a
long-term, resilient, enduring economy. And that's the best way to pay
down our debt.
I understand the point that we should allocate a funding source to
provide funding for the flood victims. Well, I would like to propose
one.
Over the last 10 years, this Congress has authorized the spending of
over $50 billion--that's with a ``b''--in economic aid to Afghanistan.
Each fiscal year, including this current one, we're spending at least
$4 billion on economic aid in Afghanistan. I'm proposing let's just
take a share of the money we're sending overseas to help serve and
protect people in another country, let's redirect American tax dollars
back to serve Americans.
And my fundamental point is this: We need to be more conservative
with our tax dollars. Yes, there are needs all around the world, but
our people need help right here. This budget choice that we're faced
with right now underscores that. This is a choice that we should not
have to make. We shouldn't have to choose between serving flood victims
and providing for long-term jobs that we need in Michigan and metro
Detroit through high-speed rail.
You know, there is another fairness issue. Folks where I live, the
auto capital of the world, they can't afford an automobile because of
the high cost of automobile insurance. They need high-speed rail and
the synergy it will create with mass transit.
So again, I urge you, let's use this money for its intended purpose--
to ultimately create jobs. That's the best way that we can pay down the
Federal debt, and also it's the principle of it. In these tough
economic times, let's redirect American tax dollars to serve Americans.
High-speed rail in America will create jobs and make a difference for
our people, a positive difference.
I yield back the balance of my time.
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:
An amendment by Mr. Matheson of Utah.
An amendment by Mr. Reed of New York.
Amendment No. 65 by Mr. Holt of New Jersey.
Amendment No. 68 by Mr. Royce of California.
Amendment No. 43 by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
An amendment by Mr. Schiff of California.
Amendment No. 48 by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
An amendment by Mr. Shimkus of Illinois.
Amendment No. 47 by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in this series.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Matheson
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Utah (Mr.
Matheson) 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 vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 168,
noes 257, not voting 6, as follows:
[Roll No. 574]
AYES--168
Ackerman
Altmire
Amash
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Chandler
Chu
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanna
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lowey
Lujan
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Paul
Payne
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Richardson
Richmond
Ross (AR)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
NOES--257
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Andrews
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Berkley
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Cicilline
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanabusa
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kaptur
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Langevin
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
[[Page H5045]]
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moore
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Rothman (NJ)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Loretta
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--6
Costa
Ellison
Giffords
Hinchey
Pelosi
Rush
{time} 1442
Ms. MOORE, Messrs. AKIN, ROTHMAN, and STUTZMAN changed their vote
from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. CRITZ, GUTIERREZ, AMASH, BISHOP of Georgia, and DOYLE changed
their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Reed
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Reed) 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 Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 261,
noes 162, not voting 8, as follows:
[Roll No. 575]
AYES--261
Ackerman
Adams
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Barton (TX)
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Benishek
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blumenauer
Bono Mack
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Bucshon
Buerkle
Butterfield
Camp
Canseco
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Costa
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Doyle
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Engel
Farenthold
Farr
Filner
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hanna
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Heinrich
Higgins
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hultgren
Hurt
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Landry
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lowey
Lujan
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Meeks
Mica
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore
Mulvaney
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nugent
Nunes
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Paul
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Roe (TN)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (SC)
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Stark
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Towns
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Walden
Wasserman Schultz
Watt
Waxman
Webster
Welch
West
Wilson (FL)
Woodall
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
NOES--162
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Andrews
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Blackburn
Bonner
Boren
Boustany
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Campbell
Cantor
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chu
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cooper
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (CA)
Davis (KY)
Diaz-Balart
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellmers
Emerson
Eshoo
Fattah
Flake
Fleischmann
Flores
Forbes
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garamendi
Garrett
Gingrey (GA)
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Hall
Hanabusa
Harper
Harris
Hastings (WA)
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Himes
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hunter
Issa
Jenkins
Kelly
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Latham
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Mack
Marino
McCaul
McCotter
McKeon
McNerney
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Pastor (AZ)
Pence
Poe (TX)
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rehberg
Renacci
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rothman (NJ)
Runyan
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Loretta
Scalise
Schilling
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sessions
Shimkus
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Thornberry
Tsongas
Turner
Visclosky
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Waters
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Yoder
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--8
Ellison
Fleming
Giffords
Hinchey
King (IA)
Maloney
Moran
Pelosi
{time} 1447
Mr. WESTMORELAND changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. HONDA, WEBSTER, and CONYERS changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 575 I was unavoidably
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Amendment No. 65 Offered by Mr. Holt
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Holt) 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 Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 164,
noes 261, not voting 6, as follows:
[Roll No. 576]
AYES--164
Ackerman
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berman
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
[[Page H5046]]
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Engel
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hultgren
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Meehan
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
NOES--261
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Berkley
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Cicilline
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Ellmers
Emerson
Eshoo
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
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
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Loretta
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--6
Ellison
Giffords
Hinchey
Hirono
King (IA)
Meeks
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.
{time} 1451
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 576, had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Amendment No. 68 Offered by Mr. Royce
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
(Mr. Royce) 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 Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 136,
noes 291, not voting 4, as follows:
[Roll No. 577]
AYES--136
Adams
Akin
Amash
Bachmann
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bono Mack
Boustany
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Conaway
Costa
Cravaack
Denham
Duncan (TN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Flake
Fleming
Flores
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guthrie
Harris
Hartzler
Hensarling
Herger
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline
Labrador
Landry
Lewis (CA)
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Owens
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Ribble
Roe (TN)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Smith (NJ)
Stearns
Stutzman
Thornberry
Tipton
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Yoder
Young (IN)
NOES--291
Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brooks
Brown (FL)
Bucshon
Buerkle
Butterfield
Camp
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
Cooper
Costello
Courtney
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Edwards
Ellmers
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gonzalez
Granger
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Guinta
Gutierrez
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hultgren
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinley
[[Page H5047]]
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Noem
Olson
Olver
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (SC)
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stark
Stivers
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
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--4
Bilbray
Ellison
Giffords
Hinchey
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.
{time} 1454
Ms. PINGREE of Maine changed her vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 43 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
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 99,
noes 328, not voting 4, as follows:
[Roll No. 578]
AYES--99
Akin
Amash
Bachmann
Benishek
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bono Mack
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Canseco
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Conaway
Cravaack
Duncan (TN)
Flake
Fleming
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Green, Gene
Griffith (VA)
Guthrie
Harris
Hartzler
Hensarling
Herger
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
King (IA)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Long
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McClintock
McHenry
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Nugent
Paul
Pitts
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Quayle
Ribble
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Tipton
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Yoder
Young (IN)
NOES--328
Ackerman
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brooks
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
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
Cohen
Cole
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
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
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Edwards
Ellmers
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gonzalez
Gosar
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guinta
Gutierrez
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hultgren
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Noem
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
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
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Stivers
Sullivan
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--4
Ellison
Giffords
Hinchey
LaTourette
{time} 1458
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Schiff
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
(Mr. Schiff) 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 Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 214,
noes 213, not voting 4, as follows:
[Roll No. 579]
AYES--214
Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Bartlett
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Benishek
Berkley
Berman
Bilbray
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
Coble
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DesJarlais
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
[[Page H5048]]
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibson
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Green, Al
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Harris
Hastings (FL)
Heck
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Manzullo
Marino
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Meeks
Mica
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
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, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Welch
West
Wilson (FL)
Woodall
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
NOES--213
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barton (TX)
Berg
Biggert
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
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Mack
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Towns
Turner
Upton
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Waxman
Webster
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--4
Ellison
Giffords
Green, Gene
Hinchey
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.
{time} 1501
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 579, had I been
present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Amendment No. 48 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
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 114,
noes 309, not voting 8, as follows:
[Roll No. 580]
AYES--114
Adams
Akin
Amash
Bachmann
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bono Mack
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buerkle
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coffman (CO)
Conaway
Cravaack
Culberson
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DesJarlais
Duffy
Duncan (TN)
Fincher
Flake
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Graves (GA)
Griffith (VA)
Hall
Harris
Hartzler
Hayworth
Hensarling
Herger
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kingston
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Latta
Long
Mack
Marino
Matheson
McClintock
McHenry
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Nugent
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rigell
Roe (TN)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Schmidt
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Smith (NE)
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Thornberry
Tipton
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Young (IN)
NOES--309
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
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
Burgess
Burton (IN)
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)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan (SC)
Edwards
Ellmers
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gonzalez
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck
Heinrich
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Landry
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Manzullo
Markey
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
Noem
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Pence
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
[[Page H5049]]
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Rivera
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Stark
Stivers
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
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--8
Ackerman
Andrews
Ellison
Giffords
Hinchey
LaTourette
Marchant
Speier
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.
{time} 1504
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Shimkus
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois
(Mr. Shimkus) 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 is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 297,
noes 130, not voting 4, as follows:
[Roll No. 581]
AYES--297
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Andrews
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Cardoza
Carney
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chandler
Clay
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fattah
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)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heinrich
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hochul
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Inslee
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quayle
Quigley
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Richardson
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Tonko
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
Welch
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--130
Ackerman
Baca
Baldwin
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blumenauer
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Doggett
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heck
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Long
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McDermott
McGovern
McKeon
Meeks
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Peters
Polis
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Schakowsky
Schiff
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Velazquez
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Wu
NOT VOTING--4
Crowley
Ellison
Giffords
Hinchey
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.
{time} 1508
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 47 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 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 is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 187,
noes 239, not voting 5, as follows:
[Roll No. 582]
AYES--187
Adams
Akin
Amash
Bachmann
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Bono Mack
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cravaack
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duffy
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Flake
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Hall
Hanna
Harris
Hayworth
Heinrich
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
[[Page H5050]]
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peters
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reichert
Renacci
Rigell
Rivera
Roe (TN)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Woodall
Yoder
Young (IN)
NOES--239
Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonner
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan (SC)
Edwards
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibson
Gonzalez
Gowdy
Green, Al
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Guthrie
Hanabusa
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lummis
Lynch
Maloney
Marino
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinley
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Noem
Nunnelee
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Rehberg
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
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
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Womack
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--5
Ellison
Giffords
Gutierrez
Hinchey
Marchant
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1512
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now
rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Webster) having assumed the chair, Mr. Dold, 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. 2354)
making appropriations for energy and water development and related
agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other
purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.
____________________