[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 129 (Friday, September 21, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H6237-H6257]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STOP THE WAR ON COAL ACT OF 2012
General Leave
Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H.R. 3409.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Fleischmann). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Kentucky?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 788 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill,
H.R. 3409.
Will the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Yoder) kindly take the chair.
{time} 0918
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 3409) to limit the authority of the Secretary of the
Interior to issue regulations before December 31, 2013, under the
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, with Mr. Yoder
(Acting Chair) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Thursday,
September 20, 2012, amendment No. 7 printed in House Report 112-680
offered by the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris) had been disposed
of.
{time} 0920
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8
printed in House Report 112-680.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. 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:
Strike section 503 of the committee print.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 788, the gentlewoman
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, this is an amendment, I
believe, that common sense would allow us to work together and pass.
This amendment would simply maintain the current deadline that
existed under the previous administration of 90 days under the Clean
Air Act by striking section 503 of the bill which artificially limits
agency comment periods on water quality permits to 30 days with no
possibility of extension. This existed under President Bush's
administration.
Why, then, would my friends on the other side of the aisle not join
with me to say let's have regular order? Let's ensure that we give
everyone a reasonable opportunity for a response on their quality of
life.
On the surface, the intent of H.R. 3409 appears to be to prevent the
Interior Department from revising a Bush administration midnight
regulation that significantly weakened mountaintop protections on the
destructive practice of mountaintop removal mining. Let me remind you,
they did not alter the comment period. Mountaintop removal mining, as
many of us know, is a very challenging, environmentally difficult
process. For many, they say, it creates jobs.
What we are trying to do is to ensure that there is a balance between
that industry and, as well, the fairness of allowing those to be able
to comment. As it's presently drafted, this bill would reach, in fact,
it would make it much more difficult, if you will, to deal with the
question of rulemaking.
The people in the State of Texas and the city of Houston appreciate
the ability to drink cool, fresh water. So does everyone else. The idea
of not being able to comment on the impact of this particular process
is challenging.
I ask my colleagues to consider the importance of coming together and
extending, or going back to, the 90-day comment period to balance, if
you will, the timeframe and to ensure that all are heard on any aspects
that would impact the environment, impact the environment of this
particular procedure.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Chairman, I object to the amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, may I ask how much time
remains.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Texas has 2\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Deutch).
Mr. DEUTCH. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the gentlelady's amendment
to yet another bill that will never become law, another bill that feeds
into the biggest problem we have here.
The 112th Congress has actually set a sad new low for our democracy.
We all know that President Harry Truman famously dubbed the 80th
Congress in 1948 as the ``do-nothing Congress.'' Yet the do-nothing
Congress of 1948 has nothing on this one. That Congress passed over 900
laws, while the 112th Congress has passed just over 100.
Among the countless laws blocked by the Republican majority is the
American Jobs Act, which economists say
[[Page H6238]]
would create over 2\1/2\ million jobs. It's a sad day when the main
drag on America's economy is the U.S. House of Representatives.
Most Americans actually have to earn their vacation days, Mr.
Chairman. The only thing the Congress has earned are abysmal approval
ratings. The 112th Congress puts Harry Truman's do-nothing Congress to
shame. At a time when our economy should come first, that, Mr.
Chairman, is shameful.
I rise in strong support of the gentlelady's amendment to a bill that
prevents us from actually accomplishing the real work the American
people expect from us.
Mr. GIBBS. I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me just clarify what is
happening with this legislation. It eliminates the EPA's authority to
apply minimum Federal water quality standards sufficient to protect
human and aquatic life, and it is weaker than State standards in many
places. It strips the EPA's authority to object to the State discharge
permits that fail to meet Clean Air Act requirements.
Now, this is not about creating jobs, Mr. Chairman. I ask, on the
names of our children yet unborn, to be able to have a quality of life,
quality of water and quality of air that the requirements that they are
trying to eliminate in this bill, the proponent of this bill, to the
extent that they will narrow the comment period to 30 days rather than
90 days.
Why is that not a simple request if my good friend could not say,
Congresswoman, we support the amendment. I hope that's what he will
say. The difficulty that I have is I would rather, Mr. Chairman, be
doing Medicare, tax breaks, jobs, urgent priorities that are needed.
I just ask for a little bit of consideration on recognizing that the
Nation is better when we have provided a quality of life for all
Americans. Who are we to speak of the needs of the people who have coal
in their region? What we have asked is that we put in the four
parameters of common sense and reasonableness.
My amendment is that. It expands back to its regular order the
existing comment period, Mr. Chairman, to 90 days. It strikes the
provision, and this bill that limits it to 30 days.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson
Lee amendment that speaks to the health and good quality of life for
all Americans and America's children.
I yield back the balance of my time.
CLEAN WATER ACT DEADLINE STUDY AMENDMENT
I rise today and ask my colleagues to support my amendment to H.R.
3409 which would simply maintain the current deadline of 90 days under
the Clean Water Act, by striking Section 503 of the bill which
artificially limits agency comment periods on water quality permits to
30 days with no possibility of extension.
On the surface the intent of H.R. 3409 appears to be to prevent the
Interior Department from revising a Bush Administration midnight
regulation that significantly weakened protections on the destructive
practice of Mountaintop Removal Mining. Mountaintop Removal Mining is
one the most environmentally destructive practices on earth, which has
fouled water quality and destroyed nearly 2,000 miles of Appalachian
streams since 1992.
However, H.R. 3409 is drafted so that its reach would in fact be much
broader than just this one rulemaking. The people in the State of Texas
and the city of Houston appreciate the ability to drink cool fresh
water which, at its core, is what the Clean Water Act is designed to
do. This legislation goes all the way back to 1948 because pollution of
the nation's surface waters was a very serious problem. And Mr.
Speaker, it still is today.
Title V of H.R. 3409 eliminates EPA's authority to apply minimum
federal water quality standards sufficient to protect human health and
aquatic life, if weaker state standards are in place. It strips EPA's
authority to object to state discharge permits that fail to meet Clean
Water Act requirements.
And it limits EPA's ability to protect waterways from harm from
mountaintop removal coal mining, repealing EPA's authority to veto a
``valley fill'' permit based on environmental concerns and limiting the
time environmental agencies have to comment to the Army Corps of
Engineers on the environmental impacts of a proposed valley fill.
H.R. 3409 would prevent the Secretary of the Interior from issuing
any regulation under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act
(SMCRA) through December 31, 2013, if the regulation would, among other
things, prohibit coal mining in any area, reduce employment in coal
mines, or reduce coal production.
The principal law governing pollution of the nation's surface waters
is the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, or Clean Water Act.
Originally enacted in 1948, it was totally revised by amendments in
1972 that gave the act its current shape. The 1972 legislation spelled
out ambitious programs for water quality improvement that have since
been expanded and are still being implemented by industries and
municipalities. In fact Mr. Chairman I would dare say that most
Americans take clean water for granted.
The Clean Water Act consists of two major parts, one being the
provisions which authorize federal financial assistance for municipal
sewage treatment plant construction. The other is the regulatory
requirements that apply to industrial and municipal dischargers. The
act has been termed a technology-forcing statute because of the
rigorous demands placed on those who are regulated by it to achieve
higher and higher levels of pollution abatement under deadlines
specified in the law.
Early on, emphasis was on controlling discharges of conventional
pollutants, for example, suspended solids or bacteria that are
biodegradable and occur naturally in the aquatic environment, while
control of toxic pollutant discharges has been a key focus of water
quality programs more recently.
My colleagues Mr. Markey of Massachusetts and Mr. Waxman of
California have done an excellent job detailing many of the harms that
H.R. 3409 would do. It bears repeating though, that Title V of H.R.
3409 contains H.R. 2018, which severely limits EPA's authority to apply
minimum national standards to protect the nation's waters from
pollution.
Title V prevents EPA from strengthening weak state water quality
standards, unless the state concurs, even if the water quality standard
is insufficient to protect human health or aquatic life. It also strips
EPA's authority to enforce discharge limits by prohibiting the agency
from objecting to state discharge permits that fail to meet the
requirements of the Clean Water Act. According to EPA, this title would
``overturn almost 40 years of Federal legislation by preventing EPA
from protecting public health and water quality.''
In addition, the title limits EPA's ability to protect waterways from
the devastating effects of mountaintop removal coal mining. Mountaintop
removal coal mining involves removing mountaintops to expose coal seams
and disposing of the material in adjacent valleys, a process known as
valley fills. This bill removes EPA's authority to veto a valley fill
permit based on environmental concerns, unless the state concurs with
the veto. The bill also limits the amount of time EPA, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, and other agencies have to provide comments to
the Army Corps of Engineers on the potential environmental impacts of a
proposed valley fill operation.
Under this act, federal jurisdiction is broad, particularly regarding
establishment of national standards or effluent limitations. Certain
responsibilities are delegated to the states, and the act embodies a
philosophy of federal-state partnership in which the federal government
sets the agenda and standards for pollution abatement, while states
carry out day-to-day activities of implementation and enforcement.
To achieve its objectives, the act is based on the concept that all
discharges into the nation's waters are unlawful, unless specifically
authorized by a permit, which is the act's principal enforcement tool.
The law has civil, criminal, and administrative enforcement provisions
and also permits citizen suit enforcement.
The people in the state of Texas have had a severe drought and water
has become an even more sensitive topic. Indeed, in the West,
Southwest, and Rocky Mountain states water management is a more
prominent issue than it is in many other parts of this great nation.
Given our situation in Texas I think that it is clear that we must be
very careful not to upset the careful balance which scientists,
engineers, and the American people have developed when managing our
nation's water.
The deadlines that the Majority would like to shorten are not
arbitrary but represent realistic, reasonable, and business-friendly
deadlines which prudent Americans have learned to adhere to and Mr.
Speaker, we do nothing by modifying those deadlines today, so I ask my
colleagues to support the Jackson Lee Amendment, keeping the comment
period deadlines at 90 days.
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in opposition to the gentlelady's amendment because it strikes
an important provision in the bill that streamlines the section 404
permit process, not just for coal operations, but also for billions of
dollars of economic activity in this Nation.
One of the loudest complaints we hear in Congress is how long it
takes
[[Page H6239]]
the Federal Government to reach determination on permit requests. The
Army Corps of Engineers is the lead Agency responsible for concluding
the section 404 permit determinations. But the Clean Water Act requires
the Corps to seek consultation with other Agencies like the National
Marine Fisheries Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Sadly, all too often, this consultation is where the needless delays
occur, not because of the Corps' inaction, but because of the failure
of the other agencies to provide timely information. This section,
title V, simply sets a more reasonable timeframe for Federal agencies
to get information to the Corps so a permit decision can be made in a
timely manner.
To many of us, it is strange to see this amendment from those who
purport to extol the virtues of Big Government since this amendment
makes it clear they don't believe Big Government is competent enough to
reach a decision in a reasonable amount of time.
This section of title V, the language which has already passed the
House in a resounding bipartisan majority, will streamline the time for
the consuming permit application process and ensure that $220 billion
in annual economic activity associated with section 404 activities does
not grind to a halt. Time is money, and this is about jobs. The slower
the time it takes to get these permits done, it holds up economic job
activity and the creation of jobs all across America in all sectors. I
urge all Members to oppose the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. McKinley
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9
printed in House Report 112-680.
Mr. McKINLEY. 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 75, line 8, before the closing quotation marks insert
the following:
``(3) Following the date of issuance of a permit by the
Secretary in accordance with this section, the Administrator
may not take any action under paragraph (1) to retroactively
invalidate the permit.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 788, the gentleman
from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia.
{time} 0930
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment will prohibit the EPA from
retroactively invalidating permits after they have been issued. On
January 13, 2011, the EPA took unprecedented action by retroactively
revoking a lawfully issued section 404 permit for the Spruce No. 1
surface mine in Logan County, West Virginia. This permit had been
issued 4 years earlier after an extensive 10-year environmental review,
including a 1,600-page environmental impact statement in which the EPA
fully participated and agreed to all the terms and conditions included
in the authorized permit.
But this amendment is intended to address far more than coal mines.
If the EPA can retroactively revoke a water permit for this industry,
they can do the same to any other manufacturer, refinery, municipality,
farm, or other government agency. Imagine an entrepreneur contemplating
making an investment requiring an EPA permit but then stopping once
they learn that the EPA could first grant the permit, allow the
business to proceed, and then invalidate the permit, crushing the
investment. Or, imagine a lending institution contemplating whether or
not to loan money to someone subject to an EPA regulation. Should any
of us be critical of them for being reluctant once they, too, become
aware that their loan could go into default once the EPA retroactively
revokes the permit on which the loan was granted?
All of us in Congress should be concerned about the chilling effect
these actions by the EPA have had and will have if they continue this
threat to the creation of jobs by exceeding their statutory authority.
At a time when our country is facing economic uncertainty and our
families are struggling to make ends meet, I'm appalled by this
continued assault on American businesses and families that the EPA has
taken. Our job creators need a consistent and predictable regulatory
program that will protect jobs we have and create new ones in an
environmentally responsible manner. Remember, this amendment is not
just for coal mining but rather it addresses virtually every business
in America which requires certainty in their regulatory environment.
I urge your support, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition to Mr.
McKinley's amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. PALLONE. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment would take away the EPA's authority
under the Clean Water Act to retroactively deny permits to fill streams
and wetlands in order to protect drinking water supplies, recreational
waters, and fish and wildlife habitat. Now EPA has used this authority
to veto permits after they were issued responsibly only three times in
40 years. All of these were extremely rare cases and these vetoes were
necessary to protect critical water resources.
In 1981, EPA revoked a permit for a solid waste landfill because it
was leaking toxics into Biscayne Bay. In 1989, after objecting to a
permit before it was issued, it overturned a permit to destroy 1,200
acres of flood plain wetlands in Georgia. And in 2010, which Mr.
McKinley mentions, EPA denied a permit for one of the largest
mountaintop removal mines in Appalachia that would have buried more
than six miles of West Virginia streams and polluted downstream waters
with mining waste, causing permanent damage to ecosystems and streams.
The veto was not a surprise--and I stress that. EPA consistently
expressed its concerns about water quality impacts of this mine
beginning from 2002 to 2006, when the Corps issued the permit.
Let me stress this was an extremely rare action taken by EPA. And the
first time it was used, it used the Clean Water Act to overturn an
approved mining permit. The surface mining in the steep slopes of
Appalachia has disrupted the biological integrity of an area about the
size of Delaware, buried approximately 2,000 miles of streams with
mining waste, and contaminated downstream areas with toxic elements.
People have been drinking the byproducts of coal waste from mountaintop
removal for more than two decades. Rather than clean and clear water
running out of their faucets, the people of Appalachia are left with
orange or black liquid instead.
This is not just about the environment, Mr. Speaker; it's about
public health. The health problems caused by exposure to these
chemicals and heavy metals include cancer, organ failure, and learning
disabilities. Not only that, but there are multiple cases of children
suffering from asthma, headaches, nausea, and other symptoms likely due
to toxic contamination from coal dust. This is an environmental justice
issue. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle will claim EPA is
killing jobs. I disagree with Mr. McKinley. What the EPA is doing is
protecting the people of Appalachia from exposure to toxic chemicals
that are harming them.
Now to put this in perspective, each year the Army Corps of Engineers
processes about 60,000 permits to fill waters and grants 97 percent of
them. Over 40 years, the EPA has vetoed only three of these permits
retroactively. On the very rare occasion one of these permits threatens
to permanently destroy our Nation's critical water resources, the EPA
should have the authority to stop it. This is authority that the EPA
has used very rarely, and there is no evidence that the EPA has abused
this authority.
[[Page H6240]]
This amendment is completely unnecessary. I urge Members to oppose it
and to protect EPA's authority to safeguard our waters and our drinking
water sources.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I ask how much time remains.
The Acting CHAIR. Both gentlemen have 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Gibbs).
Mr. GIBBS. I rise in strong support of the amendment. I chair the
committee. We had the hearings on this issue. And let's get straight
what this issue is. His amendment stops a revocation of a permit after
it's been issued. And what the gentleman just referred to is a permit.
During the application process the law allows the EPA to veto a permit.
But after it's been approved, this amendment takes care of not being
able to revoke it years later, in the instance that it was done.
Keep in mind, the revocation that occurred was not because they were
in violation of the permit. It was nothing but political theater. There
was no violation of the permit. The State of West Virginia EPA stated
that and the Army Corps said there was no violation of permit. This is
revocation that sets a bad dangerous, precedent to economic growth in
our country.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I want to point out that, in addition to
this being a terrible amendment, it's also an amendment that's going
nowhere. And it really frustrates me that on the last day of the
session before the election, this do-nothing Congress continues to
bring up bills that are going nowhere--and they know are going nowhere.
For 2 years, the House Republicans have picked millionaires over
Medicare and the middle class. Now they plan to leave town today
without entering into law any responsible deficit reduction, any middle
class tax cuts, the American Jobs Act. They have no jobs bill. The farm
bill they have neglected. The Violence Against Women Act. These are all
urgent priorities that we should be working on right now rather than
trying to pass amendments or bills that are going nowhere.
The American people can't afford a do-nothing Republican Congress
that refuses to act on issues critical to middle class families, to
small businesses, to farmers, and to women. I urge the Republican
leadership to just stay in town and complete our work. Don't waste our
time on bills like this that are going nowhere. The Senate is never
going to take this up.
Now here are a few of the things that the do-nothing Republican
Congress has found time to do:
Voted to end Medicare as we know it and increase costs on seniors by
$6,400.
Republicans chose millionaires over the middle class, giving more tax
breaks to the wealthiest.
Republicans vote for corporations that ship jobs overseas over
passing the American Jobs Act.
Republicans voted to restrict women's access to health services.
It is amazing to me that we sit here hour after hour on the last day
because they refuse to continue to work and talk about bills going
nowhere, when all these other major priorities need to be addressed.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKINLEY. Do I have the right to close?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey has 30 seconds
remaining. The gentleman from West Virginia has 1\1/4\ minutes. The
gentleman from New Jersey has the right to close.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, briefly, let me just underscore here how
people try to distract attention away from the argument. We've heard
all these other arguments. I've heard the opponents talk about this is
the first time or the third time or whatever that is. Let's go back to
what the courts have said. Perhaps we need to have on the other side a
little bit more education. Because the Federal courts have already
struck down that initial reading. Shame on you--anyone--for not having
read all this.
The Federal court said the EPA's interpretation of the act is not
reasonable. Neither the statute nor the memorandum of agreement between
the EPA and the Corps makes any provision for a post-permit veto, and
this agency was completely unable to articulate what the practical
consequences of its actions would be.
{time} 0940
In addition, the court went on to say that the Clean Water Act does
not give the EPA the power to render a permit invalid once it has been
issued by the Corps.
We ought to put this to rest, codify it, and move on.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I'm very much aware that the EPA's veto
was challenged by the mining company, and the EPA has appealed this
ruling. I'm hoping that the Court of Appeals will see the light and
understand that the EPA should be able to protect the health of the
people of Appalachia.
Again, this amendment is completely unnecessary, and it's part of a
process where this Republican House does absolutely nothing but waste
our time. We shouldn't be leaving today. We should be staying and doing
our work.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from West
Virginia will be postponed.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Markey
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10
printed in House Report 112-680.
Mr. MARKEY. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the Rules Committee Print, add the following
new title:
TITLE VI--COMBINED EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY STANDARD
SEC. 601. COMBINED EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY
STANDARD.
(a) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(1) Distributed renewable generation facility.--The term
``distributed renewable generation facility'' means a
facility that--
(A) generates renewable electricity;
(B) primarily serves 1 or more electricity consumers at or
near the facility site; and
(C) is no greater than 2 megawatts in capacity.
(2) Electric consumer.--The term ``electric consumer'' has
the meaning given that term in section 3 of the Public
Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2602).
(3) Electric utility.--The term ``electric utility'' has
the meaning given that term in section 3 of the Public
Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2602),
except that, for the purposes of this section, such term does
not include any agency, authority, or instrumentality of the
United States Government.
(4) Electricity savings.--The term ``electricity savings''
means reductions in electricity consumption, relative to
business-as-usual projections, achieved through measures
implemented after the date of enactment of this section.
(5) Federal renewable electricity credit.--The term
``Federal renewable electricity credit'' means a credit,
representing one megawatt hour of renewable electricity,
issued pursuant to subsection (e).
(6) Renewable electricity.--The term ``renewable
electricity'' means electricity generated (including by means
of a fuel cell) from a renewable energy resource.
(7) Renewable energy resource.--The term ``renewable energy
resource'' means each of the following:
(A) Wind energy.
(B) Solar energy.
(C) Geothermal energy.
(D) Renewable biomass.
(E) Biogas or biofuels derived from renewable biomass.
(F) Hydropower generated by a hydroelectric facility placed
in service after January 1, 2001.
(G) Marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy, as that term
is defined in section 632 of the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. 17211).
(H) Such other energy resources as the Secretary determines
appropriate.
(8) Retail electric supplier.--The term ``retail electric
supplier'' means, for any given year, an electric utility
that sold not less than 1,000,000 megawatt hours of electric
energy to electric consumers for purposes other than resale
during the preceding calendar year.
(9) Retail electric supplier's base amount.--The term
``retail electric supplier's base amount'' means the total
amount of electric energy sold by the retail
[[Page H6241]]
electric supplier, expressed in megawatt hours, to electric
customers for purposes other than resale during the relevant
calendar year, excluding--
(A) electricity generated by a hydroelectric facility that
was placed in service prior to January 1, 2001;
(B) electricity generated by the combustion of municipal
solid waste;
(C) electricity generated by a nuclear generating unit
placed in service after the date of enactment of this
section; and
(D) the proportion of electricity generated by a fossil-
fueled generating unit that is equal to the proportion of
greenhouse gases produced by such unit that are captured and
geologically sequestered.
(10) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
(11) Total annual electricity savings.--The term ``total
annual electricity savings'' means electricity savings during
a specified calendar year from measures implemented since the
date of the enactment of this section, taking into account
verified measure lifetimes or verified annual savings
attrition rates, as determined in accordance with such
regulations as the Secretary may promulgate and measured in
megawatt hours.
(b) Annual Compliance Obligation.--
(1) In general.--For each of calendar years 2014 through
2040, not later than March 31 of the following calendar year,
each retail electric supplier shall submit to the Secretary
an amount of Federal renewable electricity credits and
demonstrated total annual electricity savings that, in the
aggregate, is equal to such retail electric supplier's annual
combined target as set forth in subsection (d), except as
otherwise provided in subsection (g).
(2) Demonstration of savings.--For purposes of this
subsection, submission of demonstrated total annual
electricity savings means submission of a report that
demonstrates, in accordance with the requirements of
subsection (f), the total annual electricity savings achieved
by the retail electric supplier within the relevant
compliance year.
(3) Renewable electricity credits portion.--Except as
provided in paragraph (4), each retail electric supplier must
submit Federal renewable electricity credits equal to at
least three quarters of the retail electric supplier's annual
combined target.
(4) State petition.--Upon written request from the Governor
of any State (including, for purposes of this paragraph, the
Mayor of the District of Columbia), the Secretary shall
increase, to not more than half, the proportion of the annual
combined targets of retail electric suppliers located within
such State that may be met through submission of demonstrated
total annual electricity savings, provided that such increase
shall be effective only with regard to the portion of a
retail electric supplier's annual combined target that is
attributable to electricity sales within such State.
(c) Establishment of Program.--Not later than 1 year after
the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall
promulgate regulations to implement and enforce the
requirements of this section.
(d) Annual Compliance Requirement.--
(1) Annual combined targets.--For each of calendar years
2014 through 2040, a retail electric supplier's annual
combined target shall be the product of--
(A) the required annual percentage for such year, as set
forth in paragraph (2); and
(B) the retail electric supplier's base amount for such
year.
(2) Required annual percentage.--
(A) In general.--For each of calendar years 2014 through
2040, the required annual percentage shall be as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required annual
Year percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 8
2015 10
2016 12
2017 14
2018 16
2019 18
2020 20
2021 22
2022 24
2023 26
2024 28
2025 30
2026 32
2027 34
2028 36
2029 38
2030 40
2031 42
2032 44
2033 46
2034 48
2035 through 2040 50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) Adjustments permitted.--The Secretary may adjust the
required annual percentages described in subparagraph (A) if
the Secretary finds that such percentages are not technically
or economically feasible or pose a threat to electric
reliability.
(e) Federal Renewable Electricity Credits.--
(1) In general.--The regulations promulgated under this
section shall include provisions governing the issuance,
tracking, and verification of Federal renewable electricity
credits. Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this
subsection, the Secretary shall issue to each generator of
renewable electricity, 1 Federal renewable electricity credit
for each megawatt hour of renewable electricity generated by
such generator after December 31, 2013. The Secretary shall
assign a unique serial number to each Federal renewable
electricity credit.
(2) Credit multiplier for distributed renewable
generation.--The Secretary shall issue 3 Federal renewable
electricity credits for each megawatt hour of renewable
electricity generated by a distributed renewable generation
facility.
(3) Trading.--The lawful holder of a Federal renewable
electricity credit may sell, exchange, transfer, submit for
compliance in accordance with subsection (b).
(4) Banking.--A Federal renewable electricity credit may be
submitted in satisfaction of the compliance obligation set
forth in subsection (b) for the compliance year in which the
credit was issued or for any of the 3 immediately subsequent
compliance years.
(f) Electricity Savings.--
(1) Standards for measurement of savings.--As part of the
regulations promulgated under this section, the Secretary
shall prescribe standards and protocols for defining and
measuring electricity savings and total annual electricity
savings that can be counted towards the compliance obligation
set forth in subsection (b).
(2) Reporting savings.--The regulations promulgated under
this section shall establish requirements governing the
submission of reports to demonstrate, in accordance with the
protocols and standards for measurement and verification
established under this subsection, the total annual
electricity savings achieved by a retail electric supplier
within the relevant year.
(g) Alternative Compliance Payments.--
(1) In general.--A retail electric supplier may satisfy the
requirements of subsection (b) in whole or in part by
submitting in accordance with this subsection, in lieu of
each Federal renewable electricity credit or megawatt hour of
demonstrated total annual electricity savings that would
otherwise be due, a payment equal to $25, adjusted for
inflation on January 1 of each year following calendar year
2014, in accordance with such regulations as the Secretary
may promulgate.
(2) Payments.--Payments made under this subsection shall be
deposited into the general fund of the Treasury and shall be
available, subject to appropriations, to the Secretary for
the administrative costs of implementing this section.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 788, the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
My amendment is going to call for 25 percent of the electricity in
the United States being generated by renewables by the year 2035.
The United States, excluding hydro, is already up to 7 or 8 percent
of all of our electricity generated by renewables here in 2012. So, 23
years from now, the goal would be to reach 25 percent.
Now, why do I feel compelled to bring this amendment out here? Well,
while the Republicans say that there's a war on coal, so far in this
first year and 9 months that they have controlled the United States
Congress, they have declared war on solar; they have declared war on
wind; they have declared war on all renewables. That's why I bring this
amendment down here to the House floor.
They are going to kill the production tax credit for wind energy that
is going to send the wind industry off a cliff next year.
Already, 2,367 jobs have been lost in the wind industry because of
Republican action. Forty thousand jobs will be lost next year because
of Republican action. They are out to deliberately kill these jobs. How
many will be lost? Three thousand to 4,000 jobs in Pennsylvania will be
lost; 4,000 to 5,000 jobs in Colorado will be lost; 5,000 to 6,000 wind
jobs will be lost in Ohio; 6,000 to 7,000 wind jobs will be lost in
Iowa if the Republican policy is allowed to be put on the books.
They have declared war on wind. They have declared war on solar, on
geothermal, on biomass.
Ladies and gentlemen, what my amendment does is say let's have a plan
for everything else because it's not going to be a part of the
Republican plan.
So, by the year 2035, 25 percent of all electricity in our country
must come from renewables.
Now, how do we know this is possible? There were 12,000 new megawatts
of wind installed in the United States this year; 3,200 new megawatts
of solar installed in the United States this year.
So, geothermal, biomass, it's all growing. What's their goal? Kill
it. That's their problem. Natural gas is
[[Page H6242]]
rising. It hurts the coal industry. It's the marketplace.
Wind and solar are growing, geothermal and biomass are growing. They
don't want a level playing field. They want to pick winners and losers.
They want to pick favorites. That's what it's all about.
So far in their control of the Congress in just a year and 9 months,
they have voted to slash research and development for wind and solar,
they have voted to end loan guarantees for wind and solar, they have
voted to kill the transmission wires to carry wind and solar to our
homes and our offices.
The Republicans are so opposed to Americans having access to clean
energy that even when it is built they don't even want to have the
transmission lines to get it to American homes.
It's a war on solar and wind. My amendment ensures that there is a
pathway to the future for the most abundant American energy source,
wind and solar, geothermal and biomass. It's all here in America.
At this point, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WHITFIELD. I rise to claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WHITFIELD. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MARKEY. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky has the right to close.
The gentleman from Massachusetts has 1\1/4\ minutes remaining.
Mr. MARKEY. If I may inquire from the Chairman, is the majority
saying that there is only one speaker remaining on their side?
The Acting CHAIR. Yes.
Mr. MARKEY. Then I will yield myself the balance of my time.
Wind and solar is the most abundant source of energy in the United
States--when we capture it. Einstein won his Nobel Prize in 1921, the
only one that won a Nobel Prize, and that's on how to capture the power
of the sun. And now we're on the cusp of doing this successfully as the
price per kilowatt hour drops and drops--and then it's all American.
And who is now looming over our shoulder, even though we invented
these technologies, even though we're producing these technologies, are
the Chinese, the Indians, and others who will pounce on this global
opportunity to create the jobs here in the United States, to export
this technology around the world even as we deploy the technology here
in our country that backs out the energy sources from around the rest
of the world. This is what they fear.
They fear the innovation. They fear the change. They fear our ability
to capture wind and solar to be able to power the vehicles which we
drive in our country, to be able to send up a cleaner source of energy
up into the sky that does not pollute. That's what this battle is all
about.
We do not want special advantage. All we want is a level playing
field. The Republicans continue this war against wind and solar.
Vote ``aye'' for the Markey amendment, 25 percent renewable
electricity by the year 2035.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, we haven't declared war on wind or solar
or anything else. We simply don't believe that when you have a $16
trillion Federal debt that the Federal Government should use taxpayers'
money to serve as venture capital for risky ventures like Solyndra that
received $538 million and now is bankrupt. If this technology is so
good, let the free market develop it. It does not need taxpayer
support.
Yet, on the other hand, this administration has adopted policies that
you can't even build a new coal-powered plant in America because
there's no technology available to meet the new emissions standards of
the Obama EPA.
On this particular amendment, on page 7 of the amendment, it says
that by the year 2035 that 50 percent of the electricity would have to
be produced from renewables. The gentleman in his comments said 25
percent, but this amendment says 50.
{time} 0950
Mr. MARKEY. Will the gentleman yield? That is not accurate.
Mr. WHITFIELD. Well, I'm just reading from page 7.
Anyway, this amendment simply creates a national renewable
electricity standard. We've seen it before. It was in the Markey-Waxman
cap-and-trade bill in the last Congress, which was rejected by the
Congress.
This amendment does nothing more than determine for the American
people where their electricity will come from and that they are going
to be paying more for it.
So I urge people to vote against the Markey amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts will be postponed.
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. DeFazio
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11
printed in House Report 112-680.
Mr. DeFAZIO. 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:
At the end of the Rules Committee Print, add the following
title:
TITLE VI--REPORT ON FUGITIVE COAL DUST
SEC. 601. REPORT.
Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
and the Secretary of Transportation shall submit to Congress
a joint report on the health, environmental, and public
safety impacts of fugitive dust emissions from coal
transport.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 788, the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Well, today, the do-nothing Congress will slink out of
town. It's going to be the earliest adjournment in an election year
since 1960; but, you know, I guess the Nation has no problems and
there's no work undone, so it's just time to go home and campaign. It's
pretty extraordinary. We've enacted one-quarter the number of bills
into law of Harry Truman's do-nothing Congress, 1947-48. So I guess
this is the ``do-nothing-er'' Congress.
So here we are again today. We are going to consider today--the only
work today will be four bills that have previously passed the House.
Someone hasn't read their civics textbooks. If you pass a bill and send
it to the Senate, it's there; they'll consider it or they won't
consider it. If you pass it again and send it again, it doesn't make
any difference. In fact, it's somewhat repetitive and wasteful of
everybody's time when we could be doing postal reform to ensure the
future of the post office. We could be doing a farm bill; there are a
lot of people suffering a horrible drought. We could be dealing with
the sequestration, which there's concern on both sides of the aisle on
that. But we're not. We're considering four bills previously passed and
one new one.
Well, I have a reasonable amendment to an unreasonable bill, which is
now before us, which is the one new bill before us. My amendment would
ask that within 6 months--that's not very long--the Department of
Transportation and the EPA submit a report to Congress on fugitive coal
dust. Now, it seems a couple of extraordinary letters have been sent
out saying, my God, this will stop projects and exports that are going
forward--undue delay. I'm not aware of anything that would be delayed
by this. It says a study will be done; it doesn't delay any ongoing
applications or projects at all. But what it would do is potentially
avert a tremendous amount of litigation down the road. If we find that
fugitive coal dust is not a problem--which the coal industry says--then
that would relieve a lot
[[Page H6243]]
of people in gateway ports and large cities in the West where coal dust
is being proposed to transit through those cities, including cities in
my district.
People are very concerned about this. They want to know, is it a
problem. How far from the loading point does fugitive coal dust get
emitted from the car? Are there ways to deal with the fugitive coal
dust? Does the surfactant work? Is that a solution? Should the cars be
covered? Is that a solution? What are the problems? What are the
problems at its destination in terms of whether or not there would be
coal dust at the port destinations? If the coal is stored outside, how
is it transported onto the ship? Et cetera, et cetera. So if we had
these answers, we could talk about the safe and clean transport and
allay a lot of concerns that are ultimately going to lead to a lot of
litigation unless we know.
Now, the industry says, oh, it's been studied. Well, no, it hasn't.
In fact, one railroad has pursued action against the coal industry
because fugitive coal dust has caused safety problems on the railroad.
It gets into the ballast; it blocks the ballast from draining. The
ballast destabilizes, the tracks destabilize, and trains can derail.
Now, that seems to me like a problem that should be dealt with. And
there may be some very, very simple ways to deal with it. Some say
surfactants; some say covered cars. There are other potential solutions
out there. Wouldn't it be good to know? Wouldn't it be good to know?
That's all I'm saying. A 6-month study and a report to Congress won't
delay anything at all. It just would give us some knowledge. And I
would hope that we legislate around here with a little bit of knowledge
and not just off the cuff.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WHITFIELD. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Does that mean there's only one speaker on their side?
The Acting CHAIR. That is correct.
Mr. DeFAZIO. May I inquire of the Chair how much time I have
remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Again, we will hear apocryphal denouncements from the
other side of the aisle--this will cost millions of jobs and billions
of dollars and stymie our exports. No, it's a study. It's a study that
would take 6 months. It's a study that, if it agrees with the
industry's conclusions, would assure the American public that there
won't be problems with these trains transiting through their hometowns.
It's something we should know. It's something the government should
look at. Apparently, there are some propriety studies that we aren't
allowed to see that say there's no problem. Well, if that's true, then
the railroads and the industry should let the American public see those
propriety studies. Really, not too many people are willing to take
someone at their word when it comes to an issue of public health.
So it's a very simple amendment. It won't delay anything; it will
take 6 months. It will cost very little, and it will give us the
information and knowledge we need to figure out how to safely transport
coal.
And with that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WHITFIELD. We have great respect for our friends on the other
side of the aisle. I think we all recognize that we do have basic
differences in our philosophy about the way energy is produced in
America. It's quite clear that many people on the other side of the
aisle are very much opposed to coal. Not only do they not want us to
burn coal in America; they don't want us to export coal to other
countries even though it would help our trade deficit and would
preserve jobs in the coal industry.
This particular amendment on fugitive dust is really unnecessary
because fugitive dust from the transport of coal is already regulated
at the Federal and State level under the Clean Air Act, as well as
State fugitive dust laws and regulations. EPA already is required to
study the environmental and health impacts from particulate matter from
all sources, including fugitive sources, and of all compositions,
including coal dust. The most recent summary of that science was
published by EPA in 2009 and supplemented in 2010. In fact, this week
the Army Corps of Engineers also announced that it will conduct an
environmental assessment of the proposed coal terminal in the sponsor's
district.
So I would say that we already have adequate protection. There's no
need for this amendment, although I'm sure it's offered with the very
best of intentions.
So I would urge our Members to oppose this amendment and would yield
back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon will
be postponed.
{time} 1000
Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Flake
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12
printed in House Report 112-680.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chair, I rise as the designee of the gentleman from
North Dakota to offer amendment No. 12 made in order by the rule
providing for consideration of H.R. 3409.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the Rules Committee Print, add the following
new title:
TITLE VI--REGIONAL HAZE REGULATORY RELIEF
SEC. 601. IMPLEMENTATION PLANS.
Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7410) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (c), by striking ``(c)(1) The
Administrator'' and all that follows through the end of
paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(c) Federal Plans.--
``(1) Plans.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (C),
unless the conditions described in subparagraph (B) are met,
the Administrator shall promulgate a Federal implementation
plan at any time after the date that is 2 years after the
date on which the Administrator--
``(i) finds that a State has failed to make a required
submission or finds that the plan or plan revision submitted
by the State does not satisfy the minimum criteria
established under subsection (k)(1)(A); or
``(ii) disapproves a State implementation plan submission.
``(B) Conditions.--The conditions described in this
subparagraph are that, before the date on which the
Administrator promulgates a Federal implementation plan--
``(i) a State corrects a deficiency in a State
implementation plan or plan revision submitted by the State;
and
``(ii) the Administrator approves the plan or plan
revision.
``(C) Visibility protection plans.--In the case of a
Federal implementation plan promulgated after the date of
enactment of this subparagraph in place of a State
implementation plan under section 169A--
``(i) the Administrator shall promulgate such Federal
implementation plan only if the Administrator makes a finding
that the State submitting the State implementation plan
failed to consider the factors described in paragraphs (1)
and (2) of section 169A(g) in preparing and submitting the
plan; and
``(ii) compliance with the requirements of such Federal
implementation plan shall not be required earlier than 5
years after the date of promulgation.''; and
(2) in subsection (k)--
(A) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(3) Full approval and disapproval.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraphs (B)
and (C), in the case of any submission for which the
Administrator is required to act under paragraph (2), the
Administrator shall approve the submission as a whole if the
submission meets all of the applicable requirements of this
Act.
``(B) Review.--In reviewing any State implementation plan
submitted pursuant to section 169A, the Administrator shall
limit the review only to a determination of whether the State
submitting the State implementation plan considered the
factors described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of section
169A(g) in preparing and submitting the plan.
``(C) Visibility plans.--The Administrator shall approve as
a whole any implementation plan submitted pursuant to section
169A that was prepared and submitted after consideration of
the factors described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of section
169A(g).''; and
(B) in paragraph (5)--
(i) in the first sentence, by striking ``Whenever'' and
inserting the following:
[[Page H6244]]
``(A) In general.--Whenever''; and
(ii) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) Visibility plans.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (A),
with respect to an implementation plan approved pursuant to
section 169A, the Administrator shall only find that such a
plan is substantially inadequate to meet standards for air
pollutants that cause or contribute to the impairment of
visibility, or any other applicable standard or requirement,
under that section if the Administrator makes a finding that,
in preparing the plan, the submitting State failed to
consider the factors described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of
section 169A(g).
``(C) Existing visibility plans.--
``(i) Request for revocation.--At any time after the date
of enactment of this subparagraph--
``(I) a State may request that the existing Federal or
State implementation plan for the State regarding visibility,
or any determination made in calendar year 2012 or 2013 of
best available retrofit technology pursuant to section 169A,
be revoked; and
``(II) upon receipt of such a request, the Administrator
shall revoke the implementation plan.
``(ii) Submission of new or revised plan.--Upon a
revocation under clause (i)(II), the State that requested the
revocation shall, not later than 2 years after such
revocation, submit to the Administrator a new or revised
visibility plan in accordance with this Act.''.
SEC. 602. VISIBILITY PROTECTION FOR FEDERAL CLASS I AREAS.
Section 169A of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7491) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(2), in the matter preceding
subparagraph (A), by striking ``as may be necessary'' and
inserting ``as the State determines, at the sole discretion
of the State after considering factors described in this
section and providing adequate opportunity for public
comment, may be necessary''; and
(2) in subsection (g)--
(A) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(1)(A) in determining reasonable progress, there shall be
taken into consideration--
``(i) the costs of compliance;
``(ii) the time necessary for compliance;
``(iii) the energy and nonair quality environmental impacts
of compliance;
``(iv) the remaining useful life of any existing source
subject to requirements under this section;
``(v) the degree of improvement in visibility that may
reasonably be anticipated to result from measures described
in the applicable implementation plan; and
``(vi) the economic impacts to the State (including people
of the State);
``(B) in consideration of costs of compliance pursuant to
subparagraph (A)(i), the State may use source-specific cost
estimations developed by a licensed professional engineer as
an alternate to other methods of estimation approved by the
Administrator; and
``(C) in consideration of the degree of improvement in
visibility pursuant to subparagraph (A)(v), the State may use
alternate modeling techniques or methods than those
prescribed by the Administrator in the Agency's `Guideline on
Air Quality Models' under appendix W to part 51 of title 40,
Code of Federal Regulations, and, where available, measured
emissions and monitoring data shall be used;'';
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) by striking ``(2) in determining best available
retrofit technology the State'' and inserting the following:
``(2) in determining the best available retrofit
technology--
``(A) the State'';
(ii) in subparagraph (A) (as designated by clause (i)), by
inserting ``the economic impacts to the State (including
people of the State),'' after ``life of the source,'';
(iii) by striking ``technology;'' and inserting
``technology; and''; and
(iv) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) in consideration of the costs of compliance pursuant
to subparagraph (A), the State may use source-specific cost
estimations developed by a licensed professional engineer as
an alternate to other methods of estimation approved by the
Administrator;
``(C) with respect to consideration of the degree of
improvement in visibility pursuant to subparagraph (A)--
``(i) the State may use alternate modeling techniques or
methods than those prescribed by the Administrator in the
Agency's `Guideline on Air Quality Models' under appendix W
to part 51 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations;
``(ii) the State may consider the degree of improvement in
visibility in the mandatory class I Federal area that is most
affected by emissions from the source without considering the
degree of improvement in visibility in any other such area;
and
``(iii) the Administrator (in any case in which the
Administrator has authority to determine emission limitations
which reflect such technology) may not consider the degree of
improvement in visibility in any area other than the
mandatory class I Federal area that is most affected by
emissions from the source; and
``(D) the determination of best available retrofit
technology by the State for any source shall be subject to
review by the Administrator, an administrative entity, or a
Federal or State court only pursuant to a clearly erroneous
standard of review;''; and
(C) in paragraph (4), by striking ``(or the date of
promulgation of such a plan revision in the case of action by
the Administrator under section 110(c) for purposes of this
section)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 788, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. FLAKE. I thank the Chair, and I'll immediately yield 1 minute to
the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Berg).
Mr. BERG. I thank the gentleman for yielding and joining me in this
amendment. I rise to support our amendment to ensure States continue to
have control over regional haze regulations.
When Congress first established EPA's Regional Haze Program, it
acknowledged that regional haze and visibility regulation has to do
purely with aesthetic value and not public health. For that very
reason, Congress emphasized that the States, not EPA, should be the
decisionmakers when it comes to regulations of regional haze.
Instead of empowering States to do what's best for their citizens,
the Obama administration has, again, imposed another costly one-size-
fits-all regulation for the producers of energy, who are the most
critical job creators in my State and across the country.
Our amendment will limit EPA's availability to override States'
management of regional haze, and it empowers States to implement their
own regional haze management plans, the plans that best fit their
individual needs.
It's time to stop the war on coal, and I urge my colleagues to
support our amendment on the underlying bill.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I seek to claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman and my colleagues, I oppose this amendment.
It would make a terrible bill even worse.
Our Nation's environmental laws are founded on cooperative
federalism. This is how it works:
The Federal Government sets minimum standards to assure that every
American has a basic level of protection so no one is forced to breathe
dirty air or drink dirty water. Then the States decide how to meet
those standards, or set stronger standards if they choose. The States
also implement the programs they adopt. Finally, if a State fails to
act, EPA can step in and do the job itself.
This approach has worked well for over 40 years. It means that there
is a healthy give-and-take between the States and the Environmental
Protection Agency. The States receive Federal funds, and they run their
own programs. But EPA has the tools to encourage the States to do more,
where necessary.
Before Congress adopted the Clean Air Act in 1970 and the Clean Water
Act in 1972, both signed by President Nixon, it was up to the States to
control pollution. The problem was that many of them didn't do it. We
had rivers catch on fire, smog so thick you couldn't see nearby
mountains, and a tremendous toll on public health and lives.
It wasn't that States didn't want to clean up pollution, but if there
are no minimum standards, States are forced into a race to the bottom.
If a State wants to reduce pollution from oil refineries, the oil
industry can threaten to build its new refineries in another State with
looser requirements. The result is that States were afraid to require
industry to clean up to the levels needed to protect the public.
This amendment, like other provisions already in the bill, overthrows
the principles of cooperative federalism that have guided us for 40
years. Instead, it would leave various pollution control decisions
almost entirely up to the States.
The proponents of this amendment claim that it is about EPA's
Regional Haze Program. Every Member should understand that this
amendment is not limited to regional haze.
The first part of the amendment is remarkably broad. It applies to
all of the criteria air pollutants regulated by the States--smog,
NOX, fine particulates--and it applies in every area that is
not meeting the health-based air quality standards.
[[Page H6245]]
This amendment says that even when a State fails to act, fails to
control air pollution, EPA can no longer provide a backstop. EPA must
wait at least 2 years before they can fill in for the States' failures.
And there's no deadline for EPA ever to act, allowing unhealthy air
quality to persist indefinitely. Citizens of that State would no longer
have any recourse.
The second part of this amendment effectively eliminates minimum
national criteria to protect air quality in our national parks.
The Clean Air Act has special provisions to protect air quality in
the pristine lands that the Nation has set aside for all Americans to
enjoy--our national parks, national monuments, and wilderness areas.
After all, we go to the Grand Canyon to see the view. There's little
point in protecting these lands if we allow their air and water to be
polluted.
This amendment targets those Clean Air Act provisions. It says that
when it comes to protecting the air quality of the national parks that
belong to all Americans, the State where a park is located has sole
discretion to decide how much, if any, pollution control would be
required. EPA would no longer be able to require a minimum level of
pollution reductions, and if the State failed to act entirely, as some
have done, EPA would no longer be able to step in and set pollution
controls.
The practical effect of this amendment would be to allow some of the
oldest and dirtiest power plants in the country to continue polluting
without standard pollution controls. I urge my colleagues to oppose
this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FLAKE. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Gosar).
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I would like to support and thank my
colleagues, Congressmen Jeff Flake and Rick Berg, and support this
amendment.
I represent the areas where two of the Arizona plants threatened by
the EPA's heavy-handed regulations are located, the Coronado Generating
Station in St. Johns and the Cholla plant near Joseph City. The third
plant, the Apache Generating Station, near Wilcox, is just 100 miles
away and serves a good portion of my constituents in the southern part
of my district. These are bedrock to our local communities. They
provide high-paying jobs where unemployment is already over 10 percent.
Over the August recess, the Environmental Protection Agency held
public hearings in Phoenix, Holbrook, and Benson on their Federal plan.
Each of the hearings in rural Arizona had over 300 people present. That
is an incredible turnout in these relatively small towns. That is how
important this issue is to my constituents.
The EPA refused to hold a hearing in St. Johns, despite being a
community directly impacted by the regulations, so I hosted a meeting
to facilitate the submission of public comments. On a night where the
local high school had their first football game and the county fair was
taking place, we still had over 100 people show up.
Listen, everybody wants clean air and good-paying jobs. The fact of
the matter is the EPA is acting well beyond its authority and under
public law in my State and many others across the country.
Vote ``yes'' for our amendment.
Mr. WAXMAN. I urge Members to oppose this amendment and yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. FLAKE. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr.
Lankford).
Mr. LANKFORD. Well, this is an interesting conversation when you deal
with how this all came about.
In January of 2009, the Sierra Club and several other organizations
sued the EPA to expand their authority, to expand what was the law. The
EPA ruled out of court in a settlement with them, and what was taken to
a judge is a consent decree to expand what was the policy, what was the
law.
So several questions have to be answered here. One is: Does the
executive branch have the authority to be able to change a law through
an agreement with the Sierra Club or any other organization?
Number 2 is: What is this all about? If you're dealing with
visibility issues, you're dealing not with health issues specifically
stated in the air quality--and all that happened with regional haze was
this is not about health; this is about visibility.
In my State, there's one of the national parks that will change 2
deciviews with the Federal implementation plan rather than the State
implementation plan.
{time} 1010
That will cost ratepayers in Oklahoma millions and millions of
dollars for something that cannot be seen by the human eye. This is
about jobs, and this is about who makes the decision. I do not like the
assumption that only people in Washington, D.C., care about the people
of Oklahoma. The people of Oklahoma care about the health and safety of
the people of Oklahoma.
I would vote ``yes'' for this amendment.
Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma, the gentleman from
Arizona, and the gentleman from North Dakota for cosponsoring this
amendment.
As the gentleman mentioned, what we are talking about here is
regional haze. This is not a health issue. It is a visibility issue.
As for the implementation plans being considered by the Federal
Government, let me just take the Navajo Generating Station in northern
Arizona. What is being considered is likely an SCR fix, selective
catalytic reduction, which would cost $1.1 billion. That would cause
the owners of the Navajo Generating Station to simply shut it down.
They can't produce economically with these kinds of burdens.
The benefits of that, we are told by the EPA, are that there would be
no perceptible improvements in visibility--none. Manmade sources make
up, at best, 5 percent of all regional haze in Arizona. This is 5
percent at best. So you require a fix costing $1.1 billion. For what?
For no perceptible improvement in visibility at the Grand Canyon.
Why are we doing this?
The costs to Arizona are immense: 85 percent of the power generated--
or used--by the Central Arizona Project to pump water for farmland and
whatever else comes from the Navajo Generating Station. If you shut
down that station, farmers will have to go back to groundwater where
they can. What does that do? That depletes our underground resources,
causing environmental havoc. This is madness what is going on.
What this amendment seeks to do is to force the EPA to actually
follow the law. The law requires that the EPA set the standard, and
then the State offers a State Implementation Plan, or a SIP. The
problem is that the EPA is ignoring what the State submits and then
entering into negotiations with third-party groups--environmental
groups or others--and ignoring the State.
We can't allow this to happen anymore. That's why this is a good
amendment. I urge its adoption.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Gosar
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13
printed in House Report 112-680.
Mr. GOSAR. I have an amendment made in order under the rule.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the Rules Committee Print, add the following:
TITLE VI--NO REGIONAL HAZE REGULATION ON THE COAL-POWERED NAVAJO
GENERATING STATION
SEC. 601. LIMITATION ON AUTHORITY TO ISSUE REGULATIONS.
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
shall not promulgate any Federal implementation plan pursuant
to section 169A or 169B of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7491,
7492; relating to visibility protection) that would--
(1) adversely impact employment at the coal-powered Navajo
Generating Station or
[[Page H6246]]
other coal-fired power plants and coal mines on tribal lands
in northern Arizona;
(2) directly or indirectly diminish the revenue received by
the Federal Government or any State, tribal or local
government by reducing through regulation the amount of coal
that is available for mining on Navajo and Hopi Reservation
lands;
(3) cause a reduction in coal-based revenue to meet
financial obligations required by federally authorized Indian
water rights settlements, pursuant to section 403(f) of the
Colorado River Basin Project Act (43 U.S.C. 1543(f)):
(4) reduce the amount of coal, or increase the cost of
coal, available for the Navajo Generating Station's Federal
responsibility to deliver water and power, as authorized by
the Colorado River Basin Project Act (43 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.); or
(5) expose the United States to liability for taking the
value of tribally-owned coal in northern Arizona through
regulation.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 788, 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 yield myself such time as I may consume.
Today, I am pleased to put forth an amendment to protect the
residents of Arizona from the EPA's attacks on the Navajo Generating
Station, which is located near Page, Arizona. The uncertainty
surrounding proposed EPA regulations and their effects on the Navajo
Generating Station were some of the first issues brought to my
attention when I was sworn into Congress.
The overreaching regulations would effectively shut down this
critical and unique plant. A closure would dramatically increase the
cost of water and power for my constituents, and it would eliminate
thousands of tribal and nontribal jobs--all for no discernible
improvement in visibility. Again, according to the Federal Government,
itself, no discernible improvement in visibility.
You see, this plant is unique because it is owned by six entities,
including the Federal Government. It was part of a plan created by
visionaries so that we could provide power to move water from the
Colorado River, through the largest aqueduct system ever constructed in
the United States, to the people of Arizona. You can see it across
here. In fact, the CAP delivers water to up to 80 percent of my State's
population. This includes 45 percent of Phoenix's water, which is the
fifth largest city in the United States, and 80 percent of the water to
the 32nd largest city in the United States, which is Tucson.
The Arizona we know today would, without a doubt, not exist if it
were not for this plant. The Navajo Generating Station and the
associated coal mine directly employ over 1,000 Arizonans, who are
mostly Native Americans. Additionally, according to an Arizona State
University study, the plant will indirectly account for more than $20
billion in gross State product and will indirectly provide for 3,000
jobs annually over the next 40 years.
I also want to point out a complicated but important part of this
issue. The Federal Government is actually working against itself with
these regulations. Revenues from the sale of excess power generated by
the plant are used to repay the Federal Government's debt for the
construction of the CAP project. They are also used to help pay for the
costs of congressionally authorized Indian water rights settlements
between the Federal Government, tribes, and entities within Arizona.
So, without these revenues, the Federal Government will be undermining
its own legal agreements with Native Americans and the people of
Arizona.
Let's put an end to this insanity. Vote for my amendment, and stop
the EPA from issuing far-reaching regulations that threaten jobs,
Arizona's water supply, affordable electricity, and tribal rights
established with Congress.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WAXMAN. This amendment is narrower than many of the provisions in
this bill.
Instead of providing a blanket get-out-of-jail-free card for many
polluters, like most of the provisions in this bill, this amendment
provides a blanket get-out-of-jail-free card for one polluter--the
Navajo Generating Station in Arizona. The amendment prohibits EPA from
requiring pollution controls if it would adversely impact employment at
the Navajo Generating Station or at other coal plants or coal mines on
tribal lands in northern Arizona.
Now, if you listened to the debate on the last amendment, you might
have thought this is another dispute about whether EPA or the States
should set the standards; but Arizona has no authority to control air
pollution on tribal lands, and the tribe has not established its own
program to set the standards. That means, by barring EPA from requiring
pollution controls, this amendment would have the effect of ensuring
modern pollution controls are not installed on this plant.
And that's a problem.
The Navajo Generating Station is a huge power plant--over 2,000
megawatts. It's also old. The Navajo Generating Station began operating
almost 40 years ago, and it was built without standard pollution
controls. And it's dirty. This plant spews almost 20,000 tons of
nitrogen oxides, or NOX, each year. This is a dangerous air
pollutant. NOX forms small particles that penetrate deep
into the lungs, causing emphysema, bronchitis and other respiratory
diseases, heart attacks, and premature deaths.
The Navajo Generating Station is the fifth highest emitter of
NOX pollution in the United States, and this plant harms the
air quality at 11 national parks and wilderness areas. These are some
of our Nation's most treasured and popular national parks. Almost 12
million Americans visit these parks each year. They travel there
because it's part of our natural heritage of the Nation and because it
belongs to all of us--but not if this amendment passes.
This amendment says that polluters' interests in continuing to
pollute trumps Americans' interests in having clean air in their
national parks. This amendment would remove EPA's authority to protect
clean air in the national parks, so I urge my colleagues to stand up
for clean air and to oppose this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 90 seconds to my friend from Arizona
(Mr. Franks).
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is offered by Mr. Gosar from Arizona,
and it confronts a stunning example of environmentalism run amuck. If
the Navajo Generating Station is forced to close due to the EPA's
nonsensical actions, it would be devastating to the economies of the
surrounding region, including those of the Hopi and Navajo Tribes.
As the sole remaining buyer of coal from the Hopi Tribe, shutting
down the Navajo Generating Station would cut nearly 90 percent of the
tribe's income, and it would effectively shut down the Hopi Tribe as a
functioning government in addition to putting hundreds of Arizonans,
including hundreds of members of the Navajo Tribe, out of work and
affecting hundreds of thousands of Arizonans' current ability to
receive water and electricity.
{time} 1020
In exchange for all of the difficulties created, the only ``benefit''
yielded would be a slight change in visibility, so slight as to not
even be detectable without specialized equipment that is significantly
more sensitive than the human eye. In other words, Mr. Chairman, the
supposed environmental benefit is functionally nonexistent. This is far
beyond the pale of environmental stewardship.
Mr. Chairman, I commend Mr. Gosar for offering this amendment, and I
sincerely encourage my colleagues to support it.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, the EPA is not going to shut down the power
plant; but if this amendment passes, they can do nothing to get some
reductions in pollution and work with the power plant to accomplish
that goal.
I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr.
Lujan).
Mr. LUJAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
This amendment is being offered under the guise of protecting tribal
sovereignty when we have seen the
[[Page H6247]]
complete opposite from the majority during this Congress. We have seen
time and time again the majority's willingness to ignore tribal issues
that are important to Indian country. A case in point is a bill the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar) sponsored, H.R. 1904, entitled the
Southeast Arizona Land Exchange. This was a giveaway of a sacred site
of the San Carlos Apache Tribe in Arizona to a copper mining company.
When the bill was considered, we heard desperate pleas from tribes
across the country asking us to stop a foreign-owned mining company
from bulldozing their sacred sites in the name of profit. I offered an
amendment to protect the sacred sites. It was straightforward and still
would have allowed the mining to take place, but it would have
protected those sacred sites. The Republican majority defeated the
amendment.
Another example is a refusal by some Members who are on the floor
today to cosponsor the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. My bill
would address years of suffering by those negatively impacted by
uranium mining on the Navajo Nation. To this day, members of the Navajo
Nation are sick and suffering from the legacy of uranium mining:
cancer, kidney disease, and, in severe cases, even death. When I
visited with Navajo elders and talking with people impacted by
exposure, they asked me, Are people in Congress waiting for us to die
for the problem to go away? Maybe someone should answer that question.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman from New Mexico.
Mr. LUJAN. Mr. Chairman, my Republican colleagues come down here to
say they are supporting and protecting tribal sovereignty with this
amendment. Let's take a hard look at their track record on these
issues. They seem to only want to support tribal sovereignty when it's
convenient, as Mr. Gosar's amendment clearly demonstrates. Before
offering this amendment, did the gentleman from Arizona even consult
with the Navajo Nation on this amendment?
What we should be doing is encouraging government-to-government
consultation between the tribe and EPA to solve this issue, not by
forcing an amendment.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to my good
friend, Mr. Schweikert, from Arizona.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
This is one of those moments of wondering where you begin with some
of the absurdity that we hear. I think this might be one. I skipped the
last set of comments because they had nothing to do with this
amendment.
The agreement is already there to spend the $45 million to do the
high-temperature NOX incineration. As this is way outside of
my expertise, that's my understanding. The EPA is coming back and
pushing and pushing and pushing to spend $1.1 billion for an almost
statistically insignificant improvement.
What you're really observing here is the classic case that we see
over and over on this sort of issue of an environmental political
feeder up against reality. The math isn't reality.
I used to chair the Indian Affairs Committee at my State legislature.
I've spent more time on Native American lands in Arizona than I bet
anyone in this body. The fact of the matter is if the EPA gets their
way here, it's going to bust a number of the water compacts and a bunch
of our agreements with those Indian communities.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, this is an amendment that would do more
harm than good, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 112-680 on
which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Markey of Massachusetts.
Amendment No. 3 by Mr. Waxman of California.
Amendment No. 4 by Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania.
Amendment No. 5 by Mr. Markey of Massachusetts.
Amendment No. 8 by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas.
Amendment No. 9 by Mr. McKinley of West Virginia.
Amendment No. 10 by Mr. Markey of Massachusetts.
Amendment No. 11 by Mr. DeFazio of Oregon.
Amendment No. 12 by Mr. Flake of Arizona.
Amendment No. 13 by Mr. Gosar 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. Markey
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 174,
noes 229, not voting 26, as follows:
[Roll No. 592]
AYES--174
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Lamborn
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner (OH)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--229
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Fincher
Flake
[[Page H6248]]
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--26
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Bishop (UT)
Castor (FL)
Ellison
Farenthold
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Himes
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Marchant
Moore
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Sullivan
{time} 1049
Messrs. HARPER, YOUNG of Indiana, and GARY G. MILLER of California
changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. THOMPSON of California, LoBIONDO, TOWNS, and RUSH changed
their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 592, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 592, had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chair, during today's vote on H.R. 3409, the Stop
the War on Coal Act, I inadvertently voted ``no'' on Congressman Ed
Markey's amendment No. 13, the first amendment voted on the bill. I
would have voted ``aye'' on Mr. Markey's amendment, rollcall No. 592.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chair, I inadvertently voted ``no'' on rollcall
592. I would like to be recorded as voting ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 592, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Waxman
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
(Mr. Waxman) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 178,
noes 229, not voting 22, as follows:
[Roll No. 593]
AYES--178
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Barrow
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
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
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--229
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
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 (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--22
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Landry
Lucas
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Sessions
Shimkus
Speier
Sullivan
{time} 1055
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
[[Page H6249]]
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 593, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chair, during rollcall vote No. 593, I mistakenly
recorded my vote as ``no'' when I should have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 593, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Kelly
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 242,
noes 168, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 594]
AYES--242
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
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
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Towns
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NOES--168
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Barrow
Barton (TX)
Becerra
Berkley
Bilbray
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crowley
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
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Labrador
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
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 (FL)
NOT VOTING--19
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Sullivan
{time} 1100
Mr. GUTIERREZ changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. PAUL, JONES, and BARTLETT changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 594 I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 594, 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. Markey
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 164,
noes 246, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 595]
AYES--164
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
[[Page H6250]]
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--246
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
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
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
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 (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--19
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Bilirakis
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1104
Mr. SCHRADER changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 595, 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. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 595, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas
(Ms. Jackson Lee) on which further proceedings were postponed and on
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 164,
noes 247, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 596]
AYES--164
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--247
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Holt
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
[[Page H6251]]
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--18
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1110
Mr. Levin changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 596, 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. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 596, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. McKinley
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from West
Virginia (Mr. McKinley) on which further proceedings were postponed and
on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 247,
noes 163, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 597]
AYES--247
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Culberson
DeFazio
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Hochul
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--163
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Manzullo
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--19
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
{time} 1113
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chair on rollcall No. 597, I inadvertantly voted
``no'' on Mr. McKinley's amendment. Had I voted correctly, I would have
voted ``aye.''
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 597, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 597, 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. JOHNSON of Illinois. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 597, I was off
the floor and inadvertantly missed the vote. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``present.''
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Markey
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 160,
noes 250, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 598]
AYES--160
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berkley
Bilbray
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
[[Page H6252]]
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
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
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Thompson (CA)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--250
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Culberson
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
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Hinojosa
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--19
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Gohmert
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
{time} 1119
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcll 598, 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. GARRETT. (Mr. Chair), on rollcll No. 598, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. DeFazio
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon
(Mr. DeFazio) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 168,
noes 243, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 599]
AYES--168
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
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
Gerlach
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--243
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Culberson
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
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
[[Page H6253]]
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--18
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1123
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 599, 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. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 599, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Flake
The Acting 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 Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 228,
noes 183, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 600]
AYES--228
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gardner
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
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 (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--183
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--18
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1127
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 600, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 600, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Gosar
The Acting 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 ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
[[Page H6254]]
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 226,
noes 181, not voting 22, as follows:
[Roll No. 601]
AYES--226
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gardner
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--181
Altmire
Amash
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Barrow
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--22
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Black
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Harris
Herger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Wilson (SC)
{time} 1131
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 601, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 601, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. West). The question is on the amendment in the
nature of a substitute, as amended.
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Yoder) having assumed the chair, Mr. West, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3409) to
limit the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to issue
regulations before December 31, 2013, under the Surface Mining Control
and Reclamation Act of 1977, and, pursuant to House Resolution 788, he
reported the bill back to the House with an amendment 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 to the amendment
reported from the Committee of the Whole?
If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute, as amended.
The amendment was 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
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman opposed to the bill?
Mrs. CAPPS. Yes, I am opposed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mrs. Capps moves to recommit the bill H.R. 3409 to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce with instructions to report
the same back to the House forthwith, with the following
amendment:
At the end of title II of the bill, insert the following
new section:
SEC. 203. ENSURING CONSUMERS PAY LESS FOR GAS AND THAT FUEL
EFFICIENT AUTOMOBILES CONTINUE TO BE MADE IN
AMERICA.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds as follows:
(1) The standards of the national program to improve fuel
efficiency and reduce pollution for light-duty cars and
trucks will provide major economic and consumer benefits to
the United States.
(2) The standards will save families more than $1.7
trillion in fuel costs and reduce America's dependence on oil
by more than 2 million barrels per day in 2025, which is
equivalent to one-half of the oil which our Nation currently
imports from OPEC countries each day.
(3) As a result of the standards, a family with a model
year 2025 vehicle will save more than $8,000 in fuel costs
over the life of the vehicle compared to a 2011 year vehicle.
(4) As a result of the standards, average net savings for
the owner of a 2025 vehicle will be equivalent to a drop in
fuel prices of $1 per gallon.
(b) Preservation of Rule.--Section 330 of the Clean Air
Act, as added by section 201 of this Act, shall not apply
with respect to the final rule issued by the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation on
August 28, 2012, relating to standards for pollution control
and fuel efficiency for model year 2017 and later light-duty
vehicles, and such rule shall take effect on the effective
date specified in the rule, if nullification of such rule
would result in--
(1) consumers, on average, paying more for gasoline over
the life of their motor vehicles; or
(2) the loss of jobs in the United States automobile
manufacturing industrial sector or a negative impact on the
overall United States economy.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
[[Page H6255]]
{time} 1140
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, there are many times when we come to this
floor and engage in heated debate, and we've heard some heated debate
on this bill. But my final amendment offers us the opportunity to come
together to do something extraordinarily important, and that is to
ensure our constituents' hard-earned cash is redirected away from the
gas pump and back into their wallets. I want to be clear, the passage
of this amendment will not prevent the passage of the underlying bill.
If it's adopted, my amendment will be incorporated into the bill and
the bill will be immediately voted upon.
Now I make no apologies for opposing this bill. Regardless of how you
feel about the bill, my amendment should be something we could all
agree on.
My amendment preserves new fuel efficiency standards issued last
month if their repeal would mean higher prices at the pump for our
constituents or lost jobs for our workers. These new standards raise
fuel efficiency to 54.5 miles per gallon. That's roughly twice the
mileage our cars are getting today.
By 2025, these standards will save consumers $1.7 trillion at the gas
pump, and they will cut our oil imports by 2 million barrels per day.
That's one half our current imports for OPEC. They also represent a new
chapter for American ingenuity.
Mr. Speaker, if U.S. engineers made it possible for every car to
include a computer more powerful than the one that sent a man to the
Moon, then surely they can produce cars that go further on a gallon of
gas. The good news is they can and they are.
There are now 57 fuel-efficient models available in showrooms today,
up from 27 models in 2009. Car makers have retooled some of their most
popular models to boost efficiency, and the improvements keep coming.
The first half of this year set the record for highest-ever fuel
efficiency for new vehicles. Consumers are rewarding these
breakthroughs. Fuel efficiency is the top concern for car buyers by
far, and this is according to Consumer Reports.
Consumers support these new standards. Families will save an
estimated $8,000 in gasoline costs over the lifetime of their car, and
that's equivalent to lowering the price of gasoline by $1 per gallon.
These new standards also provide something consumer trends cannot:
long-term certainty. And that's why three major automakers--General
Motors, Ford, and Chrysler--all support them.
Strong standards tell carmakers exactly what goal they need to reach
by when so they can invest in innovation, deploy new technologies, and
build cars right here in America. When they do that, they hire more
workers. More than 150,000 Americans have jobs making parts for and
assembling more efficient cars in America today. Car makers are moving
production to our shores also.
One car maker alone, Honda, recently announced plans to move all
global Civic hybrid manufacturing to Indiana from Japan, creating 300
jobs by the end of the year.
This onshoring of jobs is because of our commitment to making more
efficient cars and components in America. That's why GM's CEO, Dan
Akerson, called these standards, ``a win for American manufacturers for
the very first time.''
Mr. Speaker, everybody wins when more efficient cars hit the road.
American workers win, drivers win, and automakers. These standards
demonstrate the best of America, how creating jobs goes hand-in-hand
with protecting the environment and health, how drivers can save
billions in gasoline costs, how the American auto industry can compete
with any country in the world. That's why we must preserve these
historic standards and the enormous benefits that come with them by
voting for my final amendment.
Mr. Speaker, I respectfully ask that all colleagues weigh this simple
proposition: Do you want your constituents to pay less at the pump and
drive more efficient cars made in America? If your answer is yes, then
vote for my amendment. It ensures that our constituents will save
thousands of dollars every year at the gas pump, and it makes sure that
American workers will find jobs building the cars of the future right
here in America.
Today we have the opportunity to speak with one voice, to save these
landmark car efficiency standards. It's up to us. Support this final
amendment to the bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion
to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, this motion is nothing more than a
distraction from the underlying legislation that we're considering
today, and the journey that we began in January of 2011 to cut
government spending, to create jobs and, today, to stop the
administration's war on the coal industry.
We, all of us in this Chamber, sat here a little over a year ago, and
we heard an address by the Prime Minister of Australia. She started her
speech off by saying, you know, I remember being a young girl, sitting
on the floor of my living room watching as Neil Armstrong and Buzz
Aldrin landed on the Moon.
She went on to talk about that era of innovation in America, what
that meant and how that inspired the rest of the world. Do we need to
be reminded that it was the coal industry that fueled America's
innovative engine and powered America's innovative wheels during that
period of innovation? I don't think so. Today's underlying legislation,
it's about the thousands of jobs that have already been cut from the
coal industry, the thousands more that are in jeopardy to be cut from
the coal industry.
It's about the millions of Americans and America's businesses that
are paying skyrocketing prices, 23 million Americans underemployed, and
yet we've got an administration that wants to attack the very reliable
energy source that would fuel a resurgence in manufacturing and put
America back to work.
Ladies and gentlemen, I implore to you, defeat this motion to
recommit. Vote on the final passage of this legislation today. Let's
get America back to work and stop the administration's war on coal.
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
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on
the question of passage.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 173,
noes 233, not voting 23, as follows:
[Roll No. 602]
AYES--173
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Barrow
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
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
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McIntyre
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
[[Page H6256]]
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--233
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
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
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
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 (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--23
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Cohen
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Lujan
Mack
McGovern
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Smith (TX)
Speier
{time} 1159
Mr. HENSARLING changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall 602, 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. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 602, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 233,
noes 175, not voting 21, as follows:
[Roll No. 603]
AYES--233
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Berg
Berkley
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Loebsack
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Renacci
Ribble
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
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)
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--175
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Bilbray
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Woolsey
Yarmuth
[[Page H6257]]
NOT VOTING--21
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Miller, Gary
Murphy (CT)
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Sessions
Shimkus
Speier
{time} 1208
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. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 603, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall 603, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''
Personal Explanation
Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I mistakenly voted ``aye'' on rollcall No.
603. My intention was to vote ``no.''
Personal Explanation
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, during the course of the week, I
was absent for legislative business; had I been present, I would have
cast the following votes:
Rollcall 585--H.R. 5044--On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as
Amended--``yes.''
Rollcall 586--H.R. 5912--On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as
Amended--``yes.''
Rollcall 587--H. Res. 788--On Ordering the Previous Question--
``yes.''
Rollcall 588--H. Res. 788--On Agreeing to the Resolution--``yes.''
Rollcall 591--H.R. 5987--On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as
Amended--``no.''
Rollcall 592--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``no.''
Rollcall 593--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``no.''
Rollcall 594--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``yes.''
Rollcall 595--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``no.''
Rollcall 596--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``no.''
Rollcall 597--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``yes.''
Rollcall 598--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``no.''
Rollcall 599--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``no.''
Rollcall 600--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``yes.''
Rollcall 601--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``yes.''
Rollcall 602--H.R. 3409--On Motion to Recommit with instructions--
``no.''
Rollcall 603--H.R. 3409--On Passage--``yes.''
____________________