Congressional Record, Volume 158 Issue 86 (Friday, June 8, 2012)

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 86 (Friday, June 8, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H3665-H3690]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2013

General Leave

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and include tabular and extraneous material on H.R. 5882.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania). Is there
objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 679 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 5882.
The Chair appoints the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass) to
preside over the Committee of the Whole.

{time} 0915

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 consideration of the bill
(H.R. 5882) making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2013, and for other purposes, with Mr.
Bass of New Hampshire in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw) and the gentleman from
California (Mr. Honda) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Ladies and gentlemen of the House, we bring before the House today
the 2013 appropriations bill for the Legislative Subcommittee. This is
a bill that spends $3.3 billion, which is approximately 1 percent less
than last year. That's a $33.4 million reduction from last year.
I think all of us know that we are living in difficult economic times
in this country. Taxpayers want to know that when they send their money
to Washington it's being spent wisely. We also know that government
needs money to provide services, but right now government needs
something more. The government needs a sense of discipline to rein in
spending. The government needs a commitment to make sure that every
task of government is accomplished and completed in a most efficient
and most effective manner, more so than ever before.
Our subcommittee took this philosophy to heart, and we had a series
of hearings. We listened to the Agency heads as they came before us and
talked about their needs, their wants, their priorities. We considered
all of that and made some very difficult, some tough, but I think
workable, decisions that allow us to move forward.
I would remind the Members that over the last two cycles we have
reduced spending on the Legislative Branch Subcommittee funding bill by
almost 8 percent, and after we finish this bill, we will have decreased
spending by nearly 9 percent.
So let me just give you all a summary of the highlights of this bill.
First and foremost, we fund the House of Representatives at $1.2
billion. That's the same level as last year. It's the same level that
was requested by the House of Representatives. When people say, ``Well,
why didn't you reduce the House any further?'' I would remind Members
that over the last two cycles we have reduced funding for our own House
by 10.5 percent. The Members' office accounts--the so-called Members'
Representational Accounts--are funded at last year's level. Once again,
when people say, ``Why didn't you cut those again?'' I would remind
Members that we have cut those. The appropriations have been reduced by
13.5 percent for the office accounts. That takes us back to 2008
levels, which is a substantial cut.
We have certainly led by example. We have tightened our belts. We
have reined in spending, and I think we can be proud of that. We also
have language that allows Members, if they don't spend all of their
office account, they can reduce the national debt with their leftover
funds.
The Capitol Police receive about a $20 million increase. That will
allow them to reduce the backlog in training that they have. It will
also alleviate some of the salary shortfalls, because this is a year
where we have the two national conventions and we also have the
inauguration.
The Congressional Budget Office receives a very slight increase to
acquire some much-needed equipment.
The Architect of the Capitol, which we fund, actually receives the
largest reduction, about a 10 percent reduction. The Architect brings
to us a series of projects that he would like to see funded. We can't
fund them all, but we give priority to those that deal with health and
safety issues because so many people work in the Capitol complex, so
many visitors come here every year.
This subcommittee was concerned about the fact that we don't have the
money right now to continue the rehabilitation of the Capitol dome,
that great symbol of freedom that we see every day. We have spent $19
million to begin that rehabilitation project, and it's about $100
million to finish that. I'm confident we'll find the money very shortly
and complete that project.
If you look at the Library of Congress, they receive a very modest
increase.
The Government Accountability Office, the so-called watchdog of this
Congress, they receive a slight increase to allow them to add 21 new
full-time equivalent personnel. That will allow them to continue to
write the reports that they write that tell us whether we're spending
the money wisely or not.

{time} 0920

And I think it will allow them to continue to meet the ever-
increasing demands that we, as Members, place on them.
The Government Printing Office receives a cut, again, for the third
straight year. They're doing a much better job of dealing with binding
and printing of the information that they provide for us.
So, in a nutshell, Mr. Chairman, that summarizes the bill. I want to
be sure and say thank you to all the members of the subcommittee, both
the Democrats and Republicans, for the work

[[Page H3666]]

that they put in to bring this bill before us today.
I want to say a special word of thanks to my colleague, Mr. Honda,
the ranking member. I thank him for his bipartisan spirit as we work
together to fund these agencies that we depend on every day.
And, finally, I certainly want to express the gratitude of all the
members of the committee to our staff, both the Democratic side and the
Republican side, for the tireless effort they put in to bring this bill
before us.
So with that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H3667]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH08JN12.001

[[Page H3668]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH08JN12.002

[[Page H3669]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH08JN12.003

[[Page H3670]]

Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I am pleased we are considering the fiscal year 2013 Legislative
Branch appropriations bill. Chairman Crenshaw has been collegial in the
development of this bill, and I appreciate his willingness to accept
our input throughout the process.
The chairman's mark before us funds the legislative branch at $3.3
billion, a cut of 1 percent from fiscal year 2012, and this does not
include Senate items. Even with a lower allocation, Chairman Crenshaw
was able to level-fund and even increase several areas important to the
operation of the legislative branch. The House, overall, is held flat
at $1.225 billion. The Capitol Police will receive $360 million, a
nearly 6 percent increase. The Congressional Budget Office is funded at
$44.3 million, at $493,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level. And the
Government Accountability Office is funded at $519.8 million--$8.5
million, or nearly 2 percent, above fiscal year 2012.
While the levels are adequate for some agencies, the allocation
required the subcommittee to propose no funding to continue the
rehabilitation of the Capitol dome, this Nation's great symbol of
democracy. This bill's lack of funding for this critical project is a
direct result of the House Republicans' unilateral decision to cast
aside the funding levels agreed to under the Budget Control Act. The
majority's decision required the Appropriations Committee to absorb $19
billion in reductions across all of the bills.
One issue that I continue to be concerned about is the House General
Counsel's defense of the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA.
With the limited funding available for the House of Representatives, I
think there are far more worthy uses of the precious taxpayers'
resources than funding contracts for outside counsel to defend the
highly controversial--and two U.S. district courts and a Federal
appellate court have ruled unconstitutional--DOMA. I am concerned that
the scarce resources available to the House will continue to be
siphoned off in order to defend a law that continues to be found
unconstitutional in the courts.
I am privileged to represent Silicon Valley, the center of
technological innovation in this country. Since I joined the
subcommittee, I have tried to push the House and other agencies to
explore technological solutions to issues such as transparency,
evacuation management, and data storage.
As you probably know, Federal agencies, including our own in the leg
branch, can be slow to change and develop new technologies. This is
mentioned in the report, which includes language on the issue of bulk-
data downloads of legislative information, something I requested and
secured language about in this bill in fiscal year 2009.
This effort is now being championed by leadership on both sides of
the aisle, as it is a way to increase transparency by allowing the
public to easily download and analyze government data. There are some
concerns about cost and the ability to authenticate the data that the
language in the report tries to address. I think, however, that these
are relatively simple matters to overcome, as data is already being
compiled in a format that can be easily distributed, and technology
support staff has indicated that only a simple procedure is needed to
make the bulk data available.
Furthermore, the GPO already employs an authentication standard for
its own accessible bulk data through its FDSys, or the Federal Digital
System, Web site that we could also utilize.
The House majority recently announced that it will immediately create
a task force, as described in this bill, to expedite a report and
implementation of public access to bulk legislative data. While I
believe the time to implement this is now, I expect to be included in
these efforts as ranking member of the subcommittee and a longtime
advocate since before 2009.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I want to reiterate my appreciation for
the chairman's effort to work with my side of the aisle on issues where
there was agreement. I am glad to see the congressional support
Agencies, including the Congressional Budget Office, the Government
Accountability Office, and the Congressional Research Service, are
adequately funded.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the hardworking professional staff that
has helped to craft this bill and assisted the subcommittee in a
bipartisan manner over the course of the year: Liz Dawson, Chuck Turner
and Jenny Kesiah on the majority side, along with Michael Kirlin with
Chairman Crenshaw's personal office, and Shalanda Young and Danny
Cromer on our side of the aisle, along with Ken Takeda and Mark
Nakamoto from my office.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lungren), the chairman of the House Administration
Committee.
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 5882, the Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act. As chairman of the Committee on House
Administration, which oversees many of the agencies affected by these
appropriations, I am pleased we are continuing to uphold our pledge to
reduce government spending, while providing the necessary security and
support for each Member to fulfill their constitutional
responsibilities.
Since taking control of the House, we've worked diligently to
identify and eliminate wasteful spending and streamline and improve
operations by using technology, thereby saving taxpayers millions.
We've also worked to reduce spending on the production and printing of
unnecessary publications, including an amendment offered by my
colleague, Mr. Harper, to reduce the number of copies of the U.S. Code
printed for the House.
With the support of the Appropriations Committee, we will further
improve House technology through an advancement of programs utilized by
the Law Revision Counsel and the Office of the Legislative Counsel that
modernize and improve their capabilities.
Utilizing new technologies, we will continue to increase the accuracy
and accessibility of legislative proposals and changes to the U.S.
Code. As the people's House, it is imperative we continue to use
technological innovations to foster transparency and provide our
constituents with timely and accurate information.
I'd like to thank the appropriators for their support in providing
the resources necessary to enhance and streamline House operations and
reduce overall expenses. And later, when we have an amendment on the
floor that once again tries to make us go backward in our effort to get
rid of waste produced in this House, I will stand and oppose that.
We have had a successful program of converting waste to energy, one
of the most innovative programs in the entire country. We've convinced
the other side of the Capitol, the Senate, to join us. We have
thousands of tons of waste now not going into landfills but being
converted to clean energy, one of the best examples of a technology
that the EPA says is one of the cleanest in the country. We ought to be
thankful for that. We ought not to go backwards. We ought to
understand.
And in doing that, we have also given best or better customer service
to those who utilize the various restaurants on the campus here in the
Capitol. Those are things that we ought to be proud of and not be shy
about the successes that we have had.
So I'll still be here on the floor to talk about one of those
amendments, as we did just a year ago.

{time} 0930

Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Washington, the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on
Appropriations, Mr. Dicks.
Mr. DICKS. First of all, I would like to pass along my appreciation
to Chairman Crenshaw and to Ranking Member Honda for their willingness
to work together in a very bipartisan manner. I also would like to
commend the staffs of the majority and minority for their efforts in
bringing this bill where we are today.
This bill's allocation is just slightly below last year's and is well
within the range of what would have been expected had the majority
stuck to the discretionary number agreed to in the

[[Page H3671]]

Budget Control Act. But for the most part, this bill has been protected
from Ryan budget austerity.
Many programs and agencies important to the operation of Congress
have been spared from harmful cuts. Support agencies, such as the
Congressional Budget Office, the Congressional Research Service, and
the Government Accountability Office are all adequately funded, which
will allow them to continue operating without further reductions in
staff or services. However, it is important to note that not every
account has been spared.
As we all know, the Architect of the Capitol is in the middle of an
extensive restoration effort. This bill's allocation does not provide
the funds needed to begin the second phase of that effort but, rather,
cuts the Architect of the Capitol significantly below last year's
funding level. As I'd mentioned during the committee markup, I'd rather
the dome remain a monument to our Nation's greatness than become a
symbol for shortsighted austerity.
Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CRENSHAW. I think this is a good bill. I think it has been
adequately explained.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Fiscal
Year 2013 Legislative Branch Appropriations bill.
Although this measure is the smallest of the thirteen annual
appropriations bills, it plays a giant role by funding some of the most
vital areas of the United States Government.
In fact, the Legislative Branch Subcommittee is responsible for more
than just the operations of the United States Congress.
The Subcommittee also is responsible for the preservation of our
cultural heritage by the Library of Congress; the objective analysis of
our budget and economic decisions by the Congressional Budget Office;
the independent evaluation of the Federal Government's performance by
the Government Accountability Office; and the publishing and
dissemination of government information by the Government Printing
Office.
In short, none of us here in Congress could represent our
constituents effectively and make informed decisions in the national
interest without the resources provided for in this bill.
As a Member of this Subcommittee, I want to commend Chairman Crenshaw
and Ranking Member Honda for working together in a bipartisan fashion
to craft this legislation.
I know that both of you were dealt a difficult hand with your
Subcommittee allocation. Nevertheless, I am pleased that you were able
to either level fund or provide small increases in the budgets of most
accounts.
Many of the accounts under this Subcommittee's jurisdiction already
have been cut to the bone. Further significant reductions would have
seriously jeopardized their missions--some of which include finding
cost savings and efficiencies throughout the government--and would have
had an adverse impact on the services that we in Congress provide to
our constituents.
I am glad that we were able to hold the line and prevent further
harm.
I also am grateful by you and your staff's willingness to engage on
the issue of the security of our District Offices and our District
Staff.
I am especially pleased by the inclusion of report language I
sponsored along with Representative LaTourette directing the House
Sergeant at Arms, in coordination with the United States Capitol
Police, to develop a series of recommendations and best practices on
security features or enhancements for House District Offices to be made
available to new and returning Members prior to the start of the 113th
Congress.
Again, I want to thank Chairman Crenshaw and Ranking Member Honda on
your work on this bill.
The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read for amendment under
the 5-minute rule.
The text of the bill is as follows:

H.R. 5882

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Legislative
Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013, and for
other purposes, namely:

TITLE I--LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Salaries and Expenses

For salaries and expenses of the House of Representatives,
$1,225,680,000, as follows:

House Leadership Offices

For salaries and expenses, as authorized by law,
$23,275,773, including: Office of the Speaker, $6,942,770,
including $25,000 for official expenses of the Speaker;
Office of the Majority Floor Leader, $2,277,595, including
$10,000 for official expenses of the Majority Leader; Office
of the Minority Floor Leader, $7,432,812, including $10,000
for official expenses of the Minority Leader; Office of the
Majority Whip, including the Chief Deputy Majority Whip,
$1,971,050, including $5,000 for official expenses of the
Majority Whip; Office of the Minority Whip, including the
Chief Deputy Minority Whip, $1,524,951, including $5,000 for
official expenses of the Minority Whip; Republican
Conference, $1,572,788; Democratic Caucus, $1,553,807.
Provided, That such amount for salaries and expenses shall
remain available from January 3, 2013 until January 3, 2014.

Members' Representational Allowances

Including Members' Clerk Hire, Official Expenses of Members, and
Official Mail

For Members' representational allowances, including
Members' clerk hire, official expenses, and official mail,
$573,939,282.

Committee Employees

Standing Committees, Special and Select

For salaries and expenses of standing committees, special
and select, authorized by House resolutions, $125,964,870:
Provided, That such amount shall remain available for such
salaries and expenses until December 31, 2014.

Committee on Appropriations

For salaries and expenses of the Committee on
Appropriations, $26,665,785, including studies and
examinations of executive agencies and temporary personal
services for such committee, to be expended in accordance
with section 202(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of
1946 and to be available for reimbursement to agencies for
services performed: Provided, That such amount shall remain
available for such salaries and expenses until December 31,
2014.

Salaries, Officers and Employees

For compensation and expenses of officers and employees, as
authorized by law, $173,669,084, including: for salaries and
expenses of the Office of the Clerk, including not more than
$23,000, of which not more than $20,000 is for the Family
Room, for official representation and reception expenses,
$22,370,252; for salaries and expenses of the Office of the
Sergeant at Arms, including the position of Superintendent of
Garages and the Office of Emergency Management, and including
not more than $3,000 for official representation and
reception expenses, $12,585,000, of which $5,463,251 shall
remain available until expended; for salaries and expenses of
the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer including not
more than $3,000 for official representation and reception
expenses, $116,782,000, of which $3,937,000 shall remain
available until expended; for salaries and expenses of the
Office of the Inspector General, $4,692,000; for salaries and
expenses of the Office of General Counsel, $1,415,000; for
the Office of the Chaplain, $179,000; for salaries and
expenses of the Office of the Parliamentarian, including the
Parliamentarian, $2,000 for preparing the Digest of Rules,
and not more than $1,000 for official representation and
reception expenses, $2,060,000; for salaries and expenses of
the Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the House,
$3,258,000; for salaries and expenses of the Office of the
Legislative Counsel of the House, $8,814,000; for salaries
and expenses of the Office of Interparliamentary Affairs,
$859,000; for other authorized employees, $484,832; and for
salaries and expenses of the Historian, $170,000.

Allowances and Expenses

For allowances and expenses as authorized by House
resolution or law, $302,165,206, including: supplies,
materials, administrative costs and Federal tort claims,
$3,696,118; official mail for committees, leadership offices,
and administrative offices of the House, $201,000; Government
contributions for health, retirement, Social Security, and
other applicable employee benefits, $272,548,016; Business
Continuity and Disaster Recovery, $17,112,072, of which
$5,000,000 shall remain available until expended; transition
activities for new members and staff, $4,125,000; Wounded
Warrior Program $2,175,000, to remain available until
expended; Office of Congressional Ethics, $1,548,000; and
miscellaneous items including purchase, exchange,
maintenance, repair and operation of House motor vehicles,
interparliamentary receptions, and gratuities to heirs of
deceased employees of the House, $760,000.

Administrative Provisions

Sec. 101. (a) Requiring Amounts Remaining in Members'
Representational Allowances To Be Used for Deficit Reduction
or To Reduce the Federal Debt.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, any amounts appropriated under this Act for
``HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES--Salaries and Expenses--Members'
Representational Allowances'' shall be available only for
fiscal year 2013. Any amount remaining after all payments are
made under such allowances for fiscal year 2013 shall be
deposited in the Treasury and used for deficit reduction (or,
if there is no Federal budget deficit after all such payments
have been made, for reducing the Federal debt, in such manner
as the Secretary of the Treasury considers appropriate).
(b) Regulations.--The Committee on House Administration of
the House of Representatives shall have authority to
prescribe regulations to carry out this section.

[[Page H3672]]

(c) Definition.--As used in this section, the term ``Member
of the House of Representatives'' means a Representative in,
or a Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress.
Sec. 102. (a) Section 109(a) of the Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 1998 (2 U.S.C. 95d(a)) is amended by
striking the period at the end and inserting the following:
``, and for reimbursing the Secretary of Labor for any
amounts paid with respect to unemployment compensation
payments for former employees of the House.''.
(b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with
respect to fiscal year 2013 and each succeeding fiscal year.
Sec. 103. (a) Section 101(c)(2) of the Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 1993 (2 U.S.C. 95b(c)(2)) is amended by
striking ``and `Allowances and Expenses' '' and inserting the
following: `` `Allowances and Expenses', the heading for any
joint committee under the heading `Joint Items' (to the
extent that amounts appropriated for the joint committee are
disbursed by the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of
Representatives), and `Office of the Attending Physician' ''.
(b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with
respect to fiscal year 2013 and each succeeding fiscal year.

oversight of office of inspector general

Sec. 104. (a) Oversight.--The Office of the Inspector
General of the House of Representatives shall provide the
Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives
with a copy of each audit and investigative report the Office
produces, and shall consult regularly with such Committee
with respect to the Office's operations.
(b) Effective Date.--This section shall apply with respect
to fiscal year 2013 and each succeeding fiscal year.

JOINT ITEMS

For Joint Committees, as follows:

Joint Economic Committee

For salaries and expenses of the Joint Economic Committee,
$4,203,000, to be disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate.

Joint Committee on Taxation

For salaries and expenses of the Joint Committee on
Taxation, $10,004,000, to be disbursed by the Chief
Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives.
For other joint items, as follows:

Office of the Attending Physician

For medical supplies, equipment, and contingent expenses of
the emergency rooms, and for the Attending Physician and his
assistants, including: (1) an allowance of $2,175 per month
to the Attending Physician; (2) an allowance of $1,300 per
month to the Senior Medical Officer; (3) an allowance of $725
per month each to three medical officers while on duty in the
Office of the Attending Physician; (4) an allowance of $725
per month to 2 assistants and $580 per month each not to
exceed 11 assistants on the basis heretofore provided for
such assistants; and (5) $2,603,000 for reimbursement to the
Department of the Navy for expenses incurred for staff and
equipment assigned to the Office of the Attending Physician,
which shall be advanced and credited to the applicable
appropriation or appropriations from which such salaries,
allowances, and other expenses are payable and shall be
available for all the purposes thereof, $3,467,000, to be
disbursed by the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of
Representatives.

Office of Congressional Accessibility Services

Salaries and Expenses

For salaries and expenses of the Office of Congressional
Accessibility Services, $1,363,000, to be disbursed by the
Secretary of the Senate.

CAPITOL POLICE

salaries

For salaries of employees of the Capitol Police, including
overtime, hazardous duty pay, and Government contributions
for health, retirement, social security, professional
liability insurance, and other applicable employee benefits,
$297,133,000, to be disbursed by the Chief of the Capitol
Police or his designee.

general expenses

For necessary expenses of the Capitol Police, including
motor vehicles, communications and other equipment, security
equipment and installation, uniforms, weapons, supplies,
materials, training, medical services, forensic services,
stenographic services, personal and professional services,
the employee assistance program, the awards program, postage,
communication services, travel advances, relocation of
instructor and liaison personnel for the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center, and not more than $5,000 to be
expended on the certification of the Chief of the Capitol
Police in connection with official representation and
reception expenses, $63,004,000, of which $2,700,000 shall
remain available until September 30, 2015 to be disbursed by
the Chief of the Capitol Police or his designee: Provided,
That, notwithstanding any other provision of law, the cost of
basic training for the Capitol Police at the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center for fiscal year 2013 shall be
paid by the Secretary of Homeland Security from funds
available to the Department of Homeland Security.

Administrative Provisions

(including transfer of funds)

authority to transfer amounts between salaries and general expenses

Sec. 1001. During fiscal year 2013 and any succeeding
fiscal year, the Capitol Police may transfer amounts
appropriated for the fiscal year between the category for
salaries and the category for general expenses, upon the
approval of the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and Senate.

funds available for workers compensation payments

Sec. 1002. (a) In General.--Available balances of expired
United States Capitol Police appropriations shall be
available to the Capitol Police to make the deposit to the
credit of the Employees' Compensation Fund required by
section 8147(b) of title 5, United States Code.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1018 of the Legislative
Branch Appropriations Act, 2003 (2 U.S.C. 1907) is amended by
striking subsection (f).
(c) Effective Date.--This section shall apply with respect
to appropriations for fiscal year 2013 and each fiscal year
thereafter.

OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE

Salaries and Expenses

For salaries and expenses of the Office of Compliance, as
authorized by section 305 of the Congressional Accountability
Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1385), $3,817,000, of which $527,500
shall remain available until September 30, 2014: Provided,
That not more than $500 may be expended on the certification
of the Executive Director of the Office of Compliance in
connection with official representation and reception
expenses.

Administrative Provision

Sec. 1101. (a) The second sentence of section 415(a) of the
Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1415(a))
is amended to read as follows: ``There are appropriated for
such account such sums as may be necessary to pay such awards
and settlements.''.
(b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with
respect to fiscal year 2013 and each succeeding fiscal year.

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE

Salaries and Expenses

For salaries and expenses necessary for operation of the
Congressional Budget Office, including not more than $6,000
to be expended on the certification of the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office in connection with official
representation and reception expenses, $44,280,000.

Administrative Provision

acceptance of voluntary student services

Sec. 1201. (a) Section 3111(e) of title 5, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``(e)'' and inserting ``(e)(1)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) In this section, the term `agency' includes the
Congressional Budget Office, except that in the case of the
Congressional Budget Office--
``(A) any student who provides voluntary service in
accordance with this section shall be considered an employee
of the Congressional Budget Office for purposes of section
203 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (relating to the
level of confidentiality of budget data); and
``(B) the authority granted to the Office of Personnel
Management under this section shall be exercised by the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office.''.
(b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with
respect to fiscal year 2013 and each succeeding fiscal year.

ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

General Administration

For salaries for the Architect of the Capitol, and other
personal services, at rates of pay provided by law; for
surveys and studies in connection with activities under the
care of the Architect of the Capitol; for all necessary
expenses for the general and administrative support of the
operations under the Architect of the Capitol including the
Botanic Garden; electrical substations of the Capitol, Senate
and House office buildings, and other facilities under the
jurisdiction of the Architect of the Capitol; including
furnishings and office equipment; including not more than
$5,000 for official reception and representation expenses, to
be expended as the Architect of the Capitol may approve; for
purchase or exchange, maintenance, and operation of a
passenger motor vehicle, $90,755,000, of which $999,000 shall
remain available until September 30, 2017.

Capitol Building

For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of the Capitol, $28,591,000, of which $3,500,000
shall remain available until September 30, 2017.

Capitol Grounds

For all necessary expenses for care and improvement of
grounds surrounding the Capitol, the Senate and House office
buildings, and the Capitol Power Plant, $17,152,000, of which
$7,300,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2017.

House Office Buildings

For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of the House office buildings, $83,964,000, of
which $19,362,000 shall remain available until September 30,
2017.
In addition, for a payment to the House Historic Buildings
Revitalization Trust Fund, $30,000,000, shall remain
available until expended.

[[Page H3673]]

Capitol Power Plant

For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of the Capitol Power Plant; lighting, heating,
power (including the purchase of electrical energy) and water
and sewer services for the Capitol, Senate and House office
buildings, Library of Congress buildings, and the grounds
about the same, Botanic Garden, Senate garage, and air
conditioning refrigeration not supplied from plants in any of
such buildings; heating the Government Printing Office and
Washington City Post Office, and heating and chilled water
for air conditioning for the Supreme Court Building, the
Union Station complex, the Thurgood Marshall Federal
Judiciary Building and the Folger Shakespeare Library,
expenses for which shall be advanced or reimbursed upon
request of the Architect of the Capitol and amounts so
received shall be deposited into the Treasury to the credit
of this appropriation, $108,616,000, of which $23,404,000
shall remain available until September 30, 2017: Provided,
That not more than $9,400,000 of the funds credited or to be
reimbursed to this appropriation as herein provided shall be
available for obligation during fiscal year 2013.

Library Buildings and Grounds

For all necessary expenses for the mechanical and
structural maintenance, care and operation of the Library
buildings and grounds, $30,660,000, of which $4,900,000 shall
remain available until September 30, 2017.

Capitol Police Buildings, Grounds, and Security

For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of buildings, grounds and security enhancements of
the United States Capitol Police, wherever located, the
Alternate Computer Facility, and AOC security operations,
$20,867,000, of which $2,840,000 shall remain available until
September 30, 2017.

Botanic Garden

For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of the Botanic Garden and the nurseries, buildings,
grounds, and collections; and purchase and exchange,
maintenance, repair, and operation of a passenger motor
vehicle; all under the direction of the Joint Committee on
the Library, $12,140,000: Provided, That of the amount made
available under this heading, the Architect of the Capitol
may obligate and expend such sums as may be necessary for the
maintenance, care and operation of the National Garden
established under section 307E of the Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 1989 (2 U.S.C. 2146), upon vouchers
approved by the Architect of the Capitol or a duly authorized
designee.

Capitol Visitor Center

For all necessary expenses for the operation of the Capitol
Visitor Center, $21,276,000.

Administrative Provision

funds available for workers compensation payments

Sec. 1301. (a) In General.--Available balances of expired
Architect of the Capitol appropriations shall be available to
the Architect of the Capitol to make the deposit to the
credit of the Employees' Compensation Fund required by
section 8147(b) of title 5, United States Code.
(b) Effective Date.--This section shall apply with respect
to appropriations for fiscal year 2013 and each fiscal year
thereafter.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Salaries and Expenses

For necessary expenses of the Library of Congress not
otherwise provided for, including development and maintenance
of the Library's catalogs; custody and custodial care of the
Library buildings; special clothing; cleaning, laundering and
repair of uniforms; preservation of motion pictures in the
custody of the Library; operation and maintenance of the
American Folklife Center in the Library; activities under the
Civil Rights History Project Act of 2009; preparation and
distribution of catalog records and other publications of the
Library; hire or purchase of one passenger motor vehicle; and
expenses of the Library of Congress Trust Fund Board not
properly chargeable to the income of any trust fund held by
the Board, $422,024,000, of which not more than $6,000,000
shall be derived from collections credited to this
appropriation during fiscal year 2013, and shall remain
available until expended, under the Act of June 28, 1902
(chapter 1301; 32 Stat. 480; 2 U.S.C. 150) and not more than
$350,000 shall be derived from collections during fiscal year
2013 and shall remain available until expended for the
development and maintenance of an international legal
information database and activities related thereto:
Provided, That the Library of Congress may not obligate or
expend any funds derived from collections under the Act of
June 28, 1902, in excess of the amount authorized for
obligation or expenditure in appropriations Acts: Provided
further, That the total amount available for obligation shall
be reduced by the amount by which collections are less than
$6,350,000: Provided further, That of the total amount
appropriated, not more than $12,000 may be expended, on the
certification of the Librarian of Congress, in connection
with official representation and reception expenses for the
Overseas Field Offices: Provided further, That of the total
amount appropriated, $7,068,000 shall remain available until
expended for the digital collections and educational
curricula program.

salaries and expenses

For all necessary expenses of the Copyright Office,
$52,136,000, of which not more than $28,029,000, to remain
available until expended, shall be derived from collections
credited to this appropriation during fiscal year 2013 under
section 708(d) of title 17, United States Code: Provided,
That the Copyright Office may not obligate or expend any
funds derived from collections under such section, in excess
of the amount authorized for obligation or expenditure in
appropriations Acts: Provided further, That not more than
$5,582,000 shall be derived from collections during fiscal
year 2013 under sections 111(d)(2), 119(b)(2), 803(e), 1005,
and 1316 of such title: Provided further, That the total
amount available for obligation shall be reduced by the
amount by which collections are less than $33,611,000:
Provided further, That not more than $100,000 of the amount
appropriated is available for the maintenance of an
``International Copyright Institute'' in the Copyright Office
of the Library of Congress for the purpose of training
nationals of developing countries in intellectual property
laws and policies: Provided further, That not more than
$4,250 may be expended, on the certification of the Librarian
of Congress, in connection with official representation and
reception expenses for activities of the International
Copyright Institute and for copyright delegations, visitors,
and seminars: Provided further, That notwithstanding any
provision of chapter 8 of title 17, United States Code, any
amounts made available under this heading which are
attributable to royalty fees and payments received by the
Copyright Office pursuant to sections 111, 119, and chapter
10 of such title may be used for the costs incurred in the
administration of the Copyright Royalty Judges program, with
the exception of the costs of salaries and benefits for the
Copyright Royalty Judges and staff under section 802(e).

Congressional Research Service

salaries and expenses

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 203 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2
U.S.C. 166) and to revise and extend the Annotated
Constitution of the United States of America, $107,668,000:
Provided, That no part of such amount may be used to pay any
salary or expense in connection with any publication, or
preparation of material therefor (except the Digest of Public
General Bills), to be issued by the Library of Congress
unless such publication has obtained prior approval of either
the Committee on House Administration of the House of
Representatives or the Committee on Rules and Administration
of the Senate.

Books for the Blind and Physically Handicapped

salaries and expenses

For salaries and expenses to carry out the Act of March 3,
1931 (chapter 400; 46 Stat. 1487; 2 U.S.C. 135a),
$50,775,000: Provided, That of the total amount appropriated,
$650,000 shall be available to contract to provide newspapers
to blind and physically handicapped residents at no cost to
the individual.

Administrative Provision

reimbursable and revolving fund activities

Sec. 1401. (a) In General.--For fiscal year 2013, the
obligational authority of the Library of Congress for the
activities described in subsection (b) may not exceed
$178,958,000.
(b) Activities.--The activities referred to in subsection
(a) are reimbursable and revolving fund activities that are
funded from sources other than appropriations to the Library
in appropriations Acts for the legislative branch.

authority to transfer amounts between categories of appropriations

Sec. 1402. (a) In General.--During fiscal year 2013 and any
succeeding fiscal year, the Librarian of Congress may
transfer amounts appropriated for the fiscal year between the
categories of appropriations provided under law for the
Library of Congress for the fiscal year, upon the approval of
the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and Senate.
(b) Limitation.--Not more than 10 percent of the total
amount of funds appropriated to the account under any
category of appropriations for the Library of Congress for a
fiscal year may be transferred from that account by all
transfers made under subsection (a).

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

Congressional Printing and Binding

(including transfer of funds)

For authorized printing and binding for the Congress and
the distribution of Congressional information in any format;
expenses necessary for preparing the semimonthly and session
index to the Congressional Record, as authorized by law
(section 902 of title 44, United States Code); printing and
binding of Government publications authorized by law to be
distributed to Members of Congress; and printing, binding,
and distribution of Government publications authorized by law
to be distributed without charge to the recipient,
$83,632,000: Provided, That this appropriation shall not be
available for paper copies of the permanent edition of the
Congressional Record for individual Representatives, Resident
Commissioners or Delegates authorized under section 906 of
title 44, United

[[Page H3674]]

States Code: Provided further, That this appropriation shall
be available for the payment of obligations incurred under
the appropriations for similar purposes for preceding fiscal
years: Provided further, That notwithstanding the 2-year
limitation under section 718 of title 44, United States Code,
none of the funds appropriated or made available under this
Act or any other Act for printing and binding and related
services provided to Congress under chapter 7 of title 44,
United States Code, may be expended to print a document,
report, or publication after the 27-month period beginning on
the date that such document, report, or publication is
authorized by Congress to be printed, unless Congress
reauthorizes such printing in accordance with section 718 of
title 44, United States Code: Provided further, That any
unobligated or unexpended balances in this account or
accounts for similar purposes for preceding fiscal years may
be transferred to the Government Printing Office revolving
fund for carrying out the purposes of this heading, subject
to the approval of the Committees on Appropriations of the
House of Representatives and Senate: Provided further, That
notwithstanding sections 901, 902, and 906 of title 44,
United States Code, this appropriation may be used to prepare
indexes to the Congressional Record on only a monthly and
session basis.

Office of Superintendent of Documents

salaries and expenses

(including transfer of funds)

For expenses of the Office of Superintendent of Documents
necessary to provide for the cataloging and indexing of
Government publications and their distribution to the public,
Members of Congress, other Government agencies, and
designated depository and international exchange libraries as
authorized by law, $34,728,000: Provided, That amounts of not
more than $2,000,000 from current year appropriations are
authorized for producing and disseminating Congressional
serial sets and other related publications for fiscal years
2011 and 2012 to depository and other designated libraries:
Provided further, That any unobligated or unexpended balances
in this account or accounts for similar purposes for
preceding fiscal years may be transferred to the Government
Printing Office revolving fund for carrying out the purposes
of this heading, subject to the approval of the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and Senate.

Government Printing Office Revolving Fund

For payment to the Government Printing Office Revolving
Fund, $4,096,000, to remain available until expended, for
information technology development and facilities repair:
Provided, That the Government Printing Office is hereby
authorized to make such expenditures, within the limits of
funds available and in accordance with law, and to make such
contracts and commitments without regard to fiscal year
limitations as provided by section 9104 of title 31, United
States Code, as may be necessary in carrying out the programs
and purposes set forth in the budget for the current fiscal
year for the Government Printing Office revolving fund:
Provided further, That not more than $7,500 may be expended
on the certification of the Public Printer in connection with
official representation and reception expenses: Provided
further, That the revolving fund shall be available for the
hire or purchase of not more than 12 passenger motor
vehicles: Provided further, That expenditures in connection
with travel expenses of the advisory councils to the Public
Printer shall be deemed necessary to carry out the provisions
of title 44, United States Code: Provided further, That the
revolving fund shall be available for temporary or
intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5,
United States Code, but at rates for individuals not more
than the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay for
level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such
title: Provided further, That activities financed through the
revolving fund may provide information in any format:
Provided further, That the revolving fund and the funds
provided under the headings ``Office of Superintendent of
Documents'' and ``Salaries and Expenses'' may not be used for
contracted security services at GPO's passport facility in
the District of Columbia.

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

Salaries and Expenses

For necessary expenses of the Government Accountability
Office, including not more than $12,500 to be expended on the
certification of the Comptroller General of the United States
in connection with official representation and reception
expenses; temporary or intermittent services under section
3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, but at rates for
individuals not more than the daily equivalent of the annual
rate of basic pay for level IV of the Executive Schedule
under section 5315 of such title; hire of one passenger motor
vehicle; advance payments in foreign countries in accordance
with section 3324 of title 31, United States Code; benefits
comparable to those payable under sections 901(5), (6), and
(8) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4081(5),
(6), and (8)); and under regulations prescribed by the
Comptroller General of the United States, rental of living
quarters in foreign countries, $519,802,000: Provided, That,
in addition, $24,318,000 of payments received under sections
782, 3521, and 9105 of title 31, United States Code, shall be
available without fiscal year limitation: Provided further,
That this appropriation and appropriations for administrative
expenses of any other department or agency which is a member
of the National Intergovernmental Audit Forum or a Regional
Intergovernmental Audit Forum shall be available to finance
an appropriate share of either Forum's costs as determined by
the respective Forum, including necessary travel expenses of
non-Federal participants: Provided further, That payments
hereunder to the Forum may be credited as reimbursements to
any appropriation from which costs involved are initially
financed.

Administrative Provision

funds available for workers compensation payments

Sec. 1501. (a) In General.--Available balances of expired
Government Accountability Office appropriations shall be
available to the Government Accountability Office to make the
deposit to the credit of the Employees' Compensation Fund
required by section 8147(b) of title 5, United States Code.
(b) Effective Date.--This section shall apply with respect
to appropriations for fiscal year 2013 and each fiscal year
thereafter.

OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP CENTER TRUST FUND

For a payment to the Open World Leadership Center Trust
Fund for financing activites of the Open World Leadership
Center under section 313 of the Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 2001 (2 U.S.C. 1151), $1,000,000.

TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS

maintenance and care of private vehicles

Sec. 201. No part of the funds appropriated in this Act
shall be used for the maintenance or care of private
vehicles, except for emergency assistance and cleaning as may
be provided under regulations relating to parking facilities
for the House of Representatives issued by the Committee on
House Administration and for the Senate issued by the
Committee on Rules and Administration.

fiscal year limitation

Sec. 202. No part of the funds appropriated in this Act
shall remain available for obligation beyond fiscal year 2013
unless expressly so provided in this Act.

rates of compensation and designation

Sec. 203. Whenever in this Act any office or position not
specifically established by the Legislative Pay Act of 1929
(46 Stat. 32 et seq.) is appropriated for or the rate of
compensation or designation of any office or position
appropriated for is different from that specifically
established by such Act, the rate of compensation and the
designation in this Act shall be the permanent law with
respect thereto: Provided, That the provisions in this Act
for the various items of official expenses of Members,
officers, and committees of the Senate and House of
Representatives, and clerk hire for Senators and Members of
the House of Representatives shall be the permanent law with
respect thereto.

consulting services

Sec. 204. The expenditure of any appropriation under this
Act for any consulting service through procurement contract,
under section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, shall be
limited to those contracts where such expenditures are a
matter of public record and available for public inspection,
except where otherwise provided under existing law, or under
existing Executive order issued under existing law.

costs of lbfmc

Sec. 205. Amounts available for administrative expenses of
any legislative branch entity which participates in the
Legislative Branch Financial Managers Council (LBFMC)
established by charter on March 26, 1996, shall be available
to finance an appropriate share of LBFMC costs as determined
by the LBFMC, except that the total LBFMC costs to be shared
among all participating legislative branch entities (in such
allocations among the entities as the entities may determine)
may not exceed $2,000.

landscape maintenance

Sec. 206. The Architect of the Capitol, in consultation
with the District of Columbia, is authorized to maintain and
improve the landscape features, excluding streets, in the
irregular shaped grassy areas bounded by Washington Avenue,
SW on the northeast, Second Street, SW, on the west, Square
582 on the south, and the beginning of the I 395 tunnel on
the southeast.

limitation on transfers

Sec. 207. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality
of the United States Government, except pursuant to a
transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act
or any other appropriation Act.

guided tours of the capitol

Sec. 208. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), none of
the funds made available to the Architect of the Capitol in
this Act may be used to eliminate or restrict guided tours of
the United States Capitol which are led by employees and
interns of offices of Members of Congress and other offices
of the House of Representatives and Senate.
(b) At the direction of the Capitol Police Board, or at the
direction of the Architect of the Capitol with the approval
of the Capitol Police Board, guided tours of the United
States Capitol which are led by employees and interns
described in subsection (a) may be suspended temporarily or
otherwise subject to restriction for security or related
reasons to the same extent as guided tours of

[[Page H3675]]

the United States Capitol which are led by the Architect of
the Capitol.

delivery of bills and resolutions

Sec. 209. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to deliver a printed copy of a bill, joint
resolution, or resolution to the office of a Member of the
House of Representatives (including a Delegate or Resident
Commissioner to the Congress) unless the Member requests a
copy.

delivery of congressional record

Sec. 210. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to deliver a printed copy of any version of the
Congressional Record to the office of a Member of the House
of Representatives (including a Delegate or Resident
Commissioner to the Congress).

limitation on amount available to lease vehicles

Sec. 211. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used by the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of
Representatives to make any payments from any Members'
Representational Allowance for the leasing of a vehicle,
excluding mobile district offices, in an aggregate amount
that exceeds $1,000 for the vehicle in any month.

authorizing commercial activity on union square

Sec. 212. (a) Continuation of Types of Activity Previously
Authorized.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any limitations on the use
of the United States Capitol Grounds (including section
5104(c) of title 40, United States Code), the Chief of the
United States Capitol Police (hereafter referred to as the
``Chief'')--
(A) may issue a permit authorizing a person to engage in
commercial activity in Union Square if the activity is
similar to the types of commercial activity permitted in
Union Square prior to the transfer of jurisdiction and
control of Union Square to the Architect of the Capitol under
section 1202 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act,
2012 (Public Law 112 74); and
(B) under the terms and conditions of such a permit, may
require the person to whom the permit is issued to pay a fee
to cover any costs incurred by the Architect of the Capitol
as a result of the issuance of the permit, if the fees are
similar to the fees collected by the Director of the National
Park Service for commercial activity permitted in Union
Square prior to such transfer of jurisdiction and control.
(2) Regulations.--The Chief shall carry out this section in
accordance with such regulations as the Capitol Police Board
may promulgate pursuant to the Board's authority under
section 14 of the Act of July 31, 1946 (2 U.S.C. 1969).
(b) Capitol Trust Account.--
(1) Establishment.--There is established in the Treasury of
the United States an account for the Architect of the Capitol
to be known as the ``Capitol Trust Account'', consisting of
all fees collected by the Chief under subsection (a)(2).
(2) Transfer.--Immediately upon receiving any fees
collected under subsection (a)(2), the Chief shall transfer
the fees to the Capitol Trust Account.
(3) Use of funds.--Amounts in the Capitol Trust Account
shall be available without fiscal year limitation for such
maintenance, improvements, and projects with respect to Union
Square as the Architect of the Capitol considers appropriate,
subject to the approval of the Committees on Appropriations
of the House of Representatives and Senate.
(c) Union Square.--In this section, the term ``Union
Square'' means the area for which jurisdiction and control
was transferred to the Architect of the Capitol under section
1202 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2012
(Public Law 112 74).
(d) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the
date of the enactment of the Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 2012 (Public Law 112 74).

spending reduction account

Sec. 213. The amount by which the applicable allocation of
new budget authority made by the Committee on Appropriations
of the House of Representatives under section 302(b) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, excluding Senate items,
exceeds the amount of proposed new budget authority is $0.
This Act may be cited as the ``Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 2013''.

The CHAIR. No amendment to the bill shall be in order except those
printed in House Report 112 518 and except pro forma amendments offered
at any time by the chair or ranking minority member of the Committee on
Appropriations or their designees for the purpose of debate.
Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the
report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall
be considered read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the
report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent,
shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand
for division of the question.
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1, printed in
House Report 112 518.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CRENSHAW. I know there is an amendment that is going to be
offered by Mr. Gosar from Arizona, and I understand that he is just
outside the Chamber at this very moment.
So I thought I would take a minute, while he comes to the floor, to
just remind everyone of the great job that this subcommittee has done
in working through all of the issues in order to bring them before the
House. There are several amendments that are going to be offered here
today, and we will certainly take those into consideration. From my
standpoint, some of those amendments are good amendments, and there are
some that I will oppose.
As we begin that process, I just want to, once again, thank everyone
who has spent so much time and energy in bringing this to the House
floor. In recognizing that this is the branch that funds the House of
Representatives, which encompass all of the agencies that we look to to
give us support, we wanted to make sure that they have adequate funds,
because when they do a good job, it helps us to do a good job.
Mr. DICKS. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CRENSHAW. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. DICKS. If we have another Member, could we go out of order by
unanimous consent? Is that a problem?
Mr. CRENSHAW. In response to your question, I think it is in order,
Mr. Dicks. I know that I, Mr. Honda, and you as well, Mr. Dicks, could
strike the last word and make a comment or two if you'd like. Mr. Honda
might want to say a word.
Mr. DICKS. Apparently, we would have to go back in the House and ask
unanimous consent if we wanted to go out of order on this. Maybe it's
just better to wait for the gentleman from Arizona to get here.
Since we're here, what is the plan for phase two of the Capitol, of
the dome restoration? How does the chairman see this?
Mr. CRENSHAW. That's an excellent question. We ought to take a little
time.
Mr. DICKS. I thought it was.
Mr. CRENSHAW. As you know, phase one is in process, and that's the
skirt of the dome. You can see some of the work that's being done
there. The next phase is much more expensive. I think it's a little
over $100 million. As you know, we have an inauguration that's coming.
So, during the inauguration, I would hope that we wouldn't have a lot
of construction going on to impair the view of that beautiful dome. It
is my desire that, as soon as the inauguration is over, we can find the
funds, which is a priority of this subcommittee. We might even break
that up into two or three phases, but certainly that work needs to be
done.
As you have often pointed out, when you look up and see that
magnificent structure, it looks wonderful. But when you get up close,
there are some problems that we need to deal with. We want to deal with
those as soon as we can, so I think it's just a matter of priority.
Mr. DICKS. There is no emergency requirement here? I mean, this work
is work that can be done over a staged period of time, and there is no
real serious problem that could have an adverse effect on the Capitol,
is there?
Mr. CRENSHAW. No, I don't think there is anything that makes it an
emergency.
I think, clearly, like a lot of these projects that ought to be
funded, the Architect has a long list of projects, and this is
certainly one of those, so we want to be able to deal with that. It is
a priority of this subcommittee, and we've talked about that. We want
to make sure, as soon as we can, that we'll have the money to do that.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman from Florida has expired.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. DICKS. I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Boren).
Mr. BOREN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H. Res. 397, to
reinstate the House Page Program, which was terminated in August of
2011.
This is in the context of the Legislative Branch appropriations.
Unfortunately, this amendment was not made

[[Page H3676]]

in order, but we're going to work with the committee as we go forward.
The House Page Program was an institution older than Congress,
itself. Dating back to the first Continental Congress in 1774, House
pages supported Congress by delivering messages, answering phones in
the cloakrooms, and serving on the House floor. Young people who served
as House pages had the chance to see the inner workings of our
government from a perspective many people did not. I had the
opportunity to serve as a page for Senator Robert Byrd in 1988, and it
is a summer I will never forget. The experience was instrumental in my
motivation to become a public servant.
The House Page Program was not only a great opportunity for young
people to learn about our government, but the enthusiasm of these young
people also reminded us every day of why we are here.

{time} 0940

In a time when we are trying to come together and find bipartisan
solutions to our Nation's problems, pages serve as a reminder of our
future. As we legislate on the House floor, pages served as witnesses
to lawmaking that will affect their generation. They remind us to
consider viable long-term solutions to the problems facing America.
In September of 2011, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi proposed a new
intern initiative to replace the House Page program. While this is a
step in the right direction, I believe it is necessary to restore the
tradition of young people serving Congress, even before they attend
college.
I look forward to working with my colleagues to bring pages back to
our Halls.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Gosar

The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in
House Report 112 518.
Mr. GOSAR. I have an amendment at the table.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 18, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $1,235,000)''.
Page 36, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,235,000)''.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 679, the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Gosar) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today and speak of my simple and
straightforward amendment.
My amendment would reduce funding at the United States Botanic Garden
to the levels appropriated in 2009, which equals just over a $1.2
million cut. That money would then be transferred to the spending
reduction account so that we can take one more step towards reining in
Federal spending.
I will be the first to say I appreciate the Botanic Garden and its
beauty. I believe it is a great program, and I am personally interested
in botany. But Members of Congress are often faced with difficult
choices, especially given our current fiscal crisis. There are programs
that are constitutionally mandated and other programs that are nice but
are not constitutionally mandated. This is one program that is nice,
but it cannot be immune from the fiscal pressures facing our
government.
While the Botanic Garden is a wonderful attraction, Congress must
seek to limit excess spending in the name of getting our fiscal house
in order. No line item can be overlooked in making these assessments
and decisions, including our own office budget, as we on the House side
have demonstrated.
Mr. Chairman, so many families are tightening their belts during
these trying economic times. Congress must do the same and make cuts
where it can.
I ask each of the Members to vote in favor of the Gosar amendment,
and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I want to urge my colleagues to vote
against this amendment.
One of the reasons we have committee structure is so that the members
of the subcommittee that I chair--and Mr. Honda is the ranking member.
As I said earlier, we sit down. We listen to the AGG heads and the
Architect of the Capitol, which is in charge of the budget for the
Botanic Garden. They make difficult choices. They come to us, and we
make difficult choices.
As I've said, we have reduced spending in the Legislative Branch
Subcommittee for 3 years in a row. We are now at a point where it is
almost 9 percent less than it was 3 years ago. So if you just decide
you want to stand up and cut another 10 percent of this budget and then
say you really like the Botanic Garden, it seems to me that this is a
function of the Architect of the Capitol.
It costs $12 million a year to have the Botanic Garden. A million
people a year come to visit it and enjoy the beauty. If you're just
going to stand up and say, Let's just cut 10 percent across the board,
let's just start with the Botanic Garden, I don't know why you don't
just cut 10 percent from the Capitol Police and 10 percent from some
other areas. It just seems to be shortsighted.
We've gone through this process already. The Architect of the Capitol
has said, I'm not going to ask for additional money to do some of the
repairs I need to do. There's a need for a new roof and there's a need
for some other things. They said, We're not going to ask for that
because we're operating under the philosophy that we all believe here,
that we ought to do more with less; we ought to try to do the best we
can. So here we are.
I would just say that they're doing a good job. They're trying to
control their costs. If we cut them any further, you really cripple
them. You'll say to them that they can't have as many staff members,
they'll have to close the Botanic Garden certain parts of the year. I
think they've done a good job of managing their money. They have not
asked for more dollars.
With that, I would urge Members to defeat this amendment, and I yield
2 minutes of my time in opposition to the gentleman from California
(Mr. Honda).
Mr. HONDA. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Chairman, I also rise in opposition to the amendment which seeks
to cut $1.2 million from the Architect of the Capitol's Botanic Garden.
The hardest hit agency in this building is the Architect of the
Capitol, which was cut by $52.5 million, or 11 percent, making it
impossible to fund the Capitol dome restoration in this bill. However,
the chairman found a small amount of funding to try to keep up with the
maintenance of the Botanic Garden. Nevertheless, Members attack because
they can get a good headline in the papers for cutting a garden.
To that effect, the author of this amendment put out a press release
after offering this same amendment last year. In that press release,
Representative Gosar stated:

The Botanic Garden has proven its ability to use tax
dollars in a cost-effective and efficient way.

If the Botanic Garden has indeed proven it's ability to use its tax
dollars in a cost-effective manner, why is the gentleman targeting this
agency?
The public should know that after this amendment, we still won't
finish the dome restoration. We still have to rehabilitate the Cannon
House Office Building. The gentleman from Arizona wants to make sure
the Botanic Garden is added to the scrap heap of buildings that we are
unable to keep in working condition.
Our constituents sent us here to do real work and look for real
solutions to the deficit, not to make political points by attacking
institutions like the Botanic Garden, which was established back in
1820. As a Member of Congress, we have a responsibility to ensure that
our Nation's heritage is kept intact for future generations by both
tackling unnecessary spending, but also by making investments in our
future.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I urge defeat of this amendment.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks).
Mr. DICKS. I thank the gentleman.
Just so we have a historical perspective of what we're talking about
here today, the United States Botanic Garden is rooted in the Nation's
heritage. During the late 18th century, George Washington, Thomas
Jefferson, and

[[Page H3677]]

James Madison shared the dream of a national Botanic Garden and were
instrumental in establishing one on The National Mall in 1820.
It just seems to me that even though we're in difficult fiscal
times--and I could make an argument that we should be spending money on
projects to put people to work, including the dome. But this has a
historic significance to our country--George Washington, Thomas
Jefferson, and James Madison.
To me, we can find $1.23 million to do the repair work that is
necessary to keep this in good condition for the American people. This
is a priority. I hope that we will all resoundingly defeat the
gentleman's amendment.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.
The Botanic Garden is a national treasure.
The history of the Botanic Garden starts over 200 years ago.
Originally, the idea for a Botanic Garden came from George Washington
himself.
Congress formally established the Garden in 1820 and it is one of the
oldest botanic gardens in North America.
The Botanic Garden is dedicated to demonstrating the aesthetic,
cultural, economic, therapeutic and ecological importance of plants to
the well-being of humankind.
More than 750,000 visitors a year experience the Botanic Garden's
plants displays, innovative exhibits, and special programs.
The Botanic Garden maintains 13,000 accessions, which equates to
about 26,000 plants.
Its noteworthy collections include medicinal plants, rare species,
orchids, carnivorous plants, cacti, bromeliads, cycads and ferns. Some
of the plant specimens date back to the Garden's original 1842 founding
collection.
There is no better place to gain an understanding of the essential
relationship of plants to human life than at the Garden. Through living
displays that feature the biodiversity of plants from around the world,
the Garden brings to light the many benefits derived from plants
including oxygen, food, medicine, fiber, fragrance, shelter, and
inspiration.
Education is also a critical mission of the Botanic Garden. It
creates opportunities to inspire our visitors to learn about the
importance of plants and presents a variety of educational programming
to visitors, teachers, and students.
The Botanic Garden partners with the Smithsonian Institution, U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA), the National Wildlife Federation, the
National Gardening Association and other domestic and international
botanic gardens on its outreach programs to maximize its educational
impact.
Mr. Chairman, this botanic collection is a global treasure.
Globally, about one in every eight known plant species is threatened
or nearing extinction. In the United States, the figure rises to about
three in every ten plant species.
Humans are inextricably interwined with plants and other life forms,
locked in a dynamic, co-dependent struggle for survival. It is in our
own self-interest to pay them more attention.
Moreover, the Botanic Garden has a backlog of capital renewal and
deferred maintenance projects of over $14.5 million, which is $2.5
million more than its total budget in this bill.
If Mr. Gosar's amendment is accepted, it is likely to cost more
taxpayer dollars as staff will likely have to be furloughed, the number
of deferred maintenance projects will increase, and there will be less
educational opportunities for students.
While we have serious fiscal challenges in this country, the U.S.
Botanic Garden is not part of the problem.
Let's prosecute Wall Street wrong doings and recoup the billions upon
billions used on bailouts rather than pick on the U.S. Botanic Garden.
I urge my colleagues to reject this misguided amendment.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will be postponed.

{time} 0950

Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HONDA. I yield to my colleague, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms.
Kaptur).
Ms. KAPTUR. I just want to thank Congressman Honda, the ranking
member, for yielding me just a brief moment here to oppose this
amendment and put comments on the record.
I oppose the Gosar amendment and the cuts to the United States
Botanic Garden. Unless you've actually walked through the aisles and
looked at the extraordinary collections, and exhibits, including
specimens that preserve the genomes of extinct plants; and if you
haven't really understood why medical science depends on many of the
medicinal plants that are held there for posterity; and if you haven't
really appreciated the importance of the botanical sciences to human
life; and if you haven't understood the work of the Botanic Garden that
links to hundreds of communities across this country trying to help
communities raise food, even inside urban borders and food deserts--
then you really can't come to appreciate the importance of the
fragility of life and how significant this botanical collection is to
our country. This is a collection and capability that has been
understood since George Washington's time over decades and indeed
centuries. Our predecessors appreciated the importance of botanical
sciences to human life even with science as rudimentary as it was at
our Nation's founding. The site itself is nestled right adjacent to the
Capitol, demonstrating the importance to the American people that those
who came before us understood--the importance of the linkage between
human life and plant life. Some of the most important scientific
breakthroughs that we've had in medicine, for example, come from the
plant kingdom.
I think that though the gentleman may have a good goal in mind in
trying to handle our accounts in a more responsible way, this is a very
irresponsible way to do it. Why? Because if the botanic garden has to
cut existing contracts, or if they have to lay off workers, or put off
longer deferred main tenancy, in the end what appears to be a cut may
actually prove to be a budgetary increase over time in additional
costs. Truly this cut is rather draconian cuts to the Architect of the
Capitol.
I just wanted to say in a prior iteration of his amendment, the
gentleman actually issued a press release saying the Botanic Garden has
proven its ability to use tax dollars in a cost-effective and efficient
way. I don't know how he might have changed his mind on that, but I
think for the good of the country, for the future of medical science,
for the linkage of this scientific collection to communities across the
country, the Botanical Garden has proven its worth.
I want to thank the gentleman for yielding, and I appreciate the
opportunity to place my remarks on the record.
Mr. HONDA. I yield back the balance of my time.

Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in
House Report 112 518.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 22, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $878,000)''.
Page 36, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $878,000)''.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 679, the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Broun) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is very simple. It
would reduce the proposed funding for salaries and expenses of the
Congressional Research Service, or CRS, back to fiscal year 2012 levels
this year.
Mr. Chairman, we have to look at savings at every line of these
appropriations bills, no matter how big or small they may be. This
amendment would take almost a million dollars and transfer that money
to the spending reduction account. Also, keep in mind that I'm not
asking to cut anything. I'm not making any single cut in funding from
CRS. I'm only asking that they receive the same amount of

[[Page H3678]]

money that they are getting this very year.
We are in far worse shape than we were 1 year ago economically. Our
national debt has hit almost $16 trillion, yet this Congress continues
to blow through trillions of dollars with a reckless disregard for our
economic reality.
Mr. Chairman, I think CRS should have to pitch in and do their part
by spending no more money next year than they're spending this year.
It's called tightening the belt. Families have to do it, States have to
do it, and branches of the Federal Government should also have to do
it. We have to stop spending money that we do not have. I ask that my
colleagues support this amendment as a step in the right direction for
doing just that.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the
gentleman's amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would cut the funding level
of the Congressional Research Service by $878,000, returning it to the
2012 level.
He said that he's not doing anything to harm it because it's the same
level as last year, but everybody knows that every year the cost of
living, the cost of doing services, increases. So a flat, across-the-
board push ahead kind of a budget is really a decrease. It's subtle,
but it's still a decrease. I just want to let the gentleman know that
that's the fact.
The other fact is the CRS is a research arm of the congressional
Members. It's a research arm that we're able to use to do the kind of
research that our folks really depend upon and is nonpartisan, is not
biased in one way or another, and they are very professional in doing
so. If we're expected to do the right kind of work for our constituency
and then also for our country on issues, then we should be able to
expect good work from our CRS.
In fact, Chairman Crenshaw and his staff should be commended for
recognizing the funding shortfall that CRS has incurred in recent
years.
As other congressional staff can attest, CRS is really essential to
help Members to be able to perform the duties by this kind of a
nonpartisan research and policy analysis. I believe this divided
Congress should take more advantage of this unbiased resource and not
reduce its capacity. Therefore, I oppose the amendment and urge my
colleagues do so also.
I yield back the balance of my time.

[From the Washington Times, June 6, 2012]

Congressional Staffers, Public Shortchanged by High Turnover, Low Pay

(By Luke Rosiak)

The most powerful nation on Earth is run largely by 24-
year-olds.
High turnover and lack of experience in congressional
offices are leaving staffs increasingly without policy and
institutional knowledge, a Washington Times analysis of a
decade of House and Senate personnel records shows--leaving a
vacuum that usually is filled by lobbyists.
Most Senate staffers have worked in the Capitol for less
than three years. For most, it is their first job ever. In
House offices, one-third of staffers are in their first year,
while only 1 in 3 has worked there for five years or more.
Among the aides who work on powerful committees where the
nation's legislation takes shape, resumes are a little
longer: Half have four years of experience.
When Americans wonder why Congress can't seem to get
anything done, this could be a clue. It's also a sharp
difference from the average government employee: Unlike many
state and federal workers with comfortable salaries, pensions
and seemingly endless tenures, those in the halls of power
are more likely to be inexperienced and overworked.
Low pay for high-stress jobs with less-than-stellar
prospects for advancement takes a toll on institutional
memory and expertise.
While senators make $174,000, staff assistants and
legislative correspondents--by far the most common positions
in the Senate--have median pay of $30,000 and $35,000,
respectively, significantly less than Senate janitors and a
fairly low salary for college graduates in a city as
expensive as Washington.
Historical pay records were transcribed from book form by
the website Legistorm.
The size of committee and members' staffs have remained the
same over the past decade, and salaries have often not risen
with inflation--or at all.
The average legislative counsel in the House made $56,000
last year, less than in 2007. While pay for parking-lot
attendants in the House increased from $26,000 to $49,000 in
the past decade, pay for staff assistants, who make up the
bulk of the House's workforce, rose from $26,000 to $30,000.
That puts them in the bottom fifth of the region's college-
educated workforce.
It means that young workers have proximity to enormous
power while surviving on a meager budget--dual forces that
come together to push congressional staffers through the
``revolving door'' to highly paid K Street lobbyists. In the
revolving door, former congressional staff and members use
their personal connections and insider knowledge to attempt
to pull the levers of power on behalf of a paying client. A
former congressional staffer is among the most valuable
assets a company desiring legislative change can buy.
But it also means that staffers are often forced to rely on
lobbyists while they still work for Congress, sometimes for
the purest of reasons: While lobbyists with decades of
experience in energy policy or other arcane areas are common,
such depth of experience is nearly nonexistent on Capitol
Hill. Though 10 years of experience in a home-state office,
which handles constituent services and other less stressful
concerns, is not rare, a person with a decade of experience
is few and far between in Washington.

Without a foundation

``Who are congressional staff going to turn to?'' asked
Daniel Schuman, a former Congressional Research Service (CRS)
lawyer who now studies policy at the nonpartisan Sunlight
Foundation. ``The experienced staff aren't there. But
lobbyists and think tanks are beating down the door: `Here's
the legislation, here are the research materials and I've got
the co-sponsors lined up.' ''
As policy questions more frequently hinge on the nuances of
technical matters, members of Congress are operating without
the researchers and topical experts on which they have relied
to cast informed votes.
With the shuttering of the Office of Technology Assessment,
a 200-member congressional support agency that closed in 1995
under House Speaker Newt Gingrich, members who are largely
lawyers and rhetorical masters are asked to differentiate
between competing proposals that only scientists might be
able to evaluate effectively.
The technology office researched and summarized scientific
and technological matters, ranging from acid rain to wireless
phones, for members who, with an average age of 64 in the
Senate and 58 in the House, are legislating on matters such
as the Internet, which most spent much of their lives
without. Typical of its work products was a decades-ago
warning on the effect of technology on copyright law, a
question lawmakers contentiously grappled with this year.
``It helped us to . . . better oversee the science and
technology programs within the federal establishment,'' said
then-Rep. Amo Houghton, New York Republican, who served nine
terms before retiring in 2005. The role of CRS, which
provides research on topics beyond science and technology,
has also been rolled back.
Brian Darling, a former Senate staffer who is now senior
fellow for government studies at the conservative Heritage
Foundation, said he strongly supports smaller government, but
sometimes symbolic cuts can backfire.
``Cutbacks at CRS to me don't make a lot of sense, with
their institutional knowledge. They put out a great
nonpartisan work product. When crafting the legislative
branch appropriation bill, members of Congress are trying to
show they want to cut spending, but there can be
repercussions,'' he said.
Though it seems paradoxical, a lack of knowledge and
resources by congressional staffers can make for waste, Mr.
Schuman said, citing an inability to conduct oversight,
agency regulations that are left unchallenged, loopholes
slipped into laws that are giveaways for special interests
and poorly implemented programs.
He pointed to the creation of the Department of Homeland
Security.
``The department is a mess because people didn't understand
what would happen when you merge so many different agencies
with different cultures,'' he said. ``It is bloated,
inefficient and maladroit.''
A failure by Congress to ``understand the laws it passed''
and ``innovations in the private sector'' also led ultimately
to a huge crunch and the massive bailouts with taxpayer
money, he said.

Up and out

Consider the class of 2005. Of 186 Senate staff assistants
who started that year, 82 percent had left by last year, 13
percent were still in the same position and the remaining 5
percent have moved up a notch. Of Senate legislative
correspondents starting the same year, 83 percent have
departed and the rest moved up.
In the House, of 105 people who started as legislative
assistants, four made chief of staff in six years. Seven out
of 10 left, and almost all the rest got other promotions.
As that group has come or gone, multiple other layers of
congressional staff have been churned through. Among staffers
who moved on from Congress in early 2010, three-quarters of
departing staff assistants and legislative correspondents had
two years or less under their belts.
Even policy wonks in the most nonpolitical of positions,
``professional staff'' in the Senate committees where most
legislative work gets done, last only five years on average,
from the time they got their first job in Congress to the
time they found a new employer.

[[Page H3679]]

``When people get married or have kids, around 35, you
either jump up in pay by $50,000 or you get out of there
because you can't make it anymore. Making that money for 10
years puts people behind for the rest of their lives in terms
of retirement,'' Mr. Schuman said.
Most college-educated workers in the D.C. area earn $81,000
or more, with an average salary of $93,850, according to the
U.S. Census Bureau. For college grads under 30, the median
salary is $42,000.
Some 300 staffers who started in 2005 or 2006 are already
registered federal lobbyists, a Times review of records
indicated. They are preparing detailed policy papers, and in
some cases drafting proposed legislation, for their former
colleagues, and they have the time and resources to do a more
thorough job than those still there--though one that has a
slant in favor of their new, more generous employer.
``Staff are incredibly vulnerable to this. They're trying
to do a very complicated job with limited resources,'' Mr.
Schuman said.
As the federal government has grown dramatically over the
decades, the Congress in charge of overseeing it has stayed
the same or shrunk. A recent 10 percent reduction to
congressional offices' budgets is the latest major reduction.
``When times are going bad, lawmakers say we have to cut
Congress. But when things are going great, no one says it's
time to hire more staff. You get the Congress you pay for,''
Mr. Schuman said.
Mr. Darling acknowledged that salaries made it nearly
impossible for Congress to have many workers with significant
experience. But he likened the limitation to ``term limits''
for staff. He decried the deferred compensation system that
inspires some Hill staffers to make next to nothing for a few
years so they can cash in big as a lobbyist afterward, but
praised the idealists who toiled there.
``There's a perception that government workers are
underworked, and that's far from the case in Congress. In
fact, they tend to burn out and leave for higher-paid
positions,'' said Mr. Darling. Executive-branch bureaucrats
could take a lesson from their grueling workload, he added.
``The way Congress runs is the way the federal government
should run.''

Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Well, my good friend from California said this
is a decrease in spending, but it's not. It's just keeping the spending
at the current levels for 1 more year. It makes sense.
We are in hard economic times as a nation. We're broke as a nation.
We're spending more money than we're bringing in.
Members on both sides of the aisle certainly use the Congressional
Research Service, and it's a good service for all of us. But we all
have to tighten our belts. I hear Members on both sides talk about we
need to make cuts, we need to balance our budget, we need to start
dealing with the deficit and debt. I agree, we do.
This reminds me of some mantra that went on back during our founding
period with a slightly different twist. Back in those days of founding
our Nation, they were talking about taxes. The mantra was, Don't tax
me, don't tax thee, tax that fellow behind the tree. Well, today it's,
Don't cut me, don't cut thee, cut the fellow behind the tree. But
there's not a person behind the tree.
We all need to tighten our belts. This is just a very small, not cut,
but a stabilization of spending for the CRS. So I encourage my
colleagues to make one small little, itty-bitty step towards financial
reality and financial sanity by saying let's just freeze the spending
level for CRS for 1 year.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will be postponed.

Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Holt

The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed in
House Report 112 518.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I have amendment No. 3 at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 24, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $218,379) (increased by $218,379)''.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 679, the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Holt) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.

{time} 1000

Mr. HOLT. My amendment seeks to address a problem we face here in the
legislative branch: the congressional supply of pocket-sized copies of
the U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence is exhausted.
My amendment reduces and then reinserts $218,379 from the budget for
the Government Printing Office to address this shortage so that they
can provide these pocket Constitutions and Declarations. It is the
exact cost of the last printing of the pocket version of the
Constitution.
But the money is not the root of the problem. The funding exists to
print more pocket Constitutions today or tomorrow. What is lacking is
the authority for the Government Printing Office to do so. The approval
of this amendment appears to be the best parliamentary approach that we
have right now to solve this immediate problem.
Last week, as I prepared to visit a school in New Jersey where we
would hold a ceremony of oath of citizenship for new citizens, I asked
my staff to make sure we had pocket Constitutions to distribute to
them. I always carry one. I find many of my constituents want to as
well. When I discovered that the supply was exhausted and none have
been printed for this Congress, I thought we should address that
problem now. Except for the dozens of copies that might be on a shelf
in Members' offices or the few that are in a bag in the back of my
station wagon, Members find that they cannot get these pocket
Constitutions for love nor money.
Everyday, like so many of my Republican and Democratic colleagues, I
point to this Constitution. When I meet with students, I ask them, What
is the greatest invention of humans? And they, knowing I'm a scientist,
will sometimes come up with some technological answer. I would argue
our greatest invention is our constitutional system of government. Our
brilliant, resilient, self-correcting system of government, dreamed up
in Philadelphia so many years ago, functions remarkably well over the
centuries. And this simple, 45-page pocket Constitution that Members
have been able to share with their constituents for generations allows
everyone to understand better that brilliant system of government.
Over my time here in the House, I have eagerly distributed these
pocket Constitutions to students, new citizens, and many constituents
who ask for them so that they can have their own. And who better to
distribute these copies than a Representative working under the
authority of article I of this ingenious document.
A self-governing country works only if we citizens believe that it
does. A self-governing country works only if the citizens provide the
motive force for it to work. And familiarity with the copies of this
ingenious, powerful, essential document provide the motivation and the
mechanism for our government to work.
Since 2009, when Members of the 111th Congress each received a
thousand copies of this pocket edition of the U.S. Constitution,
Members of the House have not received any new pocket Constitutions.
That means despite the fact that we began this Congress, the 112th, by
reading the Constitution in this House Chamber, which I was pleased to
participate in, no Member of the 112th Congress has been provided with
any additional constitutions. So with no new copies of the pocket
Constitution since 2009, except these few that I have here, it is long
past time to fix this simple problem with this simple amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I seek time in opposition, although I'm
not necessarily opposed.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CRENSHAW. I want to say thank you to the gentleman for bringing
this to the attention of the House and just from an informational
standpoint make Members aware that in February this House passed what
we call the Printing Resolution, which calls for the printing of the
pocket Constitutions that he's talking about. The other body now has
that piece of legislation. Like a lot of other pieces of legislation
that that body finds itself in possession of, nothing has happened.

[[Page H3680]]

So I think it's appropriate for some of us to encourage the other
body to take up the Printing Resolution, solve the problem. And,
actually, I was told just this morning that I think the point of your
amendment has actually had an impact because the other body, I am told,
has indicated that they plan to move ahead with the Printing Resolution
that we sent them earlier this year. So I think all in all, that's been
positive.
Mr. HOLT. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CRENSHAW. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. HOLT. As I said in my remarks, the problem is not money; the
problem is authorization. That can be accomplished by this joint
resolution from the Joint Committee on Printing to the Government
Printing Office, or it could be resolved through the appropriations, as
I'm attempting to do now.
And I should point out, as the gentleman refers to the other body, it
is out of pride of this body that we say we will do what we should do
and the Senate will do what they will do and we will try to get
together to move legislation forward. It is our job here today to do
what we can do and to educate the public about this ingenious system of
government that has been so successful for 2 centuries. We should do
this.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Reclaiming my time, I yield 2 minutes to Mr. Lungren,
the chairman of the House Administration Committee.
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. The gentleman is correct, we did
pass a resolution over to the other body. It is customary that either
body determine what their printing needs are, but we do have to
normally have a resolution for it.
Under Mr. Harper's direction, with the Joint Committee on Printing,
we actually reduced our request by 50 percent to save money, but also
to give adequate printing of what we thought was needed. The other body
initially decided that they didn't need any more copies. They have now
reassessed that and at the last minute have indicated to us that they
see the need for doing that and have promised us that they will act on
our resolution.
So this is a hope that maybe this is one thing that they can agree on
sending out of their body this year and over to us. But in the
meantime, the gentleman's amendment is appropriate. Let us not lose the
Constitution over this.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the ranking member,
Mr. Honda.
Mr. HONDA. Thank you for yielding.
I won't need the full 2 minutes because I think that the proponent,
Congressman Holt, has done an excellent job in expressing our sentiment
about the importance of the pocket Constitution. I appreciate the
chairman of the authorizing committee, Congressman Lungren, and my
chairperson for taking the initiative in moving forward on this and
prodding the other body to make sure that they act on Resolution 90.
So I would urge all Members to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.
Mr. CRENSHAW. I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Scalise

The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed in
House Report 112 518.
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 29, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.
Page 36, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000)''.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 679, the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Scalise) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana.
Mr. SCALISE. The amendment that I bring forward zeroes out the Open
World Leadership Center. This is a subset of the Library of Congress.
This is an agency that's received millions of dollars over the years--
in fact, $123 million over the past 10 years--to bring foreign
government leaders from countries like Russia and others to the United
States, something that might be a good idea but, frankly, when you
consider the fact that we're running massive deficits, have a mountain
of debt that keeps building up, we have to cut back programs that we
just can't afford to do. And clearly, this is one of those programs.
I do applaud the chairman and the committee for reducing this
account. Although it's been reduced, there's still a million dollars
remaining in the account. Ultimately, what we do is completely
eliminate that funding. The reason that we're doing this, if you go
back--and we've looked at the Congressional Record over the years,
going back to 2009--Congress has been very clear to this agency, the
Open World Leadership Center, that it's time for them to stop receiving
government money.

{time} 1010

Just look at the comments from April 21 of 2010. At the time,
Chairman Wasserman Schultz said:

Our subcommittee's stated goal has been that we would begin
to wean you off your reliance on Legislative Branch funding,
so it is somewhat difficult for me to understand why you have
asked for $2 million more in funding.

This is an agency, Mr. Chairman, that has shown an unwillingness to
work with Congress who for years now has said it's time for you to stop
getting government money. This isn't some new development. This is
something that Republicans and Democrats have agreed on for years, and
it's finally time for that government funding to end. And if they want
to continue doing the work they do, they can still go seek private
funding, which, by the way, Congress encouraged them to do years ago,
but they refused to do that because they still had the ability to get
government money. As long as we leave a million in this account, we
continue to allow this agency, the Open World Leadership Center, to
function when we've now, as a policy decision, finally said it's time
for them to go.
So with that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Everything the gentleman said is true except for the
fact that what we are doing in this bill is actually shutting down the
Open World program. When you do that, there are some costs involved in
the final shutdown, and that's why last year this was funded at $10
million. To shut down the program, we basically took away $9 million,
left $1 million there to terminate the existing contracts that we have.
There's some final compensation that has to be paid. They have to close
some offices. There are potential unemployment claims.
And so the point of this bill is to do exactly as the gentleman
suggests, and that is to shut down this program which probably at one
time was a very worthwhile program and was, I guess, a program that you
could afford. But in today's world, this is a program that, under this
legislative subcommittee, doesn't seem to be the right place to find
funding. There were attempts in the past to fund it under the State-
Foreign Operations Subcommittee.
But bottom line, the goal of this committee is to shut down this
program because we can't afford it anymore. Even if you pass this
amendment, it still costs a million dollars to shut down the program.
The Congressional Budget Office scores it as a million dollars.
So I would say we ought not to pass this amendment. We ought to
continue the process that has been started to shut down this program,
and these dollars will be used to do just that.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the ranking member,
the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).
Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's amendment attempts to cut $1
million in the bill for the Open World program, and I want to emphasize
the word ``attempts.'' I also want to emphasize that it's not my intent
to support the idea of shutting down the program; it's the issue of the
process of the gentleman's resolution.

[[Page H3681]]

Now, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the official
bookkeeper of Congress, this amendment would net to zero. They believe
that the organization would need at least $1 million to ramp down the
organization. That's the CBO's impartial analysis. That means that this
amendment has no effect. Maybe the gentleman did not know that, or
maybe he disagrees with the Congressional Budget Office, but the
Congressional Budget Office is a fine arbiter, and it has concluded
that this amendment would not save one red cent. Again, this is a
process of zeroing out, and you need that money.
But let me emphasize again that it is not my intent to support the
idea of closing down the program at all; it is just my comment on the
process.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Moran), the former ranking member of the Legislative
Branch.
Mr. MORAN. I thank my friend from Florida very much.
Mr. Chairman, not only do I oppose the amendment, I don't think we
should be shutting down this program. This was a bipartisan program one
of whose principal sponsors was Senator Ted Stevens from Alaska. What
it does is to give voice to leaders within countries who are suffering
under oppressive forms of government.
I just met with the Ukrainian delegation. My friend, Mr. Crenshaw,
may have had an opportunity to meet with them as well. They come
through the Congress of the United States and the executive branch.
They learn how our government works. And at a time when we are spending
two-thirds of a trillion dollars on military security, this is the kind
of program that can promote smart power by working with leaders in
other countries. They want freedom of the press. They want democracy.
They can't stand what communism did to their countries, but they don't
want the kleptocracy of Russia. They don't want Russian domination.
They want to be like the United States, and they want to come here and
learn how to adopt the best principles that empower our democracy.
It's a good program. It's not much money, and the dividends that it
yields are far greater than anything it costs us. I certainly agree we
ought not eliminate the $1 million placeholder, but I wish we would not
eliminate this program at all because it's a program we ought to be
proud to fund.
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I'm prepared to close, and I would first
like to address some of the issues that were brought up during this
discussion.
As it relates to the idea of having exchanges with people from
foreign countries, that's why we have a State Department. And, in fact,
the State Department has programs that do just that.
The Open World Leadership Center is a program run by the Library of
Congress. If this program were so important to national security and
relations with foreign countries, then the State Department would pick
it up, but they haven't chosen to do that because they already do
programs that are similar. But they probably do it a lot more
effectively, and it's a lot more coordinated with the State Department
because it's run out of the State Department.
So now you have a separate, duplicative program that Congress, both
Republican and Democrat Members, for 3 years now has been saying, It's
time for you to go.
And I go back again to the June 2009 committee hearing. The committee
recommendation begins a phaseout of Legislative Branch financial
support for the Open World program. That was the committee
recommendation in 2009. Republicans weren't running the House back
then. That was under Democratic leadership.
And of course in 2010, the chairman at the time, Ms. Wasserman
Schultz from the opposing party said:

Our subcommittee's stated goal has been that we would begin
to wean you off your reliance on Legislative Branch funding.

Yet that same year, they asked for $2 million more.
This is an agency that just doesn't get it, and this represents
what's wrong with Washington when we're going broke. We are going broke
right now. Every single day, every dollar spent here in Washington, 42
cents of that dollar is borrowed money, borrowed from countries like
China, sending the bill to our kids and our grandkids. And here we've
got a program that even Congress, Republican and Democrats, said it's
time for the program to end, and yet they still have a million dollars
sitting in their budget.
So what you would have is seven employees. They have a staff of seven
people. So you've taken $10 million away, and I applaud, again, the
chairman for doing that. So you've said there will be no more program.
There will be no more exchange. That's been a decision already made by
the committee, the subcommittee. But you're leaving seven people to be
paid to do absolutely nothing with money we don't have.
Now, how many small businesses across the country that have been
facing these tough economic times are given a million-dollar check by
the Federal Government to close down? Unfortunately, so many businesses
have closed down because times are tough, but they don't get a million
dollars from the Federal Government to do it, especially with money
borrowed from China.
And now I would go to address the CBO issue. We actually asked CBO
about this amendment. We asked them on Monday. Here's a letter from
CBO. On Monday they said:

At this point, we estimate that your amendment would have
no score.

So there is no cost to doing this, but it is a million dollars less
that we'll be borrowing from China. And at some point they say a
million dollars here, a million dollars there, pretty soon you're
talking about real money.
We need to start making these tough decisions, and, frankly, this one
isn't that tough. We ought to eliminate this program.
And I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Louisiana will be
postponed.

{time} 1020

Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Moran

The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 printed in
House Report 112 518.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:

limitation on use of funds for polystyrene products

Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to obtain polystyrene products for use in food
service facilities of the House of Representatives.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 679, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Moran) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, this amendment, which I am offering jointly
with Congress Members Welch and Pingree, would ban polystyrene products
in our food service facilities here in the House.
Mr. Chairman, in 2011, the new Republican majority in the House
instituted the use of polystyrene containers in our food service
facilities. This amendment would prohibit the use of funds to purchase
polystyrene products for use in the House cafeteria and eateries.
Removing polystyrene would show our concern for the health of our
visitors and our employees, and for the future of our environment. We
should be using recyclable and biodegradable products and avoiding
polystyrene foam packaging.
Over 20 years ago, McDonalds and other for-profit fast-food
restaurants replaced polystyrene foam with recyclable and paper board
containers. The House of Representatives is the only place within the
Capitol Complex to revert back to Styrofoam products. Neither the
Senate, the Library of Congress, nor the Capitol Visitors Center

[[Page H3682]]

food services use polystyrene food products out of concern for the
health of their patrons. We should be leading by example, and this
amendment provides a way through which we can show environmental
responsibility to the thousands of constituents who visit our offices
each year. We should be concerned about their health and that of our
employees.
Polystyrene is also very difficult to recycle. Most polystyrene
containers end up taking up inordinately large amounts of space in
landfills or incinerators. The problems with polystyrene include
cancerous chemicals used during manufacturing, minimal recycle ability,
enormous space taken up in landfills, and toxic byproducts released
during incineration.
An EPA report on solid waste named the polystyrene manufacturing
process the fifth-largest creator of hazardous waste. Toxic chemicals
leak out of these Styrofoam containers into the food and drinks they
contain and thus endanger human health and reproductive systems. That's
our employees and our visitors to the House office buildings we're
endangering. With this amendment, we can reduce environmental hazards
and landfill waste, and protect the public's health.
I encourage my colleagues to support what I think should be a no-
brainer amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the
amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that we don't use any
appropriated funds to buy polystyrene containers. I just want to make
that point that we don't use any appropriated money to do that.
I want to recognize a valued member of the subcommittee, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert), for 2 minutes.
Mr. CALVERT. I thank the Chairman.
My friend's--and he is my friend, Mr. Moran--amendment is certainly
misguided and costly and a step backwards. Let's talk about the facts.
The House composting program in the last Congress increased our
operating costs by half a million dollars a year, all for the luxury of
using, remember, weak utensils that literally melted in your soup, and
ineffective cups, soda cups, not including the extra paper insulators
to keep your hands from burning once you use those ineffective paper
cups. The cups, by the way, were two to three times more expensive than
polystyrene foam cups.
And the environmental benefits. Peer reviewed studies confirm that
foam food and beverage containers--which are recyclable and, by the
way, are still used by McDonalds--use significantly less energy and
water than their supposed eco-friendly alternatives. They use fewer raw
materials, create less solid waste, and the carbon emission differences
are nominal.
If Mr. Moran would like to eliminate polystyrene in the House he
needs to be right upfront with the American people and let them know
how much this is going to cost them. In fact, this product costs less
and is a better product. And I think that's something that we ought to
do here in the government is find ways of saving money and produce a
better outcome.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I would say to my good friend from
California, this amendment doesn't reintroduce the composting program,
and it doesn't deal with those utensils--which I admit, some of them
were not the best--but this deals with the polystyrene containers only,
which is the greater source of concern for the health of our visitors
and our employees.
At this time, I'd like to yield 1 minute to our friend and colleague
from Maine (Ms. Pingree).
Ms. PINGREE of Maine. I thank my colleague, Mr. Moran, for allowing
me to speak and join him with this amendment today.
I rise in support of this amendment, which would prohibit us from
using taxpayer money to stock the House cafeterias with polystyrene,
or, as most Americans call it, Styrofoam. Maybe to some this seems like
a small thing, but stocking our cafeterias with Styrofoam sends a
terrible message.
When I was first elected to Congress in 2008, it was such a pleasure
to see biodegradable materials in the cafeteria: cardboard containers,
paper cups, even bamboo forks--which maybe didn't always work right,
but they still were recyclable and biodegradable. We ate out of
containers that looked a lot like what we now see in most fast food
restaurants.
When the Republicans took control, that instantly changed and we are
back to eating from Styrofoam. When my constituents read about it they
were, frankly, quite shocked. They couldn't imagine why Congress was
moving backwards.
Styrofoam takes hundreds of years to biodegrade and is a suspected
carcinogen because of the chemical it leaches into food and liquid. I
urge my colleagues to support our amendment to get rid of Styrofoam in
the House cafeterias.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
chairman of the House Administration Committee, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lungren).
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
Last year we had this argument. Last year, it was criticism of the
fact that I had approved a contract that got rid of the composting and
instead that started a pilot project, I believe, in the gentleman from
Virginia's district, where we are taking all of this and we are
converting it from waste energy in the gentleman's district--one of the
exemplary programs in the country. We're not putting this into a
landfill; we are actually converting it. In fact, these products are
one of the best means of creating energy from waste.
The second thing is, this is a condemnation of an industry that
employs about 50,000 Americans around the country that deal with the
production of this product. I would say they have come to me and said:
Can you at least defend us with the facts, that the FDA has to approve
use for sale of these products that come into human contact. If it were
carcinogenic, it would not be allowed.
The fact of the matter is, we used common sense. We actually took up
a recommendation by the Democrats when the Republicans took over. One
of the recommendations that was made in writing was that we eliminate
the composting program because it cost too much money, it was
unsuccessful, and in fact it caused more energy than it was supposed to
save. We did that. I thought you were going to thank us for following
your suggestion. We even put it in the gentleman's district--proud
employees of the gentleman's constituency are reducing this waste to
energy, and yet the gentleman comes before us and says the program that
you have in my district, doggone it, we just don't want it. Sometimes
people around here can't take yes for an answer.
Mr. MORAN. Well, certainly the gentleman makes a compelling argument
here in terms of employment. But it is clear that when you talk to
people who regularly use our cafeterias, that they are concerned about
the health effects of polystyrene containers. In fact, there's a
Facebook group that's been created called Stop the Styrofoam Invasion:
Bring Cardboard Back to the House Cafeteria. Now, I'm sure these
gentlemen see that effort on Facebook.
Communities across the country have rallied against polystyrene
products, and bans have been instituted in cities and counties in
California, Massachusetts, Illinois, Maine, Washington, Oregon, New
Jersey, and New York.

{time} 1030

Now, these are not statewide bans in all of these States. Many of
them, they're cities and counties. But this is not something that is
unique to the people supporting this amendment. Across the country,
people are realizing that it is not healthy to use polystyrene as a
material. It does take up too much land space in many places in the
country, and we really ought to support this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CRENSHAW. I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Moran).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.

[[Page H3683]]

Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I demand a
recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia will be postponed.

Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Harper

The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 printed in
House Report 112 518.
Mr. HARPER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to provide an aggregate number of more than 50
printed copies of any edition of the United States Code to
all offices of the House of Representatives.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 679, the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Harper) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi.
Mr. HARPER. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would limit the printing of
paper copies of the U.S. Code for the United States House of
Representatives to 50 copies.
As chairman of the Joint Committee on Printing, I have been working
to cut wasteful printing, and the U.S. Code is a prime example of what
needs to be cut. Every 6 years, the United States Code is reprinted to
incorporate new statutory changes.
Currently, the 2012 edition of the U.S. Code is slated to be printed
by GPO in fiscal year 2013. However, the printing and production of the
Code takes anywhere from 14 to 16 months, guaranteeing that the Code is
outdated before it even is in print.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment would reduce the House's allotment from
213 to 50 copies. This reduction will ensure the long-term preservation
of hard copies in the House, while freeing up over $369,000 for FY2013,
money that would be better spent modernizing and improving access to
legislative information, including the Code.
The printed copies of the U.S. Code in the House are used less each
day because of increasingly available, more up-to-date electronic
alternatives. This amendment is a simple overdue reduction in
unnecessary printing.
I want to thank Chairman Lungren, as well as the appropriators, for
their support of these efforts; and I encourage my colleagues to
support this amendment.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HARPER. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Thank you for yielding. I just want to thank you for
bringing this to our attention. I think it's well-intentioned. I think
it's a good idea.
I'm just curious as to how you decided to have 50 copies instead of
213.
Mr. HARPER. Well, there's certainly an assessment of the number of
copies and the need and each agency that controls those and gets those.
And we believe that on the distribution of those copies, as you look at
it, that those agencies that get them, which include 43 copies to House
Leg Counsel, 48 copies to House Law Revision Counsel, 13 copies to the
House Committee on Appropriations, the House Legislative Resource
Center receives four copies, House Parliamentarian receives three, and
then the list goes on from there as to how we have those.
I certainly do believe that the House Committee on Appropriations,
for example, is not going to need 13 full copies for those. Those are
things that, even going back to law school days, you learn how to share
the available copies.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HARPER. I will certainly yield to the gentleman.
Mr. CRENSHAW. How many copies will the Appropriations Committee get
under your amendment?
Mr. HARPER. Well, under the amendment we do not determine how many
copies each will get. If we do a pro rata reduction in the numbers that
go to each one, I think we could come to an agreement as to what those
numbers will be.
Mr. CRENSHAW. If the gentleman will further yield, I just want to say
I think that's a very good amendment.
Mr. HARPER. Thank you, sir.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Mississippi (Mr. Harper).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Flake

The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 printed in
House Report 112 518.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act for
Members' Representational Allowances, the salaries and
expenses of House Leadership Offices, or the salaries and
expenses of Committee Employees may be used to purchase paid
advertisements on any Internet site other than an official
site of the Member, leadership office, or committee involved.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 679, the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. FLAKE. This amendment would simply prohibit Members, Committees,
and leadership offices from using taxpayer-funded MRAs to purchase
online advertisements. These ads are little more than a tool to boost
name identification. They blur the lines between official duties and
campaign activities. I believe, and I think most of us would concede,
it's an inappropriate use of taxpayer money.
I know that some will stand up and say we've got to advertise town
halls and whatever else that we're doing.
Let me tell you, all the online advertising that is being paid for by
the taxpayers from Members' offices right now, town halls and those
other notices represent a tiny fraction of that. Most of it are things
like this, ads reading: Congressman X is fighting the madness. Click on
this, and then it sends them to their official page, just boosting
their name ID.
Representative X is working to lower gas prices by increasing
American energy production. Find out more and like my page today.
Another one: Congressman X is committed to creating jobs, driving
down spending, and shrinking the size of the Federal Government. That's
pure electioneering or campaigning. The taxpayers have no reason to
fund that kind of purchase in online advertising.
We already see the abuse that takes place with regard to franking.
When you receive in the mail a four-color glossy that you can't even
tell the difference between that these days and a campaign mailer,
unless you look and see the very, very fine print that is there on the
bottom of the mailer: paid for at taxpayer expense.
Enter the Internet world and the potential for abuse is that much
greater when Members can target ads. Say if I wanted to run for
Governor next, I could say that I want an ad to pop up or my name to
pop up when somebody types in a Google search for Arizona Governor. I
would submit to you that kind of thing is happening right now, and
we've got to stop it before it brings a dark cloud over this body.
We all know what happened with earmarks in years past. It got so
rampant and the corruption set in that we had to get rid of it
completely. Let's stop this before it really balloons. There is abuse
going on right now, but let's stop it before it gets big.
I urge adoption of the amendment and reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, Members of the House, if the gentleman
has a problem with communicating with constituents, then I think he
ought to take his gripes to the Franking Commission.
I think everyone knows in this House that Members have an office
account, and the philosophy is that you have an office account, you run
your office. You are held accountable for how you spend those dollars.
Some dollars are spent for salaries, for equipment, for rent, and for
communications.
When the communications are paid for with taxpayers' dollars, they
are

[[Page H3684]]

subject to review by what's called the Franking Commission. That is a
bipartisan commission, made up of Democrats, made up of Republicans.
And before any kind of communication is put forward--whether it's a
newsletter, maybe it is a postcard--before anything goes out, there are
very strict guidelines that the Franking Commission uses to decide what
goes in to those communication pieces.
Under the rules, Members are allowed to use their MRA, their office
account, that's funded by taxpayers dollars. They can, if they want to
announce they're going to have a town hall meeting, they can send out a
postcard, they can send out a letter. They can actually buy advertising
in a newspaper, as long as it meets the requirements of the Franking
Commission. And they are very strict about how big your name can be and
how many pictures you can have.

{time} 1040

You can also buy time, buy advertising on the radio. If you want to
say, ``I'm going to have a meeting, and we're going to decide whether
or not to appoint people to the military academies,'' you can do that.
You can also use the Internet for that. Quite frankly, in today's
world, that's how most people get their information. I'm not a tech
guy, but I understand that social media is how a lot of young people
and old people, as well, communicate.
If you want to communicate through the Internet, then you should have
the same rules and regulations that apply to the print. You have to go
to the Franking Commission, and they approve it. Again, Democrats and
Republicans, they're making sure that these are official notices. They
can direct you to your own Web site. Most Members have Web sites, and
they can announce things on there.
So it seems strange to me to single out this new social media, which
is where the world seems to be going. That's how people get their
information. It's a lot cheaper to communicate on the Internet than it
is to mail a letter or to mail a post card. It seems to me this is just
an effort to micromanage how the Members use their MRAs, and you single
out the one area in which the world seems to be going. So it's like a
step backwards to say that you can communicate, that you can buy
advertising on the radio, that you can buy an ad in a newspaper as long
as you comply with these franking rules but that you can't do it with
the Internet. It just seems like a strange way to go. Once again, all
of this is subject to review by the Franking Commission, made up of
Democrats and Republicans, in order to make sure that all of that is
appropriate.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FLAKE. In response, the gentleman mentioned people want to
announce town halls and whatnot. That is a tiny, tiny fraction of what
occurs in the money being spent, taxpayer money, through franking on
the Internet. It's things like this, and I'll just read a few.
This is from a Member:

``Like'' my Facebook page to find out what I'm doing to
create jobs, to reduce spending, and to put our economy back
on track.

How is that necessary for the taxpayer to fund? Come on. Let's get
real here.
Another one:

I want to know, do you support a balanced budget amendment
to the United States Constitution?

I don't really want to know that. Members just want to get traffic,
name IDs to their Web pages.
Now, I'm not a Luddite here. I have my own Web page. I have a
Facebook account. I do all of that, but I do it where it's
appropriate--with campaign funds, not with official funds to campaign.
The gentleman mentioned that we ought to just kind of trust the
Member--there is a Franking Commission--and let everybody do it. I
should mention that, in 1997, when this bill came to the floor, Members
thought there was some abuse going on with the franking of mail, so a
requirement was put in to add the ``printed at taxpayer expense.'' That
was done by amendment on this bill on this floor in 1997. Also, there
was abuse with franking too close to an election. So, with an amendment
in this bill on this floor in 1997, there was put in a requirement that
there is a 90-day blackout period in which you can't do it.
So there is a recognition that sometimes you go too far here. I can
tell you that Members are going too far. I would invite anyone to go
down to the Franking Commission and take a look at what's going on, to
take a look at what Members are sending.
We're going to be voting on this quickly. So I would submit, if
you're coming to the floor or watching this debate, you don't want to
be on the other side of this issue, because we will be here, sooner or
later, banning this practice. I hope it's sooner rather than later.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from California, the chairman of the House Administration Committee,
Mr. Lungren.
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. I would just like to advise all
Members that we have full-time employees working under the direction of
Members of the Franking Commission and the House administration every
single day who review the products of the offices of Members.
There is a limitation on the number of references you can make to
yourself. There is a limitation on the number of pictures you can have.
There is a limitation on how large the pictures can be. There is a
limitation on some of the language that there can be. We try not to
censor, but we try to make a distinction between that which is
partisanly political and that which is a communication to our
membership.
If someone is trying to suggest that we ought not to be allowed to
ask our constituents ``What is your position on a balanced budget
amendment?'' I'd like to say that you have that right. If you don't
want to ask that question, you don't have to ask that question, but
that's for Members to be able to do that.
Frankly, I think the idea that somehow we ought to limit our
communications to the old-fashioned snail mail is just wrong. What
we've attempted to do is to use the principles that have been
established by the Franking Commission over the years to the new
technology. That is simply what we have done. It is no more or no less.
If people want to complain about particular messages that have come
out, we can look at that. In fact, we turn down many, many suggested
pieces to be sent out by Members of Congress. We have tried to adjust
to the new communications, and the gentleman's amendment would not
allow us to use a new means of communication.
Mr. FLAKE. May I inquire as to the time remaining?
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona has 30 seconds remaining.
Mr. FLAKE. In closing, I would just say we have a Franking
Commission. They are making determinations like this, and we're still
getting this stuff. We're still getting people saying, Congressman X--
fighting the madness. ``Like'' my Facebook page now.
I would suggest that the bipartisanship of this Franking Commission
is part of the problem. Both parties say, They're doing it, so we'll do
it, too, and we'll both turn the other way.
That's why we get into problems with this. I'm just saying, please,
get ahead of the curve here, and get ahead of where the taxpayers are
going to be on this issue. I urge the support of the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will be postponed.

Announcement by the Chair

The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will now
resume on those amendments printed in House Report 112 518 on which
further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Gosar of Arizona.
Amendment No. 2 by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
Amendment No. 4 by Mr. Scalise of Louisiana.
Amendment No. 5 by Mr. Moran of Virginia.

[[Page H3685]]

Amendment No. 7 by Mr. Flake of Arizona.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any
electronic vote after the first vote in this series.

Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Gosar

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

Recorded Vote

The CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 213,
noes 193, not voting 25, as follows:

[Roll No. 371]

AYES--213

Adams
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Carney
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coffman (CO)
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Cooper
Costa
Cravaack
Critz
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
Dent
DesJarlais
Donnelly (IN)
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Himes
Hochul
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Keating
Kelly
Kind
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Lamborn
Landry
Lankford
Latta
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thornberry
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Woodall
Yoder
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOES--193

Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Baca
Bachus
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Bonner
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Calvert
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carson (IN)
Carter
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Conyers
Costello
Courtney
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards
Ellison
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gonzalez
Granger
Green, Al
Grijalva
Grimm
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Heinrich
Higgins
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Kildee
King (NY)
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lujan
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schock
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Simpson
Sires
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Yarmuth
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--25

Akin
Andrews
Baldwin
Bass (CA)
Bilirakis
Cardoza
Coble
Denham
Filner
Gohmert
Green, Gene
Hirono
Holden
Kucinich
Labrador
Lewis (CA)
Mack
Meehan
Miller (FL)
Neal
Paul
Platts
Shuler
Slaughter
Towns

{time} 1112

Ms. RICHARDSON, Mrs. CAPPS, and Messrs. DOLD and DREIER changed their
vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mr. ISRAEL changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Chair, due to attending Corrections
Professionals National Memorial Service, I missed the following
rollcall vote: No. 371 on June 8, 2012. If present, I would have voted:
rollcall vote No. 371--Gosar (R AZ) Amendment, ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 371, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 371, had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''

Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

The 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 CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 214,
noes 189, not voting 28, as follows:

[Roll No. 372]

AYES--214

Adams
Alexander
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bono Mack
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Latham
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson

[[Page H3686]]

Palazzo
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOES--189

Ackerman
Aderholt
Altmire
Amodei
Baca
Bachus
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Bonner
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Camp
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Forbes
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Grijalva
Grimm
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lujan
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Renacci
Reyes
Richmond
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Woolsey
Yarmuth
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--28

Akin
Andrews
Baldwin
Bass (CA)
Bilirakis
Cardoza
Cicilline
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Deutch
Filner
Gohmert
Green, Gene
Hirono
Holden
Kucinich
Labrador
Lewis (CA)
Mack
Meehan
Neal
Paul
Platts
Richardson
Shuler
Slaughter
Towns

{time} 1117

So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 372, I inadvertently
voted ``no''. I meant to vote ``aye.'' Had I been present, I would have
voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 372, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''

Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Scalise

The CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise)
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 CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 204,
noes 203, not voting 24, as follows:

[Roll No. 373]

AYES--204

Adams
Alexander
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Bilbray
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coffman (CO)
Conaway
Costa
Cravaack
Crawford
Culberson
DeFazio
Denham
DesJarlais
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Hochul
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
Kind
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Wasserman Schultz
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Woodall
Yoder
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOES--203

Ackerman
Aderholt
Altmire
Amash
Andrews
Baca
Becerra
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boren
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Calvert
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (KY)
DeGette
DeLauro
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards
Ellison
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibson
Gonzalez
Gosar
Granger
Green, Al
Grijalva
Grimm
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
King (NY)
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lujan
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McKeon
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rogers (KY)
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Sires
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tierney
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Wolf
Womack
Woolsey
Yarmuth
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--24

Akin
Baldwin
Bass (CA)
Bilirakis
Cardoza
Cicilline
Coble
Davis (IL)
Filner

[[Page H3687]]

Gohmert
Green, Gene
Hirono
Holden
Kucinich
Labrador
Lewis (CA)
Mack
Meehan
Neal
Paul
Platts
Shuler
Slaughter
Towns

{time} 1121

So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 373, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''

Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Moran

The CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) 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 CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 178,
noes 229, not voting 24, as follows:

[Roll No. 374]

AYES--178

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

NOES--229

Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Andrews
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
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
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
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
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Renacci
Ribble
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (IN)

NOT VOTING--24

Akin
Baldwin
Bass (CA)
Bilirakis
Cardoza
Cicilline
Coble
Filner
Gallegly
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Green, Gene
Hirono
Kucinich
Labrador
Lewis (CA)
Mack
Meehan
Neal
Paul
Platts
Shuler
Slaughter
Towns

{time} 1125

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 374, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 374 on agreeing
to the Moran Amendment to H.R. 5882, the Fiscal Year 2013 Legislation
Branch Appropriations Act, I am not recorded because I was unavoidably
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Flake

The CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) 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 CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 148,
noes 261, not voting 22, as follows:

[Roll No. 375]

AYES--148

Ackerman
Adams
Altmire
Austria
Bachus
Bartlett
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Boswell
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Carney
Castor (FL)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coffman (CO)
Cooper
Cravaack
DeFazio
DeGette
Dent
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Duncan (TN)
Emerson
Eshoo
Flake
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gowdy
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Harris
Hartzler
Higgins
Hochul
Israel
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Jones
Jordan
Kaptur
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
Kissell
Kline
Lamborn
Latham
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Marchant
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mulvaney
Myrick
Noem
Owens
Palazzo
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pence
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Polis
Posey
Quayle
Quigley
Rehberg
Reichert
Ribble
Roe (TN)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Royce
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stearns
Stutzman
Sullivan
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (PA)

[[Page H3688]]

Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Upton
Van Hollen
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Wilson (SC)
Womack
Young (FL)

NOES--261

Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Andrews
Baca
Bachmann
Barletta
Barrow
Barton (TX)
Becerra
Berg
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (GA)
Black
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Bucshon
Buerkle
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Chu
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeLauro
Denham
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dold
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Engel
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gosar
Granger
Graves (GA)
Green, Al
Grijalva
Grimm
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Keating
Kelly
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Lance
Landry
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lowey
Lucas
Lujan
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Manzullo
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meeks
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neugebauer
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Pallone
Paulsen
Pearce
Pelosi
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Renacci
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rokita
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schock
Schwartz
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Stark
Stivers
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tierney
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner (OH)
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Webster
Welch
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Woodall
Woolsey
Yarmuth
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (IN)

NOT VOTING--22

Akin
Baldwin
Bass (CA)
Bilirakis
Cardoza
Cicilline
Coble
Filner
Gohmert
Green, Gene
Hirono
Kucinich
Labrador
Lewis (CA)
Mack
Meehan
Neal
Paul
Platts
Shuler
Slaughter
Towns

{time} 1129

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 375, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''

Personal Explanation

Mr. AKIN. Mr. Chair, on rollcall Nos. 371, 372, 373, 374 and 375 I
was delayed and unable to vote. Had I been present I would have voted
``aye'' on rollcall No. 371, ``aye'' on rollcall No. 372, ``aye'' on
rollcall No. 373, ``no'' on rollcall No. 374, and ``aye'' on rollcall
No. 375.

{time} 1130

The CHAIR. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mrs.
Biggert) having assumed the chair, Mr. Bass of New Hampshire, 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.
5882) making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 2013, and for other purposes, and, pursuant
to House Resolution 667, he reported the bill back to the House with
sundry amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the
Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.

Motion to Recommit

Ms. PINGREE of Maine. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at
the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman opposed to the bill?
Ms. PINGREE of Maine. I am opposed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:

Ms. Pingree of Maine moves to recommit the bill H.R. 5882
to the Committee on Appropriations with instructions to
report the same back to the House forthwith with the
following amendment:
Page 3, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $3,099,244)''.
Page 4, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $3,099,244)''.

Ms. PINGREE of Maine (during the reading). I ask unanimous consent to
dispense with the reading.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Maine?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. PINGREE of Maine. Madam Speaker, every day my colleagues on the
other side of the aisle talk about cutting spending. In fact, a fair
number of them came here after getting elected by promising to slash
wasteful spending and be good stewards of the taxpayer dollars. And
they have voted for some pretty big spending cuts.
They cut spending on food stamps, making it harder for struggling
families to put a meal on the table. They cut spending on unemployment
benefits, making it harder for the millions of Americans who are
looking for work to make ends meet. They cut spending on Pell Grants,
making it harder for working families to put their kids through
college.
But the problem is these cuts my colleagues have passed put the
entire burden on working families and seniors who are already
struggling to get by and none of it on big oil companies or wealthy
money managers. The problem is the burden of spending cuts is not now
being shared equally or distributed fairly.
Today, Madam Speaker, I am offering my colleagues a chance to share
that burden by cutting our own spending on fancy taxpayer-funded
mailings that our constituents don't always want us to send. The
amendment I'm offering represents a 10 percent cut in our franking
budget. This would mean giving up expensive, glossy, self-promoting
mailings and getting back to straight talk to our constituents. Don't
get me wrong: Part of our job is communicating with our constituents
and letting them know about the work we are doing here in Washington
and in our home districts.
In my office, we've designated simple, straightforward mailings in-
house to communicate directly with our constituents. We've designed
them in-house. We've been able to cut the costs of this communication
dramatically but still effectively communicate. In fact, we've recently
sent an update to veterans explaining the programs available to them,
and two or three constituents have received their lifetime veterans
benefits because of that update.
Asking working families to sacrifice and bear the burden of spending
cuts while protecting big banks, Big Oil, and congressional perks is
one of the reasons our approval rating is at an all-time low.
Madam Speaker, we all agree we need to get budget deficits under
control, but asking seniors, young people, and working families to feel
the pain while passing tax cuts for the rich, protecting tax breaks for
Big Oil, and spending millions of dollars on glossy, self-promoting
mailers is unfair, and Americans know it.

[[Page H3689]]

If we want the American public to think we can be responsible and
serious about cutting wasteful spending, we will pass this amendment
today and take a big chunk out of our franking budget.
Let me be clear: this is the final amendment to the bill. It will not
kill the bill or send it back to committee. If adopted, the bill will
immediately proceed to final passage as amended. And if adopted, the
American people might have a little more faith that the people they
send to Congress are really serious about cutting wasteful spending,
and not just protecting the perks that they think will get them
reelected.
I urge you to vote ``yes'' on my final amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Madam Speaker, I want to urge my colleagues to vote
``no'' on this motion to recommit and vote for this very good bill.
Now, I'm not surprised that the Democrats don't like this bill. This
funding bill spends less money than last year, and last year's bill
spent less than the year before. So for 3 straight years we've reduced
spending in the legislative branch. We've reduced spending on
ourselves. So don't tell us we haven't shared in the pain. We are doing
in this bill what we ask every agency or State government to do. We are
doing in this bill what every American family does. We are setting
priorities. We are tightening our belt. We are reining in spending. We
are doing more with less. No wonder they don't like it.
So I say let's pass this bill, reject this motion to recommit, and
cast a vote for fiscal responsibility by voting ``yes.''
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.

Recorded Vote

Ms. PINGREE of Maine. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule
XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by
5-minute votes on passage of the bill and the motion to instruct
conferees on H.R. 4348.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 101,
noes 309, not voting 21, as follows:

[Roll No. 376]

AYES--101

Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Bass (CA)
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Capps
Carney
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Clarke (MI)
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Critz
Cuellar
Davis (CA)
DeFazio
Deutch
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Higgins
Hinojosa
Hochul
Holden
Israel
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Langevin
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Owens
Pallone
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Sherman
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Tierney
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Walz (MN)
Waxman
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NOES--309

Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Capuano
Carnahan
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Dold
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Himes
Hinchey
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McDermott
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meeks
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moore
Moran
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Palazzo
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Webster
Welch
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Woolsey
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NOT VOTING--21

Akin
Baldwin
Bilirakis
Cardoza
Cicilline
Coble
Filner
Gohmert
Gosar
Green, Gene
Hirono
Kucinich
Labrador
Lewis (CA)
Mack
Meehan
Neal
Paul
Shuler
Slaughter
Towns

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.

{time} 1153

Messrs. DINGELL and LEVIN changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Ms. WILSON of Florida and Mr. HINOJOSA changed their vote from ``no''
to ``aye.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Madam Speaker, on rollcall 376, I was away from the
Capitol due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been
present, I would have voted ``aye.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
Under clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered. Members
will record their vote by electronic device.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 307,
nays 102, not voting 22, as follows:

[Roll No. 377]

YEAS--307

Ackerman
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amodei
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta

[[Page H3690]]

Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonamici
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brooks
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clyburn
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Costa
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Culberson
Davis (CA)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Ellmers
Emerson
Eshoo
Farenthold
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Green, Al
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hahn
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heinrich
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hochul
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kaptur
Kelly
Kildee
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Long
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lungren, Daniel E.
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meeks
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Quayle
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Rehberg
Renacci
Ribble
Richardson
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Rothman (NJ)
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Scott (SC)
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Van Hollen
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waxman
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

NAYS--102

Amash
Becerra
Blumenauer
Broun (GA)
Burgess
Butterfield
Campbell
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Chandler
Chu
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (IL)
Doggett
Doyle
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Farr
Flake
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Fudge
Gonzalez
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Heck
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holden
Holt
Honda
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Keating
Kind
Langevin
Lee (CA)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lummis
Lynch
Markey
Matheson
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mulvaney
Nadler
Napolitano
Olver
Owens
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Reichert
Reyes
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schilling
Schwartz
Schweikert
Sherman
Stark
Stearns
Sutton
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Velazquez
Waters
Watt
Welch
Wittman
Woolsey
Yarmuth

NOT VOTING--22

Akin
Baldwin
Bilirakis
Cardoza
Cicilline
Coble
Filner
Gohmert
Gosar
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Hirono
Kucinich
Labrador
Lewis (CA)
Mack
Meehan
Neal
Paul
Shuler
Slaughter
Towns

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.

{time} 1200

So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall vote No. 377, I was unable to
make it to the floor in time for the vote due to a previously scheduled
meeting with constituents. Had I been present, I would have voted
``yea.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Madam Speaker, on rollcall 377, I was away from the
Capitol due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been
present, I would have voted ``no.''

____________________