[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 64 (Thursday, May 1, 2014)]
[House]
[Pages H3368-H3393]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2015
General Leave
Mr. COLE. 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 consideration of H.R. 4487, and that I
may include tabular material on the same.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Meadows). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Oklahoma?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 557 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 4487.
The Chair appoints the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) to
preside over the Committee of the Whole.
{time} 0912
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 4487) making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2015, and for other purposes, with Ms.
Ros-Lehtinen in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) and the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, thank you for the recognition, and I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
H.R. 4487, the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for fiscal year
2015, provides $3.3 billion for the operations of the legislative
branch, excluding Senate items. The recommendation is the equivalent to
the fiscal year 2014 level and a decrease of $122.5 million, or 3.7
percent, from the requested level.
Conforming with the longstanding practice under which each body of
Congress determines its own housekeeping requirements and the other
concurs without intervention, funds for the Senate are not included in
the bill as reported by the committee.
Through seven hearings and meetings with agency heads, the committee
listened to all who presented their respective concerns and budget
requests. It was necessary to make some critical decisions and
prioritize programs, and we did this in a bipartisan and transparent
manner.
We are presenting to the House today a bill that is fiscally
responsible and maintains current operations for the Legislative Branch
agencies.
The bill includes $1.2 billion for the operations of the House. This
is equivalent to the fiscal year 2014 enacted
[[Page H3369]]
level and $20 million below the request. It is worthy to note that the
funding provided for Member's Representational Allowances and
Committees provides for the current operations, and I do not anticipate
further reductions in the coming year. The bill also includes the
Members' pay freeze for fiscal year 2015.
{time} 0915
With this bill, total funding for the House of Representatives is 14
percent below fiscal year 2010.
The bill includes $348 million for the Capitol Police. This is $9.5
million above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $77 million less
than the requested level. This will support 1,775 sworn officers and
370 civilian positions. A slight increase above last year is provided
to ensure the Capitol Police maintain current operations and ensure
mission-essential training.
Knowing that access to the House office buildings is of critical
concern to Members, we directed that the Chief of Police develop an
action plan that will make sure public access to our buildings is
easily accessible during heightened periods of visitation. The
implementation of this plan is in the early stages, and we will
continue to monitor the budgetary impacts to the Capitol Police.
The bill includes $45.7 million for the Congressional Budget Office.
This is at the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $378,000 below the
requested level.
The bill includes $488.6 million for the Architect of the Capitol,
excluding Senate items. This is a decrease of $40.5 million from the
fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $79 million below the requested
level.
Within the recommended level, the committee continues its
prioritization of projects that promote the safety and public health of
workers and occupants, decrease the deferred maintenance backlog, and
invest to achieve future energy savings.
The committee recognizes the continuing challenge of preserving and
maintaining our infrastructure and prioritizing critical projects in
the current budgetary environment. It is important to note that $21
million is recommended for the final phase of dome restoration, a very
high priority of this committee.
In addition, we are continuing the 5-year practice of including funds
for the House Historic Buildings Revitalization Trust Fund, a fund
established by Ms. Wasserman Schultz when she was chair of this
subcommittee in anticipation of the renovation of the historic Cannon
House Office Building.
Might I say, it is one of the really tremendous contributions that my
friend and colleague has made, and I hope it stays inside of our
operating procedure for many years to come. It was a wise decision.
Also included is $16 million for the lease cost of a portion of the
Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. Federal Office Building in preparation of the
Cannon renewal project.
The bill includes $595 million for the operations of the Library of
Congress. This is an increase of $16 million above the fiscal year 2014
enacted level and $1.9 million above the requested level. The amount
will allow the Library to continue at current operations.
Established by Congress in 1800, the Library of Congress is one of
the largest libraries in the world, with a collection of more than 130
million print, audio, and video items in 460 languages. It is
imperative adequate funding is provided to maintain acquisitions,
preservation, the administration of U.S. copyright laws by the U.S.
Copyright Office for research and analysis of policy issues for the
Congress by the Congressional Research Service, and the administration
of a national program to provide reading material to the blind and
physically handicapped.
The bill before you accomplishes all of that.
It is important to note $5.5 million of the funding is provided for
the Deacidification Program, which is $1 million over the Library's
request. And $8.2 million is for the Teaching with Primary Sources
Program, at $1 million over the request, to be used for competitive
opportunities for developing online interactive and apps for classroom
use on Congress and civic participation.
It is $1.2 million above the request for the Copyright Office to
reduce the claims and processing time for copyright registrations and
to conduct business analyses for the process engineering of the
documentation recordation function.
The bill includes $122.6 million for the Government Printing Office.
This is an increase of $3.3 million above the fiscal year 2014 enacted
level and $6.3 million below the requested level. Funds have been
included for continuation of development and infrastructure costs
associated with the Federal digital system and the system replacement
for upgrading the extensible markup language.
The bill includes $519.6 million for the Government Accountability
Office. This is an increase of $14.2 million above the fiscal year 2014
enacted level and $5.5 million below the requested level. Language is
included to establish a Center for Audit Excellence to build global
institutional auditing capacity and promote good governance. This
center is to be operated on a fee-based basis.
Finally, the bill includes $3.42 million for the Open World
Leadership Trust Fund. This is $2.58 million below the fiscal year 2014
enacted level and $4.58 million below the requested level.
As a sign of support for Ukraine, the committee has reduced the
program by 43 percent. This represents the program's percentage of
participants from Russia. It is important to stress that Open World's
program does not just focus on work with Russia. Ukraine has the next
largest group of participants, closely followed by other nations in the
surrounding region. Therefore, we encourage the center to do more in
Ukraine and with other participating countries in the surrounding
region.
I would like to thank my good friend, the ranking member, Debbie
Wasserman Schultz, for her role throughout the process. We have worked
well together in a bipartisan manner. It has truly been a team effort.
Also, I extend my appreciation to all members of the subcommittee in
their efforts in helping bring this measure to the floor. I also want
to thank the truly excellent staff that has nursed me through this.
Let me just add, parenthetically, that we had a pretty unusual
situation in that, because of some early retirements and the loss of
our dear friend, Bill Young, we had a lot of reshuffling to do on our
committee. On our side, that meant we only had one carryover member,
and that was the vice chairman, Mr. Harris from Maryland, who was
indispensable and extraordinarily helpful to the rest of us.
Again, without a capable staff and without, frankly, a wonderful
working partner in my ranking member, we would have had a much more
difficult time. Frankly, I don't think anybody in this institution
knows this bill and this process better than Ms. Wasserman Schultz. She
has been my friend. I was once on her committee as a very junior member
when she chaired it, and I learned a lot from her then. I learned a lot
more from her this time.
I look forward to the debate, and with that, I reserve the balance of
my time.
[[Page H3370]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH01MY14.001
[[Page H3371]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH01MY14.002
[[Page H3372]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH01MY14.003
[[Page H3373]]
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
First, I want to thank Chairman Rogers and my ranking member, Nita
Lowey, for the commitment that they made to regular order, which is why
we have our second appropriations bill on the House floor by May 1. It
is my hope that we can stay true to this commitment throughout the
remainder of this year.
I also want to thank my friend, the gentleman from Oklahoma, Tom
Cole, who I really couldn't say enough good things about what an
incredible partner he has been. We really have--and I will say that
several times throughout my remarks--worked cooperatively,
collaboratively, and I think the finest compliment that I can pay
another Member is that they are an institutionalist--someone who has
incredible respect for those that came before us and the history and
tradition and all that has led to us being the finest democratic
institution in the entire world.
We are stewards of the Capitol complex in the Legislative Branch
Appropriations Subcommittee, and the chairman really has most
definitely recognized that and honored it.
The budget deal struck during the shutdown last year gave us 2 years
of discretionary caps so that the Appropriations Committee can now get
on with the business of funding important government programs.
There are many opinions about how these resources should be allocated
amongst programs, but that is a legitimate debate, rather than the
alternative, which we saw during the government shutdown last October.
For my part, I am pleased with and supportive of the bill that my
good friend Chairman Cole has put forward today, done within the
funding constraints that the Legislative Branch Subcommittee had to
operate under. We worked collaboratively, and, as always, it was a
pleasure to work with him.
The bill provides level funding, and, unfortunately, the constrained
allocation has ensured that there is no increase for Member and
committee offices. Personal office budgets have been cut by 16 percent
since 2010, while committees have been cut by 14 percent over the same
period. When considered through a long lens, those cuts are even more
damaging.
The Congressional Research Service reported in August 2010 that House
committee staff levels declined 28 percent between 1977 and 2009. The
recent cuts have only served to compound the decline in staffing levels
highlighted by CRS.
There is no question that these cuts will continue to have a harmful
effect on this institution--on our ability to retain the best and
brightest and to serve our constituents most effectively. We have gone
through some difficult economic times, there is no question, but as we
emerge, we need to consider how continuing these stark funding levels
affects our ability to compete with the executive branch and the Senate
for the best talent. When a Senator can offer to double the salary of a
legislative assistant working for a House Member, there is an imbalance
that we ignore in the House, at our peril.
I want to thank Chairman Cole also for the focus placed on the
Copyright Office in this bill. In the FY 2015 budget hearing with the
Library of Congress last month, we heard about the need to bring the
copyright system into the 21st century with business practices that
provide for more interaction and improvement with the copyright
community.
This bill starts that process by investing $1.5 million in much-
needed IT improvements for the Copyright Office. The bill also carves
out $750,000 to deal with the copyright backlog, which grew larger over
the last few years as they lost staff due to tightening budgets.
As the authorizing committees review our Nation's copyright laws,
these additional investments will ensure that the Copyright Office can
meet immediate needs as well as prepare for new ways to do business.
During the Capitol Police hearing and during subcommittee markup we
heard from Members on both sides of the aisle about the impact door
closures have had on our constituents and staff. This is why we
included report language requesting a report on how the Capitol Police
can accomplish door openings without increasing overtime. We have now
received what I can only hope is a draft report from the Capitol Police
that details the opening of only two doors for 2\1/2\ hours each day.
The committee has been clear that access is one of the Capitol
Police's top priorities, and the current plan does not reflect that
priority. My expectation, which I know is shared by many Members, is
that now that the Capitol Police have been provided essentially full
relief from the sequester, multiple doors throughout the House should
be staffed and opened for the entire workday.
Reducing overtime costs through door closures is unacceptable.
Forcing our constituents, staff, and people trying to do business at
the Capitol into long lines is inefficient and stressful for the public
and the officers.
I will be asking the Chief to go back to the drawing board on this
report.
The bill continues funding for the House Historic Buildings
Revitalization Trust Fund at $70 million, for which I thank the
chairman. Since the estimate to rehabilitate the Cannon House Office
Building, which is 100 years old, has come in at a staggering $753
million, investing a little at a time in the trust fund is the most
responsible way to fund this and other major projects.
The bill also includes funding for the final phase of the Capitol
dome project at $21.2 million. The funding provided this year will
address the interior walls, columns, and coffered ceiling that have
sustained significant water damage and paint delamination.
The public will soon see the skyline of our Nation's Capital changed
with scaffolding on the Capitol dome that will begin to go up at the
end of this month, using funds from previous years. The total pricetag
to restore the dome will be around $106 million after this year's
funding is provided.
This bill also directs the Library of Congress to continue their 30-
year program to deacidify books and provides an additional $1 million
to keep that program on track.
Also of note, the bill cuts the Open World Leadership Center by 43
percent to $3.4 million. The Stennis Center Leadership program is
funded at $430,000 after finally--and thankfully--providing the
committee with a budget justification for the first time, on time.
I congratulate Chairman Cole on writing a balanced bill with a few
targeted investments. Even though I wish we could do more--and I know
he does too--to invest in our staff, I know that the chairman had many
competing priorities, including our vast infrastructure needs.
Chairman Cole, again, I have truly enjoyed working with you in this
role, and I appreciate the accommodations made for the minority in this
bill. Working with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle has been
an absolute pleasure. It was a collaborative and cooperative effort. We
are truly, I think, the example for the entire Congress on what
collegiality means. The process in putting this bill together was
really a team effort.
Chairman Cole understands that this may be the smallest
appropriations bill, but one that is essential to his colleagues and
the job they do to serve their constituents.
In conclusion, Madam Chairman, I want to thank the committee staff as
well who has helped to craft this bill and assisted in a bipartisan
manner: Shalanda Young; Liz Dawson, who continues to amaze us every
single fiscal year; Chuck Turner; and Jenny Panone.
Also, we could not have done this without our personal staff: Maria
Bowie and Sean Murphy, with Chairman Cole's personal office; and Ian
Rayder from my office.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend from
the great State of Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).
{time} 0930
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Chairman, I seek the opportunity to have a
colloquy with Chairman Cole. I thank them for their work, the chairman
and his staff, the work they have put into the legislation they are
bringing before us this morning.
[[Page H3374]]
As a member of the Congressional Yellow Pages Caucus, I strongly
believe that if an activity is available from a private company that
can be found in the Yellow Pages, it should either not be a
responsibility carried out by the Federal Government or, at the very
least, performed by a private firm under contract with the Federal
Government.
It is in that spirit that Congress needs to begin the process of
leveling the playing field between the Government Printing Office, the
GPO, and private industry. Nowhere is the overreach of the GPO and its
statutory authority, found in title 44 of the United States Code, more
egregious than in the area of secure Federal credentials.
Consider this: title 44 was codified in 1968. Secure credentials,
produced by the private sector, first appeared about 30 years later and
then became pervasive after 9/11.
I can't imagine that policymakers in the sixties could have ever
envisioned title 44 expanding beyond the printing of copies of the
Federal Register or the Declaration of Independence to cover
credentials, let alone secure credentials, as the kind of printed
products the GPO has traditionally produced.
The GPO's statutory monopoly on this issue has been challenged by
numerous reports by the GAO and groups such as the National Performance
Review.
Secure credentials are a world apart from the products that GPO has
traditionally produced and should not be subject to title 44.
I hope that we can take steps to define a clear role for the GPO,
create competition, and ensure that the private secure credentials
industry and companies like MorphoTrust in Tennessee can perform these
functions that the GPO has no business in carrying out.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, I yield myself 30 seconds just to
note that the Government Printing Office has been in business, doing
the work, beyond the scope of printing the Federal Register, for more
than 100 years.
It is also important to note that they specifically contract with the
private sector to print a myriad of documents, and they are not the
only institution that prints documents.
Madam Chair, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Moran).
Mr. MORAN. Madam Chair, I want to thank my good friend from Florida
for her leadership on this bill, as well as my very good friend from
Oklahoma, who has done a terrific job as chair. Both of you take your
responsibilities extremely seriously, as you should.
This is the bill that funds the institution itself, and you have both
resisted efforts to demean this institution and to suggest that
traditions and resources that have been available to this institution
in the past are not necessary.
Both of you understand, because you are institutionalists and revere
this institution, there are a lot of things that go on in this
institution that play an important role toward serving the American
public.
I do regret the fact that there was an amendment that was not made in
order. I didn't expect that this amendment would have passed, but it
was an issue that needed to be discussed on the House floor because it
sets a precedent, what I believe is a very dangerous precedent.
This year, this bill freezes congressional compensation. It is the
sixth year in a row that we have frozen our own salaries, but by
putting it in this bill, I have been part of this institution long
enough to know that, once you do that, there is a very high likelihood
that neither political party, no matter who has the majority, is going
to be willing to ever take it out; and so it will acquire an aspect of
permanence.
So what I suggested is that we have a $25 a day housing stipend, just
for those Members that live at least 50 miles from Washington, D.C. I
am 10 miles. It wouldn't affect me. None of the other things that are
available to Members, small as they might be, affect us either.
Obviously, we can't change our own pay. We can't raise it. So it
wouldn't apply till the next term. I am retiring, but I will never lose
my love for this institution, and that is why I am doing it.
It just happens that we will be in session 112 days, times 25, that
would come, not coincidentally, to exactly what the salary increase
would have been had we not frozen it.
The reason for doing this is that, since I was first elected to the
Congress, in inflation-adjusted dollars, the compensation to Members
has gone down by one-fifth. In the meantime, the cost of rental housing
in D.C. has increased substantially.
Rental housing is going up as fast or faster than most other
metropolitan areas of the country. In fact, the median cost per month,
it is $2,250; per year, it is $27,000.
The problem is that if we continue to freeze the compensation to
Members, my fear is--and Mr. Cole, I know, is going to provide a
different perspective, but I think the fear is legitimate--that what we
will wind up with is a composition of the Congress composed primarily
of Members who don't need the pay, who are independently wealthy, who
can blithely send the check back and take credit for it because they
don't need it. In fact, more than half the Congress today, I
understand, are millionaires.
On the other hand, you may have some who figure, well, I will serve
one, two, three terms and then go into the private sector and use that
experience, albeit limited, to enrich themselves. A lot of people do
it. I am not being particularly critical, but I want to raise the issue
as to what that means for the Congress itself, for this institution.
I don't think this is the right thing to do, Madam Chairman. We need
people who represent those folks who barely make it, who have to pay a
mortgage, who have student loans to pay, who have kids to raise. They
represent the majority in this country, and it is so difficult for
Members to maintain two residences.
I wouldn't have expected us to lose an opportunity for self-
flagellation, but I do think we should have raised this issue.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I yield the gentleman an additional minute.
Mr. MORAN. I thank my very good friend.
I think I have made my point. We need to be as representative of the
country as possible. For all our failings, for all our deficiencies,
for all our needs, our struggles, we need to be able to empathize with
people who have the same kind of financial constraints.
I know people think this is a lot of money, but if you are not going
to show respect to yourself as an institution, you can't expect the
public to show you much respect either.
We are the board of directors of the largest economic entity in the
world. We deserve that respect. We ought to stand up for ourselves,
defend this Congress--because what we do is defensible--and show that
we merit adequate compensation, so we can be wholly representative of
this great American public.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
My friend and I have had a number of opportunities to talk about this
issue. We talked about it in committee, we talked about it yesterday in
discussion on the rule, and we are talking about it today because I
think he wants to make his point, and I think he is using every
opportunity to make his point.
Quite frankly, it is a point that needs to be made and a point that
deserves to be heard. One of the things I will miss about my friend a
lot is his tenacity when he has got something that he thinks is
important and his willingness to go through a little heat and a little
criticism, which I know he has received over this, to make that point.
That is a very valuable characteristic in any Member.
I don't think we are in immediate danger, the kind of future and the
kind of House that my friend describes, but I do think, if we were to
continue this course indefinitely, we would be.
Now, again, as I mentioned yesterday in our exchange, remember, a lot
of people who come here for a short time aren't coming here to cash out
on anything. They are coming here because they believe in the limited
time of public service, and quite often, that is a pretty popular point
of view in their districts. So I cast no aspersions on somebody that
comes for 6 or 8 years, and that is their choice.
[[Page H3375]]
In my State, that is exactly what Senator Tom Coburn did in this body
for 6 years and what he has done in the United States Senate. I know
that is a sincere opinion as to what he thinks the appropriate thing
is, and quite frankly, he has certainly never cast himself out and hung
around Washington, D.C. I think that is true of many, many Members.
As my friend makes a good point about the character of the body and
where we may be headed if we do the wrong things over time, I also
think we are in a really critical point in our country where we are
having to make a lot of difficult decisions.
We have made a lot of difficult decisions on this committee, made a
lot of cuts that we didn't want to make because we thought the budget
deficit was too high, and we needed to ask people to make some painful
reductions.
I think if you are going to ask people to make painful reductions you
have got to lead by example, and I think that is actually what both
sides have tried to do.
Again, I know when my friends were in the majority, we didn't always
get cost of living increases and those sorts of things either. They had
inherited a difficult situation. They were making tough choices, and
they were trying to lead by example.
I think that is exactly what this majority has continued to do, and
so maintaining your personal credibility and your institutional
responsibility, while you are arriving at and administering difficult
decisions, I think, is a very important characteristic. So that is what
we have tried to do in this bill.
Again, I appreciate my friend for making his point because I think,
over time, we could change the character of the institution if we are
not careful. I don't think that is an immediate concern, but it is one
we ought to reflect on as we move forward.
Again, I thank him for his service, and I thank him for his
persistence and tenacity.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, at this time, I yield such time
as she may consume to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), our
distinguished ranking member of the full Appropriations Committee.
Mrs. LOWEY. Madam Chair, I want to thank Chairman Cole and Ranking
Member Debbie Wasserman Schultz for their hard work on this bill. It
really was a bipartisan effort, and I do think you have produced a good
bill.
Today, we consider the smallest of the appropriations bills which
funds the operations of our Nation's legislative branch.
Without Senate items, the bill is $3.326 billion, the same as 2014.
While I am pleased with the overall funding level, it was my hope that,
after years of cuts to Member Representational Allowances, or the MRAs,
we might provide a modest increase this year.
Member offices have sustained $106 million in cuts since 2010. While
some reduction was appropriate, those cuts have severely strained the
House's ability to serve the American people, due to fewer staff for
constituent casework, the inability to effectively communicate with our
constituents, and fewer district offices.
Unless we return to sensible funding levels, we cannot stave off the
further erosion of expertise, morale, and comity in this great
institution.
This bill funds the Open World Leadership program at $3.42 million, a
reduction of $2.58 million. Instead of reducing funds equivalent to the
amount for exchanges with Russians, we should shift the funds to
support a larger presence in Ukraine and other countries fostering
democratic principles, as suggested in the committee report.
{time} 0945
Madam Chair, with that said, I congratulate, once again, the chairman
and the ranking member of the subcommittee for putting forth a balanced
bill and urge its support.
Mr. COLE. I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, at this time, I yield 3 minutes
to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), our distinguished ranking
member of the Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I thank the gentlelady for yielding to me.
Madam Chair, I just wanted to say a few words in support of this
year's Legislative Branch Appropriations Act. I have been honored to
serve on this subcommittee for the last 4 years. I am the only member,
in fact, to have served on the subcommittee for the last two
Congresses.
It may have the smallest budget of the 12 appropriations bills, but
it is vital to the work we do here in Congress and our ability to serve
our constituents. From paying our staffs, to maintaining a digital and
printed record of our work, to getting cost estimates of our
legislative proposals, the legislative branch is so important to the
proper functioning of our system of government.
It is especially gratifying that this year's bill reverses some of
the draconian cuts from the legislative branch which have occurred over
the last few years. I said last year that including these cuts would
have been like cutting off our nose to spite our face. After all,
agencies under the bill's jurisdiction, like the Congressional Budget
Office and the Government Accountability Office, help Congress to
identify potential savings and efficiencies throughout the government.
Or consider the Architect of the Capitol, which is responsible for
the maintenance, operation, development, and preservation of the United
States Capitol. Two years ago, the House couldn't find the necessary
funds to complete the restoration of one of the most vital symbols of
our democracy, the Capitol dome. I am pleased this year that the
legislation includes $21.2 million for the last phase of the Capitol
dome restoration.
Other agencies in the bill receive much-needed investments, including
the Library of Congress, the United States Capitol Police, and the
Government Printing Office.
I would like to commend the outstanding bipartisan work of Chairman
Cole and Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz in crafting this year's bill.
Chairman Cole has done a yeoman's job stepping in at the last moment
following the retirement of our colleague Rodney Alexander and
shepherding this measure for the full House Appropriations Committee
this morning.
I am also greatly appreciative of Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz,
whose institutional knowledge of the agencies in this measure is really
unmatched.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, I yield the gentleman from
Georgia an additional 2 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Both Chairman Cole and Ranking Member
Wasserman Schultz were greatly aided by their excellent staff: Liz
Dawson, Chuck Turner, Jenny Panone, and Shalanda Young.
I look forward to supporting the bill and doing all that I can to
ensure its swift passage by the full House of Representatives.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I was tempted to actually yield my friend from Georgia (Mr. Bishop)
additional time, he was being so kind to all of us on both sides of the
aisle. But I genuinely want to thank my friend who is a very valuable
member of our committee and, again, someone who is always thoughtful,
always helpful, and always works in a bipartisan manner. You saw it on
this floor yesterday when he and Chairman Culberson delivered their
bill in a very bipartisan and a very professional manner. He does the
same thing on our committee. So I just wanted to thank my friend.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, at this time, I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I just wanted to once again thank my friend, my working partner in
this, Ms. Wasserman Schultz. She, in this area, is an absolute expert
without peer in this House, which has been enormously helpful to me.
Again, I want to thank the members of the committee. I want to thank
all of the staff, frankly, from both sides of the aisle, all of the
personnel offices. They have just been absolutely first-rate.
[[Page H3376]]
As I observed, I think, in one of our committee meetings, if the
current chairman of the Democratic National Committee and the former
chief of staff of the Republican National Committee can work this well
together, then surely all things are possible in this universe.
It has been a pleasure to work with my friend. I look forward to
continuing that collaboration as we go forward.
With that, Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. ROBY. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 4487--the
Fiscal Year 2015 Legislative Branch Appropriations Act.
For our government to truly remain ``of the people, and by the
people'' the House of Representatives must be a place that is open and
transparent to all. From ensuring constituents can meet with their
elected representatives to guaranteeing open access to the legislative
business of Congress, the Legislative Branch must be accessible to the
public. We also have a responsibility to ensure the safety and security
of the U.S. Capitol complex for all who work here and all who visit.
Therefore, as a Member of the Legislative Branch Appropriations
Subcommittee, one of my priorities has been to provide appropriate
oversight regarding the security of the U.S. Capitol complex, including
Members, staff, and visitors. I have met personally with House Sergeant
of Arms Paul Irving and will continue to follow closely any
developments relating to security concerns. I greatly appreciate Mr.
Irving and our professional team of Capitol Police officers for the
tireless work they put in to protect us and all who visit these
hallowed halls.
Madam Chair, this bill adequately provides for the needs of the House
Sergeant of Arms and the Capitol Police to ensure the necessary steps
can be taken to maintain and strengthen security procedures for the
entire Capitol complex.
Recent events have shown that even the most secure buildings in our
country are still susceptible to security lapses. That is why it is
more important than ever to remain vigilant in our efforts to ensure we
are secure.
As I continue to serve on this Subcommittee, it is my responsibility
to ask questions, find solutions, and help enact policies to keep
members, staff, and guests as safe as reasonably possible.
I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill.
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Madam Chair, I rise today to highlight what I
believe are anti-competitive practices at the Government Printing
Office, or GPO.
As its name implies, the GPO was set up to do government printing.
Title 44 of the United States Code states that ``all printing, binding,
and blank-book work for Congress, the Executive Office, the Judiciary,
other than the Supreme Court of the United States . . . shall be done
at the Government Printing Office.'' GPO's mission statement is to
``produce, protect, preserve, and distribute the official publications
and information products of the Federal Government.'' Somehow, GPO has
interpreted this to mean that ``printing'' includes the creation of
secure federal credentials.
Madam Chair, the production of secure federal credentials cannot be
reasonably classified as printing. The production of these credentials
involves electronic storage capability, anti-counterfeiting
technologies, and specialized manufacturing techniques. Furthermore,
Title 44 was codified in 1968--secure credentials were not created
until 30 years later. It is hard to believe that lawmakers in the
1960's could have envisioned the technical know-how that goes into
making these credentials, much less classified the production as
printing.
The real problem, however, lies with GPO asserting its authority to
make these products while crowding out private sector competition. The
federal government has successfully contracted out production of secure
credentials to the private sector for years. The private sector
competes for these contracts, ensuring that we end up with the best
product for the best price. More disturbingly, I have heard reports
indicating that GPO has a dedicated sales staff, and sends other
staffers on sales calls to promote its secure credentials capabilities
to federal agencies. GPO's attempt to fill this space inhibits
competition by encouraging the federal government to insource at the
expense of innovations in the private sector. I believe we need to
level the playing field.
By highlighting this issue, I hope to trigger a discussion that will
define a clear role for the GPO today, but also to ensure that the
private secure credentials industry, the acknowledged leaders in this
field, will have a chance to compete for government contracts.
The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule and shall be considered as read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 4487
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Legislative
Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2015, and for
other purposes, namely:
TITLE I--LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Salaries and Expenses
For salaries and expenses of the House of Representatives,
$1,180,736,000, as follows:
House Leadership Offices
For salaries and expenses, as authorized by law,
$22,278,891, including: Office of the Speaker, $6,645,417,
including $25,000 for official expenses of the Speaker;
Office of the Majority Floor Leader, $2,180,048, including
$10,000 for official expenses of the Majority Leader; Office
of the Minority Floor Leader, $7,114,471, including $10,000
for official expenses of the Minority Leader; Office of the
Majority Whip, including the Chief Deputy Majority Whip,
$1,886,632, including $5,000 for official expenses of the
Majority Whip; Office of the Minority Whip, including the
Chief Deputy Minority Whip, $1,459,639, including $5,000 for
official expenses of the Minority Whip; Republican
Conference, $1,505,426; Democratic Caucus, $1,487,258:
Provided, That such amount for salaries and expenses shall
remain available from January 3, 2015 until January 2, 2016.
Members' Representational Allowances
Including Members' Clerk Hire, Official Expenses of Members, and
Official Mail
For Members' representational allowances, including
Members' clerk hire, official expenses, and official mail,
$554,317,732.
Committee Employees
Standing Committees, Special and Select
For salaries and expenses of standing committees, special
and select, authorized by House resolutions, $123,903,173:
Provided, That such amount shall remain available for such
salaries and expenses until December 31, 2016, except that
$2,300,000 of such amount shall remain available until
expended for committee room upgrading.
Committee on Appropriations
For salaries and expenses of the Committee on
Appropriations, $23,271,004, including studies and
examinations of executive agencies and temporary personal
services for such committee, to be expended in accordance
with section 202(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of
1946 and to be available for reimbursement to agencies for
services performed: Provided, That such amount shall remain
available for such salaries and expenses until December 31,
2016.
Salaries, Officers and Employees
For compensation and expenses of officers and employees, as
authorized by law, $171,344,864, including: for salaries and
expenses of the Office of the Clerk, including the positions
of the Chaplain and the Historian, and including not more
than $25,000 for official representative and reception
expenses, of which not more than $20,000 is for the Family
Room and not more than $2,000 is for the Office of the
Chaplain, $24,009,473; for salaries and expenses of the
Office of the Sergeant at Arms, including the position of
Superintendent of Garages and the Office of Emergency
Management, and including not more than $3,000 for official
representation and reception expenses, $11,926,729 of which
$4,344,000 shall remain available until expended; for
salaries and expenses of the Office of the Chief
Administrative Officer including not more than $3,000 for
official representation and reception expenses, $113,100,000,
of which $4,000,000 shall remain available until expended;
for salaries and expenses of the Office of the Inspector
General, $4,741,809; for salaries and expenses of the Office
of General Counsel, $1,340,987; for salaries and expenses of
the Office of the Parliamentarian, including the
Parliamentarian, $2,000 for preparing the Digest of Rules,
and not more than $1,000 for official representation and
reception expenses, $1,952,249; for salaries and expenses of
the Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the House,
$4,087,587, of which $1,000,000 shall remain available until
expended for the completion of the House Modernization
Initiative; for salaries and expenses of the Office of the
Legislative Counsel of the House, $8,892,975, of which
$540,000 shall remain available until expended for the
completion of the House Modernization Initiative; for
salaries and expenses of the Office of Interparliamentary
Affairs, $814,069; for other authorized employees, $478,986.
Allowances and Expenses
For allowances and expenses as authorized by House
resolution or law, $285,620,336, including: supplies,
materials, administrative costs and Federal tort claims,
$4,152,789; official mail for committees, leadership offices,
and administrative offices of the House, $190,486; Government
contributions for health, retirement, Social Security, and
other applicable employee benefits, $256,635,776, to remain
available until March 31, 2016; Business Continuity and
Disaster Recovery, $16,217,008 of which $5,000,000 shall
remain available until expended; transition activities for
new members and staff, $3,737,000, to remain available until
expended; Wounded Warrior Program $2,500,000, to remain
available until expended; Office of Congressional Ethics,
$1,467,030; and miscellaneous items including purchase,
exchange, maintenance, repair and operation of
[[Page H3377]]
House motor vehicles, interparliamentary receptions, and
gratuities to heirs of deceased employees of the House,
$720,247.
Administrative Provisions
Sec. 101. (a) Requiring Amounts Remaining in Members'
Representational Allowances To Be Used for Deficit Reduction
or To Reduce the Federal Debt.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, any amounts appropriated under this Act for
``HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES--Salaries and Expenses--Members'
Representational Allowances'' shall be available only for
fiscal year 2015. Any amount remaining after all payments are
made under such allowances for fiscal year 2015 shall be
deposited in the Treasury and used for deficit reduction (or,
if there is no Federal budget deficit after all such payments
have been made, for reducing the Federal debt, in such manner
as the Secretary of the Treasury considers appropriate).
(b) Regulations.--The Committee on House Administration of
the House of Representatives shall have authority to
prescribe regulations to carry out this section.
(c) Definition.--As used in this section, the term ``Member
of the House of Representatives'' means a Representative in,
or a Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress.
delivery of bills and resolutions
Sec. 102. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to deliver a printed copy of a bill, joint
resolution, or resolution to the office of a Member of the
House of Representatives (including a Delegate or Resident
Commissioner to the Congress) unless the Member requests a
copy.
delivery of congressional record
Sec. 103. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to deliver a printed copy of any version of the
Congressional Record to the office of a Member of the House
of Representatives (including a Delegate or Resident
Commissioner to the Congress).
limitation on amount available to lease vehicles
Sec. 104. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used by the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of
Representatives to make any payments from any Members'
Representational Allowance for the leasing of a vehicle,
excluding mobile district offices, in an aggregate amount
that exceeds $1,000 for the vehicle in any month.
limitation on printed copies of u.s. code to house
Sec. 105. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to provide an aggregate number of more than 50
printed copies of any edition of the United States Code to
all offices of the House of Representatives.
JOINT ITEMS
For Joint Committees, as follows:
Joint Economic Committee
For salaries and expenses of the Joint Economic Committee,
$4,203,000, to be disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate.
Joint Committee on Taxation
For salaries and expenses of the Joint Committee on
Taxation, $10,004,000, to be disbursed by the Chief
Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives.
For other joint items, as follows:
Office of the Attending Physician
For medical supplies, equipment, and contingent expenses of
the emergency rooms, and for the Attending Physician and his
assistants, including:
(1) an allowance of $2,175 per month to the Attending
Physician;
(2) an allowance of $1,300 per month to the Senior Medical
Officer;
(3) an allowance of $725 per month each to three medical
officers while on duty in the Office of the Attending
Physician;
(4) an allowance of $725 per month to 2 assistants and $580
per month each not to exceed 11 assistants on the basis
heretofore provided for such assistants; and
(5) $2,486,000 for reimbursement to the Department of the
Navy for expenses incurred for staff and equipment assigned
to the Office of the Attending Physician, which shall be
advanced and credited to the applicable appropriation or
appropriations from which such salaries, allowances, and
other expenses are payable and shall be available for all the
purposes thereof, $3,371,000, to be disbursed by the Chief
Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives.
Office of Congressional Accessibility Services
Salaries and Expenses
For salaries and expenses of the Office of Congressional
Accessibility Services, $1,387,000, to be disbursed by the
Secretary of the Senate.
CAPITOL POLICE
salaries
For salaries of employees of the Capitol Police, including
overtime, hazardous duty pay, and Government contributions
for health, retirement, social security, professional
liability insurance, and other applicable employee benefits,
$286,500,000 of which overtime shall not exceed $23,425,000
unless the Committee on Appropriations of the House and
Senate are notified, to be disbursed by the Chief of the
Capitol Police or his designee.
general expenses
For necessary expenses of the Capitol Police, including
motor vehicles, communications and other equipment, security
equipment and installation, uniforms, weapons, supplies,
materials, training, medical services, forensic services,
stenographic services, personal and professional services,
the employee assistance program, the awards program, postage,
communication services, travel advances, relocation of
instructor and liaison personnel for the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center, and not more than $5,000 to be
expended on the certification of the Chief of the Capitol
Police in connection with official representation and
reception expenses, $61,459,000, to be disbursed by the Chief
of the Capitol Police or his designee: Provided, That,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, the cost of basic
training for the Capitol Police at the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center for fiscal year 2015 shall be
paid by the Secretary of Homeland Security from funds
available to the Department of Homeland Security.
OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE
Salaries and Expenses
For salaries and expenses of the Office of Compliance, as
authorized by section 305 of the Congressional Accountability
Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1385), $3,959,000, of which $450,000
shall remain available until September 30, 2016: Provided,
That not more than $500 may be expended on the certification
of the Executive Director of the Office of Compliance in
connection with official representation and reception
expenses.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
Salaries and Expenses
For salaries and expenses necessary for operation of the
Congressional Budget Office, including not more than $6,000
to be expended on the certification of the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office in connection with official
representation and reception expenses, $45,700,000.
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
General Administration
For salaries for the Architect of the Capitol, and other
personal services, at rates of pay provided by law; for
surveys and studies in connection with activities under the
care of the Architect of the Capitol; for all necessary
expenses for the general and administrative support of the
operations under the Architect of the Capitol including the
Botanic Garden; electrical substations of the Capitol, Senate
and House office buildings, and other facilities under the
jurisdiction of the Architect of the Capitol; including
furnishings and office equipment; including not more than
$5,000 for official reception and representation expenses, to
be expended as the Architect of the Capitol may approve; for
purchase or exchange, maintenance, and operation of a
passenger motor vehicle, $91,555,000.
Capitol Building
For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of the Capitol, $53,126,000, of which $28,817,000
shall remain available until September 30, 2019.
Capitol Grounds
For all necessary expenses for care and improvement of
grounds surrounding the Capitol, the Senate and House office
buildings, and the Capitol Power Plant, $11,993,000, of which
$2,000,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2019.
House Office Buildings
For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of the House office buildings, $71,622,000, of
which $7,000,000 shall remain available until September 30,
2019.
In addition, for a payment to the House Historic Buildings
Revitalization Trust Fund, $70,000,000, to remain available
until expended.
Capitol Power Plant
For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of the Capitol Power Plant; lighting, heating,
power (including the purchase of electrical energy) and water
and sewer services for the Capitol, Senate and House office
buildings, Library of Congress buildings, and the grounds
about the same, Botanic Garden, Senate garage, and air
conditioning refrigeration not supplied from plants in any of
such buildings; heating the Government Printing Office and
Washington City Post Office, and heating and chilled water
for air conditioning for the Supreme Court Building, the
Union Station complex, the Thurgood Marshall Federal
Judiciary Building and the Folger Shakespeare Library,
expenses for which shall be advanced or reimbursed upon
request of the Architect of the Capitol and amounts so
received shall be deposited into the Treasury to the credit
of this appropriation, $93,152,000, of which $8,686,000 shall
remain available until September 30, 2019: Provided, That not
more than $9,000,000 of the funds credited or to be
reimbursed to this appropriation as herein provided shall be
available for obligation during fiscal year 2015.
Library Buildings and Grounds
For all necessary expenses for the mechanical and
structural maintenance, care and operation of the Library
buildings and grounds, $41,733,000, of which $16,542,000
shall remain available until September 30, 2019.
Capitol Police Buildings, Grounds, and Security
For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of buildings, grounds and security enhancements of
the
[[Page H3378]]
United States Capitol Police, wherever located, the Alternate
Computer Facility, and AOC security operations, $19,486,000,
of which $1,000,000 shall remain available until September
30, 2019.
Botanic Garden
For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of the Botanic Garden and the nurseries, buildings,
grounds, and collections; and purchase and exchange,
maintenance, repair, and operation of a passenger motor
vehicle; all under the direction of the Joint Committee on
the Library, $15,022,946, of which $5,122,946 shall remain
available until September 30, 2019: Provided, That of the
amount made available under this heading, the Architect of
the Capitol may obligate and expend such sums as may be
necessary for the maintenance, care and operation of the
National Garden established under section 307E of the
Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 1989 (2 U.S.C. 2146),
upon vouchers approved by the Architect of the Capitol or a
duly authorized designee.
Capitol Visitor Center
For all necessary expenses for the operation of the Capitol
Visitor Center, $20,875,000.
Administrative Provision
scrims
Sec. 1001. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used for scrims containing photographs of building
facades during restoration or construction projects performed
by the Architect of the Capitol.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of the Library of Congress not
otherwise provided for, including development and maintenance
of the Library's catalogs; custody and custodial care of the
Library buildings; special clothing; cleaning, laundering and
repair of uniforms; preservation of motion pictures in the
custody of the Library; operation and maintenance of the
American Folklife Center in the Library; activities under the
Civil Rights History Project Act of 2009; preparation and
distribution of catalog records and other publications of the
Library; hire or purchase of one passenger motor vehicle; and
expenses of the Library of Congress Trust Fund Board not
properly chargeable to the income of any trust fund held by
the Board, $424,057,000, of which not more than $6,000,000
shall be derived from collections credited to this
appropriation during fiscal year 2015, and shall remain
available until expended, under the Act of June 28, 1902
(chapter 1301; 32 Stat. 480; 2 U.S.C. 150) and not more than
$350,000 shall be derived from collections during fiscal year
2015 and shall remain available until expended for the
development and maintenance of an international legal
information database and activities related thereto:
Provided, That the Library of Congress may not obligate or
expend any funds derived from collections under the Act of
June 28, 1902, in excess of the amount authorized for
obligation or expenditure in appropriations Acts: Provided
further, That the total amount available for obligation shall
be reduced by the amount by which collections are less than
$6,350,000: Provided further, That of the total amount
appropriated, not more than $12,000 may be expended, on the
certification of the Librarian of Congress, in connection
with official representation and reception expenses for the
Overseas Field Offices: Provided further, That of the total
amount appropriated, $8,231,000 shall remain available until
expended for the digital collections and educational
curricula program.
Copyright Office
salaries and expenses
For all necessary expenses of the Copyright Office,
$54,303,000, of which not more than $27,971,000, to remain
available until expended, shall be derived from collections
credited to this appropriation during fiscal year 2015 under
section 708(d) of title 17, United States Code: Provided,
That the Copyright Office may not obligate or expend any
funds derived from collections under such section, in excess
of the amount authorized for obligation or expenditure in
appropriations Acts: Provided further, That not more than
$5,611,000 shall be derived from collections during fiscal
year 2015 under sections 111(d)(2), 119(b)(2), 803(e), 1005,
and 1316 of such title: Provided further, That the total
amount available for obligation shall be reduced by the
amount by which collections are less than $33,582,000:
Provided further, That not more than $100,000 of the amount
appropriated is available for the maintenance of an
``International Copyright Institute'' in the Copyright Office
of the Library of Congress for the purpose of training
nationals of developing countries in intellectual property
laws and policies: Provided further, That not more than
$6,500 may be expended, on the certification of the Librarian
of Congress, in connection with official representation and
reception expenses for activities of the International
Copyright Institute and for copyright delegations, visitors,
and seminars: Provided further, That notwithstanding any
provision of chapter 8 of title 17, United States Code, any
amounts made available under this heading which are
attributable to royalty fees and payments received by the
Copyright Office pursuant to sections 111, 119, and chapter
10 of such title may be used for the costs incurred in the
administration of the Copyright Royalty Judges program, with
the exception of the costs of salaries and benefits for the
Copyright Royalty Judges and staff under section 802(e).
Congressional Research Service
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 203 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2
U.S.C. 166) and to revise and extend the Annotated
Constitution of the United States of America, $106,095,000:
Provided, That no part of such amount may be used to pay any
salary or expense in connection with any publication, or
preparation of material therefor (except the Digest of Public
General Bills), to be issued by the Library of Congress
unless such publication has obtained prior approval of either
the Committee on House Administration of the House of
Representatives or the Committee on Rules and Administration
of the Senate.
Books for the Blind and Physically Handicapped
salaries and expenses
For salaries and expenses to carry out the Act of March 3,
1931 (chapter 400; 46 Stat. 1487; 2 U.S.C. 135a),
$50,429,000: Provided, That of the total amount appropriated,
$650,000 shall be available to contract to provide newspapers
to blind and physically handicapped residents at no cost to
the individual.
Administrative Provision
reimbursable and revolving fund activities
Sec. 1101. (a) In General.--For fiscal year 2015, the
obligational authority of the Library of Congress for the
activities described in subsection (b) may not exceed
$203,058,000.
(b) Activities.--The activities referred to in subsection
(a) are reimbursable and revolving fund activities that are
funded from sources other than appropriations to the Library
in appropriations Acts for the legislative branch.
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
Congressional Printing and Binding
(including transfer of funds)
For authorized printing and binding for the Congress and
the distribution of Congressional information in any format;
expenses necessary for preparing the semimonthly and session
index to the Congressional Record, as authorized by law
(section 902 of title 44, United States Code); printing and
binding of Government publications authorized by law to be
distributed to Members of Congress; and printing, binding,
and distribution of Government publications authorized by law
to be distributed without charge to the recipient,
$79,736,000: Provided, That this appropriation shall not be
available for paper copies of the permanent edition of the
Congressional Record for individual Representatives, Resident
Commissioners or Delegates authorized under section 906 of
title 44, United States Code: Provided further, That this
appropriation shall be available for the payment of
obligations incurred under the appropriations for similar
purposes for preceding fiscal years: Provided further, That
notwithstanding the 2-year limitation under section 718 of
title 44, United States Code, none of the funds appropriated
or made available under this Act or any other Act for
printing and binding and related services provided to
Congress under chapter 7 of title 44, United States Code, may
be expended to print a document, report, or publication after
the 27-month period beginning on the date that such document,
report, or publication is authorized by Congress to be
printed, unless Congress reauthorizes such printing in
accordance with section 718 of title 44, United States Code:
Provided further, That any unobligated or unexpended balances
in this account or accounts for similar purposes for
preceding fiscal years may be transferred to the Government
Printing Office revolving fund for carrying out the purposes
of this heading, subject to the approval of the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and Senate:
Provided further, That notwithstanding sections 901, 902, and
906 of title 44, United States Code, this appropriation may
be used to prepare indexes to the Congressional Record on
only a monthly and session basis.
Office of Superintendent of Documents
salaries and expenses
(including transfer of funds)
For expenses of the Office of Superintendent of Documents
necessary to provide for the cataloging and indexing of
Government publications and their distribution to the public,
Members of Congress, other Government agencies, and
designated depository and international exchange libraries as
authorized by law, $31,500,000: Provided, That amounts of not
more than $2,000,000 from current year appropriations are
authorized for producing and disseminating Congressional
serial sets and other related publications for fiscal years
2013 and 2014 to depository and other designated libraries:
Provided further, That any unobligated or unexpended balances
in this account or accounts for similar purposes for
preceding fiscal years may be transferred to the Government
Printing Office revolving fund for carrying out the purposes
of this heading, subject to the approval of the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and Senate.
Government Printing Office Revolving Fund
For payment to the Government Printing Office Revolving
Fund, $11,348,000, to remain available until expended, for
information technology development and facilities repair:
Provided, That the Government Printing Office is hereby
authorized to make such
[[Page H3379]]
expenditures, within the limits of funds available and in
accordance with law, and to make such contracts and
commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations as
provided by section 9104 of title 31, United States Code, as
may be necessary in carrying out the programs and purposes
set forth in the budget for the current fiscal year for the
Government Printing Office Revolving Fund: Provided further,
That not more than $7,500 may be expended on the
certification of the Public Printer in connection with
official representation and reception expenses: Provided
further, That the revolving fund shall be available for the
hire or purchase of not more than 12 passenger motor
vehicles: Provided further, That expenditures in connection
with travel expenses of the advisory councils to the Public
Printer shall be deemed necessary to carry out the provisions
of title 44, United States Code: Provided further, That the
revolving fund shall be available for temporary or
intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5,
United States Code, but at rates for individuals not more
than the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay for
level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such
title: Provided further, That activities financed through the
revolving fund may provide information in any format:
Provided further, That the revolving fund and the funds
provided under the headings ``Office of Superintendent of
Documents'' and ``Salaries and Expenses'' may not be used for
contracted security services at the Government Printing
Office's passport facility in the District of Columbia.
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of the Government Accountability
Office, including not more than $12,500 to be expended on the
certification of the Comptroller General of the United States
in connection with official representation and reception
expenses; temporary or intermittent services under section
3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, but at rates for
individuals not more than the daily equivalent of the annual
rate of basic pay for level IV of the Executive Schedule
under section 5315 of such title; hire of one passenger motor
vehicle; advance payments in foreign countries in accordance
with section 3324 of title 31, United States Code; benefits
comparable to those payable under sections 901(5), (6), and
(8) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4081(5),
(6), and (8)); and under regulations prescribed by the
Comptroller General of the United States, rental of living
quarters in foreign countries, $519,622,000: Provided, That,
in addition, $23,750,000 of payments received under sections
782, 3521, and 9105 of title 31, United States Code, shall be
available without fiscal year limitation: Provided further,
That this appropriation and appropriations for administrative
expenses of any other department or agency which is a member
of the National Intergovernmental Audit Forum or a Regional
Intergovernmental Audit Forum shall be available to finance
an appropriate share of either Forum's costs as determined by
the respective Forum, including necessary travel expenses of
non-Federal participants: Provided further, That payments
hereunder to the Forum may be credited as reimbursements to
any appropriation from which costs involved are initially
financed.
Administrative Provision
center for audit excellence
Sec. 1201. (a) Center for Audit Excellence.--
(1) Establishment.--Chapter 7 of title 31, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
subchapter:
``SUBCHAPTER VII--CENTER FOR AUDIT EXCELLENCE
``Sec. 791. Center for audit excellence
``(a) Establishment.--The Comptroller General shall
establish, maintain, and operate a center within the
Government Accountability Office to be known as the `Center
for Audit Excellence' (hereafter in this subchapter referred
to as the `Center').
``(b) Purpose and Activities.--
``(1) In general.--The Center shall build institutional
auditing capacity and promote good governance by providing
affordable, relevant, and high-quality training, technical
assistance, and products and services to qualified personnel
and entities of governments (including the Federal
government, State and local governments, tribal governments,
and governments of foreign nations), international
organizations, and other private organizations.
``(2) Determination of qualified personnel and entities.--
Personnel and entities shall be considered qualified for
purposes of receiving training, technical assistance, and
products or services from the Center under paragraph (1) in
accordance with such criteria as the Comptroller General may
establish and publish.
``(c) Fees.--
``(1) Permitting charging of fees.--The Comptroller General
may establish, charge, and collect fees (on a reimbursable or
advance basis) for the training, technical assistance, and
products and services provided by the Center under this
subchapter.
``(2) Deposit into separate account.--The Comptroller
General shall deposit all fees collected under paragraph (1)
into the Center for Audit Excellence Account established
under section 792.
``(d) Gifts of Property and Services.--The Comptroller
General may accept and use conditional or non-conditional
gifts of property (both real and personal) and services
(including services of guest lecturers) to support the
operation of the Center, except that the Comptroller General
may not accept or use such a gift if the Comptroller General
determines that the acceptance or use of the gift would
compromise or appear to compromise the integrity of the
Government Accountability Office.
``(e) Sense of Congress Regarding Personnel.--It is the
sense of Congress that the Center should be staffed primarily
by personnel of the Government Accountability Office who are
not otherwise engaged in carrying out other duties of the
Office under this chapter, so as to ensure that the operation
of the Center will not have a negative impact on the ability
of the Office to maintain a consistently high level of
service to Congress.
``Sec. 792. Account
``(a) Establishment of Separate Account.--There is
established in the Treasury as a separate account for the
Government Accountability Office the `Center for Audit
Excellence Account', which shall consist of the fees
deposited by the Comptroller General under section 791(c) and
such other amounts as may be appropriated under law.
``(b) Use of Account.--Amounts in the Center for Audit
Excellence Account shall be available to the Comptroller
General, in amounts specified in appropriations Acts and
without fiscal year limitation, to carry out this subchapter.
``Sec. 793. Authorization of Appropriations
``There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may
be necessary to carry out this subchapter.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
7 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``subchapter vii--center for audit excellence
``791. Center for Audit Excellence.
``792. Account.
``793. Authorization of appropriations.''.
(b) Approval of Business Plan.--The Comptroller General may
not begin operating the Center for Audit Excellence under
subchapter VII of chapter 7 of title 31, United States Code
(as added by subsection (a)) until--
(1) the Comptroller General submits a business plan for the
Center to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and Senate; and
(2) each such Committee approves the plan.
OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP CENTER TRUST FUND
For a payment to the Open World Leadership Center Trust
Fund for financing activities of the Open World Leadership
Center under section 313 of the Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 2001 (2 U.S.C. 1151), $3,420,000.
JOHN C. STENNIS CENTER FOR PUBLIC SERVICE TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT
For payment to the John C. Stennis Center for Public
Service Development Trust Fund established under section 116
of the John C. Stennis Center for Public Service Training and
Development Act (2 U.S.C. 1105), $430,000.
TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 201. No part of the funds appropriated in this Act
shall be used for the maintenance or care of private
vehicles, except for emergency assistance and cleaning as may
be provided under regulations relating to parking facilities
for the House of Representatives issued by the Committee on
House Administration and for the Senate issued by the
Committee on Rules and Administration.
Sec. 202. No part of the funds appropriated in this Act
shall remain available for obligation beyond fiscal year 2015
unless expressly so provided in this Act.
Sec. 203. Whenever in this Act any office or position not
specifically established by the Legislative Pay Act of 1929
(46 Stat. 32 et seq.) is appropriated for or the rate of
compensation or designation of any office or position
appropriated for is different from that specifically
established by such Act, the rate of compensation and the
designation in this Act shall be the permanent law with
respect thereto: Provided, That the provisions in this Act
for the various items of official expenses of Members,
officers, and committees of the Senate and House of
Representatives, and clerk hire for Senators and Members of
the House of Representatives shall be the permanent law with
respect thereto.
Sec. 204. The expenditure of any appropriation under this
Act for any consulting service through procurement contract,
under section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, shall be
limited to those contracts where such expenditures are a
matter of public record and available for public inspection,
except where otherwise provided under existing law, or under
existing Executive order issued under existing law.
Sec. 205. Amounts available for administrative expenses of
any legislative branch entity which participates in the
Legislative Branch Financial Managers Council (LBFMC)
established by charter on March 26, 1996, shall be available
to finance an appropriate share of LBFMC costs as determined
by the LBFMC, except that the total LBFMC costs to be shared
among all participating legislative branch entities (in such
allocations among the entities as the entities may determine)
may not exceed $2,000.
Sec. 206. The Architect of the Capitol, in consultation
with the District of Columbia, is authorized to maintain and
improve the
[[Page H3380]]
landscape features, excluding streets, in the irregular
shaped grassy areas bounded by Washington Avenue, SW on the
northeast, Second Street, SW on the west, Square 582 on the
south, and the beginning of the I-395 tunnel on the
southeast.
Sec. 207. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality
of the United States Government, except pursuant to a
transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act
or any other appropriation Act.
Sec. 208. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), none of
the funds made available to the Architect of the Capitol in
this Act may be used to eliminate or restrict guided tours of
the United States Capitol which are led by employees and
interns of offices of Members of Congress and other offices
of the House of Representatives and Senate.
(b) At the direction of the Capitol Police Board, or at the
direction of the Architect of the Capitol with the approval
of the Capitol Police Board, guided tours of the United
States Capitol which are led by employees and interns
described in subsection (a) may be suspended temporarily or
otherwise subject to restriction for security or related
reasons to the same extent as guided tours of the United
States Capitol which are led by the Architect of the Capitol.
Sec. 209. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
adjustment shall be made under section 610(a) of the
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 31)
(relating to cost of living adjustments for Members of
Congress) during fiscal year 2015.
spending reduction account
Sec. 210. The amount by which the applicable allocation of
new budget authority made by the Committee on Appropriations
of the House of Representatives under section 302(b) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, excluding Senate items,
exceeds the amount of proposed new budget authority is $0.
This Act may be cited as the ``Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 2015''.
The CHAIR. No amendment to the bill shall be in order except those
printed in House Report 113-426. Each such amendment may be offered
only in the order printed in the report, by a Member designated in the
report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable for the time
specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent
and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be
subject to a demand for division of the question.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Nugent
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in
House Report 113-426.
Mr. NUGENT. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 7, beginning line 23, strike ``in an aggregate amount
that exceeds $1,000 for the vehicle in any month'' and insert
``and excluding short-term vehicle rentals in an aggregate
amount that does not exceed $1,000 for the vehicle in any
month''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 557, the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Nugent) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. NUGENT. Madam Chairman, my amendment is simple. It would end the
practice of Members leasing vehicles on the taxpayers' dime. I am just
not convinced that this is a necessary use of taxpayer money, and
neither are the constituents that I represent.
We are asking agencies throughout the Federal Government to use their
funding carefully and to cut out unnecessary, nice-to-have things. We
ought to apply the same standard to ourselves, and in many ways we have
done an excellent job of doing that.
Funding for the House of Representatives has been cut since the
Republicans took the majority by over 14 percent. We have cut our own
MRAs and committee funds. We have frozen our own pay.
Unfortunately, the vehicle lease program isn't consistent in that
effort. That is not to say that some Members who lease vehicles aren't
doing it responsibly. They are, and they have good reason.
Unfortunately, I think the line of what is appropriate in terms of
leasing vehicles has been blurred by others. Members of Congress
driving around the Capitol in luxury vehicles financed by the taxpayers
that they represent isn't exactly the image we want to portray to the
American people, especially when many Americans are struggling just to
get by.
The vehicle lease program in its current form is simply out of touch
with the economic reality of what our American brothers and sisters
face. Therefore, until we can ensure that all Members of Congress are
using this program responsibly, I believe we ought to halt it entirely.
The Senate, to their credit, in one of the few times that I agree
with the Senate--and I don't say that often--already has barred its
Members from leasing vehicles with public money; and, frankly, I think
it is time that we do the same.
To be clear, my amendment is straightforward. It says that the CAO
may not make any payments from any Member's Representational Allowance
for the leasing of a vehicle. My amendment excludes short-term vehicle
rentals and mobile district offices, as those are often necessary
resources used in serving our constituents. But having basically a
personal car entirely paid for by taxpayers should no longer be
allowed.
I urge adoption of my amendment and reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. COLE. I want to begin by thanking my friend. We serve together on
the Rules Committee. It is very seldom that I would disagree with my
friend, who not only has a distinguished record here, but a
distinguished record in law enforcement.
And let me make it clear. I am quite content to let the body work its
will on this matter. I appreciate my friend actually bringing it
forward. I think it is important to discuss.
I had not really thought about this a great deal until I saw my
friend's amendment. I don't lease a vehicle through my office at all.
Although we have discussed it and looked at it, it just never seemed to
be appropriate or make sense for us. We do have 63 Members, however,
who do do this practice. The average cost of the vehicle is $589.
Now, I can't tell you that I have taken a survey of all 63, but I
have talked to a few--just sort of tell me what your reasoning is--and
the responses are pretty diverse. But you could break it into two or
three categories.
First, some of them cover exceptionally large districts, and they
find this the most cost-effective way to actually cover it, I mean,
even to the point of saying, as one Member said:
I go through rough terrain to reach remote areas. I need a
vehicle that, frankly, is quite a bit more robust than
members of my staff have or that I even have personally,
sometimes, to reach some of my constituents.
I thought that was a pretty impressive reason.
Second, others, again, just find it much more cost-effective than
actually paying and reimbursing for mileage. But I think the core thing
here is to trust--actually trust--the Member to make the decision.
I think an important point here is to note that we are not going to
save any money, really. This comes out of the Member's Representational
Allowance as it is, so there is not a real savings here. And it is all
publicly disclosed, so Members take some considerable risk if they do
this. They have to be able to explain it to their constituents.
At the end of the day, I just simply don't want to micromanage
individual Members in how they spend the money which we allot them
through this bill.
And with that, I understand my good friend would like to say some
things, so I will yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman
from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), the ranking member.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Madam Chair, I also rise in opposition to my Florida colleague's
amendment, which seeks to dictate to other Members how to spend their
office budgets. It is important to note that I also do not lease a
vehicle.
The bill already sets a limit on what Members can spend on vehicle
leases to ensure that costs are appropriately controlled. The Nugent
amendment would go further and prevent long-term vehicle leases unless
they are classified as mobile district offices.
The problem with the gentleman from Florida's amendment is the same
as we have had with other similar amendments in the past that have
sought to restrict or eliminate Members' use of funds for their office
budgets.
We have Members that represent entire States or very large geographic
[[Page H3381]]
areas. Removing transportation options for Members trying to
effectively represent their constituents forces a one-size-fits-all
approach to serving our congressional districts, and we know that is
not reasonable nor does it make sense.
The House makes statements of disbursements available to the public
so that our constituents can judge us on the purchases that we make.
Each Member has to answer to his or her constituents if they spend
inappropriately or if they make purchases that are at odds with the
sensibilities of those that sent the Member to office. We don't need to
dictate to each other how we can most effectively do our jobs.
With that, Madam Chair, I urge the defeat of this well-intentioned
but misguided amendment.
Mr. COLE. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NUGENT. Madam Chair, I do appreciate the comments of more senior
Members of this House. I, obviously, have been here 3 years, and I do
appreciate their comments.
But I will go back to this. Think about this. The Senate, each
Senator represents their whole State. They gave up that privilege a
while back because it didn't make sense. But think about this. Today,
Members of Congress can lease Lexuses, BMWs, Infinities, Acuras,
Mercedes, which all fall within the guidelines, and not all do that.
But does that send a message to our folks back home that this is the
right way to do it? Because that MRA that was discussed, this also
covers all of the wear and tear on the car, it covers the fuel. There
is no expense that is spared with regards to covering that, versus the
mileage reimbursement, if I used my own car, which I do.
That is not to try to diminish or hurt any Member. It really is,
though, bringing us into compliance with the same thing that the Senate
has done. It is about reasonable usage of the dollars the taxpayers
give us.
Once again I will tell you that I agree with most of what my good
friends have said, but I disagree on this one. I truly believe it is
time for this House to move forward and limit itself in regards to
these types of acquisitions and purchases.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Nugent).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. NUGENT. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida will be postponed.
{time} 1000
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Ms. Speier
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in
House Report 113-426.
Ms. SPEIER. Madam Chairwoman, I have an amendment desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 11, line 10, after the dollar amount insert
``(increased by $500,000)''.
Page 12, line 16, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced
by $500,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 557, the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Speier) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. SPEIER. Madam Chair, I rise today because many Americans think
Congress has unchecked power. They think we know how to make laws but
don't know how to follow them. They think of us not as the House of
Representatives but as the House of Hypocrites. I have spent a lot of
time here on the floor speaking about sexual harassment and the
epidemic of rape in the military and on college campuses. It is just as
important that we bring the same scrutiny to our own House.
The American people expect us to conduct ourselves in a manner
befitting the responsibilities and duties that we hold as Members of
Congress--not as if we are freshmen in a frat house. While they are the
exception, not the rule, it is an embarrassment to this institution
that some Members have ``sexted'' teenage pages on the floor. It is
unacceptable that others have groped and inappropriately touched their
staff members. This behavior is illegal and unacceptable in the private
sector, and it is illegal and unacceptable here.
This is not a Democratic issue, and this is not a Republican issue.
This is a House issue. Just recall former Congressman Bob Filner. He
pled guilty to charges of felony false imprisonment for sexually
harassing a former aide in the San Diego's mayor's office. When Mr.
Filner was ranking member on the Veterans' Affairs Committee in the
House, he allegedly sexually harassed several female members of the
Armed Forces who were rape survivors. But none of the women ever said a
word while Mr. Filner was still here--not one.
If you work for a private company in my home State in California, it
is likely you have had several hours of sexual harassment training to
identify and prevent sexual harassment in the workplace because it is
the law. It is also the law in California that State legislators and
their staff participate in a mandatory sexual harassment training every
year. But that is not the case here in the House.
In fact, congressional Office of Compliance staff say that when new
Members go through their 3-day training, they are mostly counseling
empty seats by the end of day 3.
Sexual harassment training is already mandatory for the executive
branch agencies, and it has proven to result in a significant reduction
in the number of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation claims.
But this training for Congress is only voluntary. The congressional
Office of Compliance provides sexual harassment training to offices,
but it is not typically requested until after an office reports an
incident.
It is time we take advantage of the valuable training the office
provides. My staff and I actually have taken this 1\1/2\ hour training,
and as much as I know about sexual harassment, I learned additional
things during that training.
Madam Chairwoman, my amendment is simple. It appropriates $500,000 in
additional funds to the Office of Compliance to be used to enhance
sexual harassment training programs by implementing a Web-based
platform. These funds will also be used for outreach to inform House
office employees what their rights are, the various forms sexual
harassment takes, and where to go if they experience sexual harassment.
It is time to send a new message: that we are here to serve and that we
are not above the law.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim
the time in opposition; although, I am not opposed.
The CHAIR. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Florida is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the gentlelady from
California's amendment, which would provide an additional $500,000 to
the Office of Compliance. The funding is intended for the office to
provide mandatory sexual harassment training for all congressional
offices in the House of Representatives.
Surveys find that anywhere from 25 to 31 percent of women in the
United States have experienced sexual harassment at work, with the
majority of women reporting that the harasser was a direct supervisor
or senior to them. Sexual harassment creates counterproductive,
hostile, and potentially dangerous working environments, not only
threatening the emotional and physical well-being of women, but also
women's job performance and security.
There is no reason to think the House of Representatives is immune to
this problem. The House of Representatives should not be exempt from
providing proper training to identify, prevent, and report sexual
harassment, as many private institutions undertake.
Additionally, this type of training is already mandatory for all
executive branch agencies. It is time that we follow suit to ensure
that the entire Federal Government is setting a model example for
safety and respect in the workplace.
To that end, I have cosponsored Representative Speier's resolution,
which
[[Page H3382]]
amends the rules of the House to require that the mandatory annual
ethics training offered to Members, officers, and employees of the
House include the specific program of training in the prevention and
deterrence of sexual harassment in employment.
I urge support of this amendment and thank the gentlelady for her
leadership on this issue, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SPEIER. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlelady from New York
(Mrs. Lowey).
Mrs. LOWEY. Madam Chairman, I rise in strong support of the
amendment. When I came to Congress, I was outraged by the behavior of
some of my colleagues. In one incident, a woman Member was told to
share a seat with a male colleague when there weren't enough chairs at
a committee meeting.
While there have certainly been improvements, recent events
embarrassing this institution highlight the continued need for
training. We cannot allow ``Mad Men''-style antics to occur in our
offices.
Sexual harassment training will help victims, improve awareness of
what is not allowed, and is necessary if we want to be serious about
stopping inappropriate acts.
I thank the gentlelady for offering this amendment, and I encourage
your support.
Ms. SPEIER. I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. At this time, I would like to yield 30 seconds
to Chairman Cole.
Mr. COLE. I thank my friend for yielding.
Madam Chairman, I just want to thank my friend from California for
bringing this amendment. I think it is a truly important amendment and
something that we are more than happy to accept, and appreciate her
raising the issue very, very much.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. We thank the gentleman and appreciate his
support.
At this time, I would like to yield the balance of our time in
opposition, even though no one is speaking in opposition to this very
important amendment, to the gentlelady from Michigan (Mrs. Miller), the
chair of the Committee on House Administration.
Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Madam Chair, I thank the gentlelady for
yielding me time, and I certainly want to thank my colleague from
California for offering this very, very important amendment which we
are all very supportive of.
This amendment, as has been explained, provides additional funds to
the congressional Office of Compliance. This is the agency that really
is tasked with making sure that Members of Congress and--very
importantly, most importantly--their staff are aware of what their
individual rights are and how to protect themselves against sexual
harassment in the workplace.
Unfortunately, sometimes it seems like the Members might be
protected, but perhaps their staffs are not as well aware and protected
as they need to be. This is certainly not a partisan issue. We have
seen incidents over the years of Republicans and of Democrats, both
sides of the aisle here.
Actually, Madam Chair, this week I met with senior staff at the OOC.
I met with all the board members there. We talked about what kind of
additional training might be helpful when we put together our new
Members orientation program in the fall, various kinds of things that
we can do, and, of course, they needed a little bit more cash to be
able to really step up, particularly on the Internet and various
things, and do awareness training. So this amendment, I think, is very
important.
Certainly, Madam Chair, Congress needs to be held to the highest
standards, and, at a minimum, we ought to be held to the same standards
that we hold private businesses to out in the marketplace and the
workplace.
Every employee that works on this Hill needs to work in an
environment that they feel is free from sexual harassment, and if they
feel threatened in any way, they need to be able to be sure that they
understand their rights and what recourse they have to protect
themselves without any fear of retribution. I think Congress needs to
be a leader on this issue--a leader--and I certainly feel that by
conducting awareness training, that will help stop any unfortunate
situation, and if we don't stop it, certainly, then, allowing an
individual to protect themselves. That, I think, is an important thing
for all of us.
So, again, I thank the gentlelady from California for offering the
amendment, and I would urge all my colleagues to support this
amendment.
Ms. SPEIER. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chairman, I also yield back the balance
of my time and thank the gentlelady from California for her amendment.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Gosar
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed in
House Report 113-426.
Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chairwoman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 15, line 2, after the first dollar amount insert
``(reduced by $3,166,946)''.
Page 32, line 21, after the dollar amount insert
``(increased by $3,166,946)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 557, the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Gosar) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chairwoman, I rise today to speak in favor of my
simple and straightforward amendment. My amendment would reduce funding
to the United States Botanic Garden to the levels appropriated in
fiscal year 2014. That money would then be transferred to the Spending
Reduction Account so that we could take one more step towards reining
in Federal spending.
I would be the first to say that I appreciate the Botanic Garden and
its beauty. I believe it is a good program, and I am personally
interested in botany. But Members of Congress are often faced with
difficult choices, especially given our current fiscal crisis. There
are programs that are constitutionally mandated, and other programs
that are nice but are not constitutionally mandated. This is one
program that is nice but cannot be immune from the fiscal pressures
facing our government.
While the Botanic Garden is a wonderful attraction, Congress must
seek to limit excessive spending in the name of getting our fiscal
house in order. No line item can be overlooked in making these
assessments and decisions, including our own office budgets, as we have
demonstrated.
Madam Chairwoman, so many families are tightening their belts during
these trying economic times. Congress must do the same and make cuts
where it can.
I am concerned that the Architect of the Capitol has proposed over
$5.1 million in new capital projects at the Botanic Garden this year.
Rather than making minor repairs to a few small leaks in the roof, the
Architect of the Capitol is proposing to tear down the entire roof and
replace it with something called a new vegetative roofing system. At a
time of soaring deficits and with the Federal debt in excess of $17
trillion, such expenditures are especially wasteful, and we shouldn't
be wasting precious taxpayer money on a new, state-of-the-art
vegetative roofing system.
My proposed amendment is a fair cut. It does not gut the program but
merely rolls back the appropriations back to 2014 levels. My amendment
still allows for almost $2 million in new capital projects and repairs
to take place in fiscal year 2015.
A note about vegetative roofs. They are usually at least twice the
cost to install and require a much higher maintenance cost, and in some
cases have unintended consequences by attracting wildlife into urban
areas, as an example, geese. I ask each Member to vote in favor of the
Gosar amendment.
Madam Chairwoman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment which
[[Page H3383]]
seeks to cut over $3 million from the Architect of the Capitol's
Botanic Garden--the people's Botanic Garden.
Now, I understand the gentleman from Arizona is trying to generate
headlines by attempting to cut much-needed funding to one of the most
beloved destinations in Washington, D.C., our Nation's Capital, but
this is not the way to fix our Nation's deficit.
Over 200 years ago, George Washington had a vision for our Capital
City to include a botanic garden that would demonstrate and promote the
important role plant life plays in our Nation. It may seem trivial, but
the Botanic Garden, established in 1820, is one of the oldest botanic
gardens in the United States. It is also one of the most visited
destinations on the Capitol complex. In fact, I know it is my own
children's favorite place to visit when they come to Washington, D.C.,
and often our first stop.
Our constituents sent us here to do real work and look for real
solutions to the deficit, not to try to score cheap political points by
attacking important institutions that have already taken a fiscal hit,
like the Botanic Garden.
The gentleman says that no line-item or opportunity can be looked
over when it comes to reducing our deficit. Yet, I urge the gentleman
if he is looking for ways to significantly reduce our deficit, to urge
the House Republican leadership to address comprehensive immigration
reform, which would result in a $900 million reduction in the deficit
over the next 20 years. Going after a garden isn't the answer.
In fact, I think it is important to note that since President Obama
took office, our deficit has been cut by more than 50 percent as a
percentage of our GDP.
With that, I urge the Members to defeat this ill-advised amendment.
I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Oklahoma
(Mr. Cole).
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding. I want to
thank my friend too because I know the spirit in which this is brought
is to save money and to make some tough decisions, and I share that. It
is worth pointing out that we did reduce the Architect's request by $79
million.
{time} 1015
Frankly, we are spending about $40 million less than we did last
year, so it is not as if we have not been serious about this. We did
look at this particular area. My friend from Florida made the point
that not only is it a well-traveled destination point and very
desirable place, but it is a pretty old building, and we really do have
serious problems here that we think are potentially health hazards.
We have chunks of the building, 5-15 pounds, that have fallen off
from the height of 40 feet, and that is a health hazard; so given the
traffic there, given the fact that we have been pretty tough across the
board, we thought this was one of those urgent priorities that needed
to be taken care of.
Again, I have no qualms with my friend's motives. I know he is trying
to save money. I share that belief. We have made a lot of tough
decisions across the board, and it is certainly appropriate for this
body to look, and if people can find areas, we are happy with that.
In this case, our judgment as a committee--and certainly my
judgment--is that we need to make certain that a facility that is this
well used is kept safe and in good repair, so we don't risk liability
and risk injury and, frankly, that we do keep open and functioning one
of the most beloved institutions of the Capitol complex.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will be postponed.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed in
House Report 113-426.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 15, line 13, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced
by $243,000)''.
Page 32, line 21, after the dollar amount insert
``(increased by $243,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 557, the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Broun) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, the bill under consideration today
is probably the smallest appropriations bill that we see each year, at
least in terms of the number of dollars involved.
It funds the operations of the legislative branch--both the
operational expenses of the congressional offices and the expenses
which occur in protecting and maintaining Capitol grounds.
This bill decreases in several places, and it holds the line on a
number of accounts as well. In total, the bill provides funding which
is in line with the amount provided just last year. I commend the
Appropriations Committee for this. However, there are also a number of
increases found within the bill.
Earlier this week, I submitted amendments to the Rules Committee, all
of which were meant to target accounts which received seemingly
inexplicable increases. I have been allowed one amendment today, only
one, which would decrease funding for the Capitol Visitor Center by
$243,000 and move the same amount to the spending reduction account.
This move would result in the Visitor Center funding being equal to
the amount which was appropriated last year, just keeping it at the
same level.
The Capitol Visitor Center opened to the public in December of 2008,
and according to the Congressional Research Service, it cost more than
$600 million to complete. While the Visitor Center received about $65
million in private donations, the rest of its cost was borne by
taxpayers.
Madam Chairman, it has been less than 10 years since the Visitor
Center has opened, at considerable public expense. I think, given our
current fiscal state, we can certainly afford to level fund the Visitor
Center, hold the line, and use this increase, while just a small one,
to help reduce our Federal deficit. I urge my colleagues to support my
amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, this amendment cuts the small
inflationary increase of $243,000 provided to the Capitol Visitor
Center in this bill. This small increase is needed for the Capitol
Visitor Center to keep up with inflation in order to provide the same
level of service to our constituents next year as they are providing
this year. When is enough enough?
My colleague must not be aware that the Capitol Visitor Center is 7
percent below the funding level that they were in fiscal year 2010.
They have already contributed their fair share to deficit reduction.
If my colleague is serious about reducing the national debt and the
deficit, then I would suggest that he stop voting to repeal the
Affordable Care Act because the recent CBO estimate is that there would
be a net increase of $109 billion to the deficit between 2013 and 2022
if the Affordable Care Act is repealed.
Perhaps he can call on his own leadership to reduce the deficit by
$900 million by taking up and passing comprehensive immigration reform.
When I was chair of this subcommittee, I inherited a fiscal disaster
in cost overruns during the construction of the Capitol Visitor Center.
We were collaboratively and in a bipartisan way able to bring that
project in for a soft landing and slow the hemorrhaging of Federal
funds for a project that a Republican majority began.
Now, we recognized that the responsible thing was to ensure that this
facility had the tools necessary to succeed, so that our visitors could
have an
[[Page H3384]]
informative and welcoming space to visit their government and to
understand our democracy, so it baffles me that we would see an
amendment that goes after the very organization that interacts with our
constituents nearly every day.
I want those working in the Capitol Visitor Center to know that we
appreciate the work they do. They are essential to the experience our
constituents have when visiting our Nation's Capitol. With that, I urge
defeat of the amendment.
Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr.
Cole).
Mr. COLE. Madam Chair, first, I thank the gentlelady for yielding,
and I want to thank my friend too because I know he is very serious
about looking for places to cut costs. Indeed, later on, there are a
number of items that Members have brought to our attention that we will
accept. In this case, we don't think it is appropriate.
I do want to thank my friend from Florida. I happened to be on this
committee as a junior Member when she did do, I think, an unbelievably
good job in working us through what had been a bad process and cost
overruns in the Center.
At the end of the day, this is where millions of Americans--this is
their portal to the Capitol. It is well run, and it is well managed. I
think maintaining access and keeping it safe and keeping it welcoming,
if you will, is very important.
So while this is a legitimate question to raise, I agree with my
friend and would oppose the amendment.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, I didn't realize with this
amendment that we were going to get into debate about the unaffordable,
uncaring act, so-called ObamaCare. Actually, I have the solution.
We have been promised that if you like your doctor, you can keep your
doctor. We have been promised that if you like your insurance, you can
keep your insurance. We know both of those are not factual.
We know both of those were known by the President when he made those
claims to America, that he knew that they were not factual also. I am
just waiting for the President to come out with this claim: if you like
your gun, you can keep your gun.
Before getting back to the appropriations process, let me, to just
finish up--and that is, I have the solution. It is called the Patient
Option Act. It will actually make everybody's health insurance in this
country less expense.
It will provide access to good quality health care for all Americans,
and it will save Medicare from going broke. It has been endorsed by the
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, as well as
FreedomWorks, and it will solve the problems that we all face of an
out-of-control health care cost system burden that has been placed on
us by a government that has intruded into the health care system
itself.
Madam Chairman, this country expects us to make cuts. We are spending
money we don't have. We are borrowing 40 cents on every dollar that we
spend, and we just have to stop spending money we don't have. We have
to restore fiscal sanity to the government. That is what I will
continue to do as a Member of Congress, as long as I am here.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, as a breast cancer survivor and
one of the 129 million Americans who live in this country with a
preexisting condition, I am thankful for the Affordable Care Act and
the peace of mind it established on January 1 when, never again, an
insurance company in this country could drop us or deny us coverage,
the coverage that the gentleman from Georgia has repeatedly voted to
take away from millions of Americans.
This amendment would cut the Capitol Visitor Center by $243,000, when
we need to make sure that they have the cost of inflation increase, so
they can continue to provide the good service that they provide to our
constituents, so we can continue to educate Americans and everyone
around the world about the finest democracy in the world.
Madam Chair, I urge Members to vote against this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will be postponed.
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Duffy
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 printed in
House Report 113-426.
Mr. DUFFY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 29, line 7, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced
by $3,420,000)''.
Page 32, line 21, after the dollar amount insert
``(increased by $3,420,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 557, the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. DUFFY. Madam Chair, first, I want to commend the work of both Mr.
Cole and Ms. Wasserman Schultz in producing a spending bill that
doesn't actually increase spending. It doesn't actually reduce it, but
it actually maintains it; and for this institution, I think that is a
positive, and I commend you both for doing that.
I think it is important, when we talk a lot about our debt at $17
trillion--we have deficits at $1.5 trillion today, down to a little
over $600 billion, I think it is important that this institution lead
by example and look to places that we can cut, places that we can be
more efficient, when we look at spending on operations here in the
House.
When we do that, I think it is important to look at duplicative
programs, programs that accomplish the same mission through multiple
agencies.
I would submit to this Chamber that one of those is the Open World
Leadership Center. This program--its purpose is to engage emerging
leaders from post-Soviet countries by exposing them to American
cultural institutions. I would argue it has outlived its usefulness.
Listen, it is great that we should engage others from around the
world. We should engage their leaders. I think that can help bridge the
gap.
The problem with this program is that, since 2000, it has cost the
American taxpayer $150 million; but not only that, we have nearly 90
programs that try to accomplish this very same mission, just to name a
few in the State Department: the National Endowment for Democracy, the
International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute,
and USAID, all with this same mission.
So I think this is a space where we can eliminate this program. The
mission can still be accomplished with other agencies, and we can move
over $3 million to deficit reduction.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chair, I want to thank my friend. Again, I appreciate
the spirit in which he approaches this. This is an interesting point of
discussion because we actually have Members of both parties who really
like this program and think it is very important, and we have Members
of both parties that share your point of view. It is not a partisan
debate in the least.
I would say that there are a number of both contemporary points and a
number of longer-term points that ought to be taken into account.
{time} 1030
First, this was originally a $6 million item. We have cut it by 43
percent aimed at Russia. All the other participants in this program are
the very countries that Russia threatens right now; particularly
Ukraine, which is the second largest participant. I think it would be a
really bad signal for this country to actually cut programs that are
supportive of democracy in the areas immediately around Russia and,
frankly, I think more or less plays into Mr. Putin's hand.
Beyond that, we have a unique institution, a unique arrangement, and
a unique person heading it at the Library
[[Page H3385]]
of Congress, Mr. Billington, who is probably the world's most expert on
Russian history, culture, and literature. This has been well placed, as
long as he has been the librarian, and well used.
So, again, I appreciate my friend's motives, but I would urge the
rejection of his amendment.
With that, I would like to yield the remainder of the time that I
have to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran), my good friend.
Mr. MORAN. Madam Chairman, I could not agree more with my good friend
from Oklahoma, the chairman of this subcommittee, the idea that my
colleague from Wisconsin would suggest that this program has outlived
its usefulness when the Russian bear is hungrier than it has been in
decades, when Putin seized Crimea and now he is trying to take parts of
eastern Ukraine.
Let me explain what this program does. It takes emerging leaders in
Russia and Russia's satellite countries, former members of the Soviet
Union, who show exceptional talent and interest in speaking for
themselves and it brings them over to the United States and puts them
in homes and communities where they will learn how our rule of law
works, what equal justice under the law means in a truly democratic
country. It shows them how to participate in the democratic process. It
shows them how we have taken the works of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky and
Solzhenitsyn and we have implemented them in a country that respects
individualism and puts individualism higher than statism. It is a
direct threat to communism. It is a direct threat to Mr. Putin. Because
if you do this, Mr. Putin can't keep his $60 billion he has taken from
corruption. He can't continue to make his people dependent upon the
state. This is disruptive to him. It is a direct threat to him. That is
why it is important.
Haven't we done enough for Mr. Putin's interests to cut this program
by 43 percent by preventing these young emerging leaders from being
able to come over to this country? Do we now have to deny Ukrainian
leaders the ability to gain an understanding of what a country that is
not corrupt, of what a country that respects individualism, respects
democracy, respects equal justice under the law is all about?
That is what this program is all about. We spend half a trillion
dollars on our military, and yet programs like this will accomplish
more for sustainability of peace among nations by giving an opportunity
for people to speak for themselves, to speak out for the rule of law,
to speak against corruption. That is what we as a nation want. We don't
want to dominate anybody else. We want to be an instrument of our
values and our vision. We want to be that beacon of light and hope for
other nations. This is one of the ways in which we achieve that
objective. A small amount of money, but an enormously valuable
contribution to world peace.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DUFFY. Madam Chairman, with all due respect, to those who may
disagree with this amendment--I am seeing some bipartisan agreement; I
know I have some bipartisan disagreement with this amendment--but to my
colleagues, there are 90 programs that are aimed at accomplishing the
very same mission. When do we come forward and say: Listen, let's cut
this back; let's cut it back a little bit? The bridge isn't cut off,
but we have other programs that are doing the same thing.
Listen, we want to talk about what is going on in Ukraine and want to
talk about what is going on in Russia. This program didn't exist in the
1980s. Ronald Reagan didn't have this program to tear down the Soviet
Union. He did it with strong leadership. So to come to this institution
and say: Listen, the $3.4 million in this program is going to stop the
aggression of Putin, no. Strong leadership will, though. This is about
when do we come together as an institution and find programs that are
duplicative, programs that we can look and say: This can be scaled back
and we can look to one of the other 89 programs to accomplish this same
mission.
There is a constituency around every dollar. That is why it is so
hard in this town to scale back because everyone will come forward and
go: But no, no, no; this dollar is so important. And people come from
our communities and go: No, don't cut back.
We are $1.7 trillion in debt. This is unsustainable. So let's come
together and find this program that we can cut and look to the other 89
that can accomplish the same mission, which I think is a noble mission.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy).
The amendment was rejected.
Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Hall
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 printed in
House Report 113-426.
Mr. HALL. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. 211. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to deliver a printed copy of the report of
disbursements for the operations of the House of
Representatives under section 106 of the House of
Representatives Administrative Reform Technical Corrections
Act (2 U.S.C. 5535) to the office of a Member of the House of
Representatives (including a Delegate or Resident
Commissioner to the Congress).
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 557, the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Hall) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. HALL. Madam Chairman, I would like to thank my good friend
Chairman Cole and the Appropriations Committee for allowing me to offer
this amendment in conjunction with Congressman McCaul. My amendment
today simply prohibits the Statement of Disbursements of the House from
being distributed the old-fashioned way--through print.
A lot of people say I am old-fashioned and I am behind the times, but
I have a Facebook account, I tweet, and just this week my congressional
Web site was singled out for the Silver Mouse Award, placing it in the
top 6 percent of all congressional Web sites for transparency, ease of
use, and accessibility of constituent services.
Right now, the Chief Administrative Officer of the House distributes
441 copies of its three-volume Statement of Disbursements to the House
at a cost of well over $300,000 per year. This quarterly public report
of all reports and expenditures for U.S. House of Representatives
Members, committees, leadership, officers, and offices was more than
2,400 pages long in its last edition. Multiply that by 441, and you
have 100,000 pages of printed material, all of which can easily be
accessed on the CAO's Web site.
To be clear, my amendment does nothing to prohibit the CAO from
making the Statement of Disbursements of the House available online to
Members as they currently do. But if I can learn to communicate
electronically, I sure don't see why the Federal Government can't do
the same thing.
Mr. COLE. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HALL. I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, I want to accept this amendment.
You certainly aren't behind the times. You are usually ahead of the
curve.
In this case, the gentleman certainly is. I appreciate him pointing
out an area where we can save $300,000. He is precisely right on this.
We are more than happy to accept the amendment and, again, very much
appreciate our friend for bringing it to the floor and for saving the
American taxpayers $300,000.
Mr. HALL. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Hall).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Wenstrup
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 printed in
House Report 113-426.
Mr. WENSTRUP. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
[[Page H3386]]
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. 211. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to deliver to the office of a Member of the House of
Representatives (including a Delegate or Resident
Commissioner to the Congress) a printed copy of the Daily
Calendar of the House of Representatives which is prepared by
the Clerk of the House of Representatives.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 557, the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Wenstrup) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. WENSTRUP. Madam Chairman, I rise in support today of amendment
No. 7.
My amendment is simple. It would eliminate the daily delivery of
printed copies of the House Calendar to Member offices.
This multipage paper booklet is currently delivered each legislative
day to 441 Representatives' offices. The document in my hand is about
100 pages, meaning that about 44,000 pages are wasted each legislative
day, over 5 million pages a year.
The information in these pages is readily available online, and, as
required, paper copies will be kept on record. Previously, the House
took similar action by ending paper deliveries of the Congressional
Record a few years ago with no adverse effects.
Let's be honest, Madam Chairman, no one sits and peruses the calendar
every day. Most offices accept the delivery, turn 90 degrees, and place
it in the recycling bin. Hardly a good use of time or precious paper.
Ending this outdated practice also saves money. We can save
hardworking taxpayers nearly $200,000 a year, according to the
Government Printing Office.
Madam Chairman, I want to note that this idea came from one of my
staff members, Kate Raulin, who repeatedly recycles these Calendars and
grew frustrated at the waste she saw every day. Imagine if every staff
member of this body had an idea or an amendment that would save the
taxpayers about $200,000 a year. By my back-of-the-napkin calculations,
those savings would easily top over a billion dollars a year.
When I worked in the private sector, we had to be mindful of excess
costs and waste. The government must be held to the same standard and
should reform outdated policies. We should not remain stuck in the
past. If the daily cost of delivery came out of each Member's personal
office budget, how many of us would actually pay to get this delivered
every day?
I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and vote ``yea.''
Mr. COLE. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WENSTRUP. I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, I want to thank my friend for bringing this
to the floor. He is precisely right in everything that he says about
both the costs and the functionality of the document in question.
His staff member is to be commended for bringing it to his attention
and for you acknowledging her. I think staff people every place are
grateful. We are delighted to accept this amendment, delighted to save
the money, and, again, appreciate our friend bringing it to our
attention, pointing it out, and saving the taxpayers $200,000.
Mr. WENSTRUP. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Ohio (Mr. Wenstrup).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Holt
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed in
House Report 113-426.
Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. 211. There is appropriated, for salaries and expenses
of the Office of Technology Assessment as authorized by the
Technology Assessment Act of 1972 (2 U.S.C. 471 et seq.),
hereby derived from the amount provided in this Act for the
payment to the House Historic Buildings Revitalization Trust
Fund, $2,500,000.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 557, the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Holt) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 2\1/2\ minutes.
For 23 years, Congress had an insightful nonpartisan agency aimed at
providing Members of Congress and their staff with expert advice on the
technological aspects of public policy. It was called the Office of
Technology Assessment. From 1972 to 1995, it produced reports on topics
that were striking in their relevance even today: computer software
security, disposal of chemical weapons, teaching with technology,
bioenergy, and many more. OTA was part of Congress, understood the
congressional process; it spoke the language of Congress, and it looked
at the technological aspects of a large variety of issues and provided
clarity where it was needed.
{time} 1045
Congress turned out the lights on the OTA in 1995 with the thought
that congressional agencies like CRS, GAO, also universities and
private industry would fill the void. They have not. In the years since
the OTA was defunded, our need for its work has grown only more acute.
Too often, we have considered or not considered legislation in
ignorance of the technological factors.
That is why I am introducing an amendment to restore some funding to
the OTA. My amendment would reallocate to the OTA $2.5 million
appropriated for the House Historic Buildings Revitalization Trust
Fund, about 1.4 percent of the surplus in that trust fund. During its
23 years, the OTA produced an amazingly high return on investment, with
hundreds of millions of dollars in savings.
A study on Agent Orange helped save the government $10 million. An
OTA report was the source of recommendations for upgrades in the
computer system of the Social Security Administration that led to a
savings of more than $300 million. Studies on the synfuels helped save,
literally, billions of dollars.
When Congress stopped receiving the OTA's counsel, technological
topics didn't become less relevant in the political process; they just
became less understood, and scientific thinking lost its toehold on
Capitol Hill, with troubling consequences for the ways we legislate on
all issues, not just on those that are explicitly scientific.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment in order to give Congress a
tool that we desperately need to do the people's work with clarity and
reason.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, my friend is, frankly, one of the most
thoughtful and best Members of this body. There is no question about
that. So, when we discussed this, I took it very seriously because it
was my friend's proposal, and I think any other Member in this House
would do the same. At the end of the day, I came to a different
conclusion for a number of reasons.
First, we are in a very tight budget. We have no increase at all, so
funding this initiative means effectively taking money away from
someplace else. Second, I looked at the long-term spending pattern of
this program in the past. It actually peaked at $20 million, so I think
starting at $2.5 million is not likely where it will end up over time.
Third, quite frankly, I looked at what some of my predecessors in my
position had thought, both Republican and Democratic. As my friend
knows, obviously, the Democrats had the majority after 1995 for a 4-
year period, which was relatively recently, and they looked at this and
came to the same decision that was made in '95, and that, I think, we
make today, which is that there are other sources of information. The
Government Accountability Office, in particular, has developed a
capability here, and we think there are other sources of information.
While I don't deny that this has played a useful role in the past, I
just believe, given the constrained circumstances that we have today,
given the possibility that this will grow, and given what at least to
date has been a bipartisan judgment that this is something we didn't
need to renew, I, reluctantly, decided not to include this in
[[Page H3387]]
the bill. For that reason, I would also oppose the amendment.
I now yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Wasserman
Schultz), my good friend, the ranking member of the Legislative Branch
Subcommittee.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I thank the gentleman, regretfully, because I
know how passionate the gentleman from New Jersey is about this
important issue.
Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to this well-intentioned
amendment, which seeks to add $2.5 million to reestablish the Office of
Technology Assessment, which did have an important scope of work for
Congress during its existence in the 1990s. Unfortunately, the
amendment takes the funding from the House Historic Buildings
Revitalization Trust Fund. This fund is critical for the long-term
maintenance for such items as the Cannon House Office Building's
rehabilitation, which is an ongoing project that has already begun. The
fund was established so we could bank resources over several years for
the revitalization of our House office buildings and stave off cost
overruns that have plagued previous projects.
I have been a supporter of the Office of Technology Assessment dating
back to my time as chair of this subcommittee. In fact, in fiscal years
2008-2010, I included $2.5 million in this bill within the Government
Accountability Office for activities similar in scope to the work of
OTA's. I also supported an identical amendment offered by Mr. Holt in
fiscal year 2012, as the Cannon project had not yet commenced, but now
that it has, I cannot support an amendment in good conscience that
would take critical resources from a fund that supports ongoing
rehabilitation projects on the Capitol complex. Perhaps, had the
gentleman found another source for his funding, we could have been
supportive.
I thank the gentleman for his passion on this issue, but I urge
Members to vote against the amendment.
Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Washington State (Mr. McDermott), who observed the OTA
in action in his time here in Congress.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Chairman, I was one of the 16 people who was on
that committee. It used to be a committee with four Republicans from
the Senate and four Republicans from the House, four Democrats from the
Senate and four Democrats from the House. It was a balanced committee.
It looked at the technological questions of what we are spending
billions of dollars on.
Now we have a choice of where we get our information. The GAO looks
backward. All of the government organizations look backward. They don't
look forward. That is not their role to imagine what will happen out
there. What we need is an organization that can look forward as we
proceed to spend billions of dollars in technology. We can either get
the information from a nonpartisan organization that is controlled
evenly by both sides of the House and the other body, or we could go to
industry. They will come in here, and they will give us all of the
information of their having the best thing since sliced bread.
I think we need the OTA, and I urge you to adopt the amendment.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran), my good friend, a member of the
Appropriations Committee, someone who has also observed the OTA in
practice.
Mr. MORAN. I thank my friend representing Princeton, New Jersey, who
has a doctorate in physics, who is a ``Jeopardy!'' award winner, who
is, perhaps, one of the most academically advanced Members of the
Congress. It is interesting that he is the one who knows enough to know
what we don't know in this Congress. My concern is that many of us
don't know enough to know what we don't know.
Madam Chairman, the size of computers is shrinking by about 50
percent every couple of years, and their capacity--their power and
their speed--is doubling, yet we can't understand the implications of
that, which applies to all of our constituencies. We just mandated that
30 percent of the energy that the military spends, which is billions of
dollars, has to be from non-carbon-polluting forms of energy. Do we
know whether that is achievable? We just committed yesterday $11
billion for computer interoperability for electronic medical records.
We have to understand the implications of our decisions, and the OTA
helps us to be able to do that.
Mr. COLE. Madam Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, in closing, for almost a quarter of a
century, the OTA was one of the most respected, productive, cost-
efficient agencies we have seen, producing comprehensive reports for
the House and the Senate on issues related to health care policy,
agricultural production, telecommunications, space policy, electronic
surveillance, national defense, and much more. It prevented decisions
made in ignorance, and ignorance is expensive.
My friend from Oklahoma and also the ranking member, the gentlelady
from Florida, talked about cost. What we are talking about here is
finding the low-hanging fruit on making government more efficient. That
is what the OTA did. That is what the OTA would do. This is the last
Legislative Branch appropriations I will be dealing with. I know the
OTA. I worked as a staffer on Capitol Hill. I saw that it works. I saw
how much it elevated the debate here on Capitol Hill. It saves taxpayer
money. I urge a ``yes'' vote.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Again, I want to thank my friend because I know he is,
indeed, committed to this idea.
In closing, Madam Chair, I think, as usual, my friend Ms. Wasserman
Schultz probably made the salient point of the debate. We are taking
from our historic trust fund, which preserves this building, and
redirects that resource. That is a mistake. That is just simply a
mistake. If there is another way to fund it, I would still have grave
reservations about reintroducing it because I do think the information
is available elsewhere, but robbing from your seed corn, I think, is
something we shouldn't do.
We have established this fund. We have been able to maintain it under
Democrats and Republicans alike. We are going to have these challenges
going forward. I do not want to set the precedent of this becoming a
piggy bank to fund other things out of. We need to maintain our campus.
This is an important way to do it, and I think weakening it in any way
would be counterproductive.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey will be
postponed.
Announcement by the Chair
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will now
resume on those amendments printed in House Report 113-426 on which
further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Nugent of Florida.
Amendment No. 3 by Mr. Gosar of Arizona.
Amendment No. 4 by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
Amendment No. 8 by Mr. Holt of New Jersey.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in this series.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Nugent
The CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Nugent) on
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 196,
noes 221, not voting 14, as follows:
[[Page H3388]]
[Roll No. 188]
AYES--196
Amodei
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Byrne
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Coble
Coffman
Cohen
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Courtney
Cramer
Daines
Davis (CA)
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
Delaney
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Esty
Farr
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Foster
Franks (AZ)
Gabbard
Gallego
Garcia
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Hahn
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Himes
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hurt
Israel
Jenkins
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kilmer
Kingston
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latta
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujaan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lummis
Maffei
Maloney, Sean
Marino
Massie
Matheson
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Meng
Messer
Mullin
Murphy (FL)
Napolitano
Noem
Nolan
Nugent
Nunnelee
O'Rourke
Olson
Palazzo
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (NC)
Reed
Reichert
Ribble
Rigell
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rokita
Ross
Royce
Ruiz
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schneider
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shea-Porter
Sinema
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Upton
Wagner
Walden
Walorski
Walz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Woodall
Yoder
NOES--221
Aderholt
Amash
Bachmann
Bachus
Barton
Bass
Beatty
Bishop (GA)
Bonamici
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Calvert
Capuano
Caardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cartwright
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cole
Conaway
Connolly
Conyers
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis, Danny
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farenthold
Fattah
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gosar
Gowdy
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Higgins
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Huffman
Hultgren
Hunter
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Marchant
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McDermott
McGovern
McKeon
McNerney
Meadows
Meeks
Mica
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Neugebauer
Nunes
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Polis
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Renacci
Rice (SC)
Roby
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Saanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Speier
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tipton
Titus
Tsongas
Turner
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velaazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wolf
Womack
Yarmuth
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--14
Becerra
Enyart
Frelinghuysen
Gingrey (GA)
Gutieerrez
Hinojosa
McAllister
McCollum
McIntyre
Miller (FL)
Richmond
Rogers (KY)
Schwartz
Stockman
{time} 1126
Mr. CRAWFORD, Ms. HANABUSA, Messrs. WALBERG, ROGERS of Michigan, and
GRIFFIN of Arkansas changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mrs. NOEM, Messrs. COURTNEY, TONKO, SCOTT of Virginia, LUETKEMEYER,
GRAVES of Missouri, CAMP, GOHMERT, ROKITA, BURGESS, and Mrs. BLACK
changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Gosar
The Acting CHAIR (Ms. Foxx). The unfinished business is the demand
for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Gosar) on which further proceedings were postponed and on
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 219,
noes 198, not voting 14, as follows:
[Roll No. 189]
AYES--219
Aderholt
Amash
Bachmann
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Byrne
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Connolly
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Daines
Davis, Rodney
Denham
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Franks (AZ)
Gabbard
Garcia
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guthrie
Hahn
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Himes
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Israel
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
Kingston
Kirkpatrick
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lankford
Latta
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Maffei
Marchant
Marino
Massie
Matheson
McAllister
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller, Gary
Mullin
Mulvaney
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Rahall
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Ruiz
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stivers
Stutzman
Terry
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Walz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NOES--198
Amodei
Bachus
Bass
Beatty
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Butterfield
Calvert
Capps
Capuano
Caardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Conyers
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Fortenberry
Foster
[[Page H3389]]
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallego
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibson
Grayson
Green, Al
Grijalva
Grimm
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jolly
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Kuster
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujaan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
McCarthy (NY)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Roby
Ros-Lehtinen
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Saanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stewart
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velaazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Wolf
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--14
Becerra
Enyart
Gingrey (GA)
Gutieerrez
Hinojosa
Hurt
Matsui
McCollum
Miller (FL)
Richmond
Rogers (KY)
Schwartz
Stockman
Visclosky
{time} 1132
Mr. DELANEY changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. HURT. Madam Chair, I was not present for rollcall vote No. 189.
Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. Broun) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 207,
noes 212, not voting 12, as follows:
[Roll No. 190]
AYES--207
Amash
Amodei
Bachmann
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Byrne
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Connolly
Cook
Costa
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Daines
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gabbard
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guthrie
Hahn
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
Kingston
Kirkpatrick
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latta
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Maffei
Marchant
Marino
Massie
Matheson
McAllister
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller, Gary
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Reed
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Ruiz
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Sinema
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Terry
Thornberry
Tipton
Tsongas
Upton
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NOES--212
Aderholt
Bachus
Bass
Beatty
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Butterfield
Calvert
Capps
Capuano
Caardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Fortenberry
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gerlach
Gibson
Granger
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Grimm
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jolly
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujaan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
McCarthy (NY)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reichert
Roby
Ros-Lehtinen
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Saanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Simpson
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Turner
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velaazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Welch
Westmoreland
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wolf
Womack
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--12
Becerra
Enyart
Gingrey (GA)
Gutieerrez
Hinojosa
Matsui
McCollum
Miller (FL)
Richmond
Rogers (KY)
Schwartz
Stockman
{time} 1136
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Holt
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Holt) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 164,
noes 248, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 191]
AYES--164
Barber
Barrow (GA)
Bass
Beatty
Bera (CA)
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Capps
Capuano
Caardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
[[Page H3390]]
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Fudge
Garamendi
Garcia
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hahn
Hanabusa
Harris
Hastings (FL)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Holt
Honda
Huffman
Israel
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujaan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Matheson
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Michaud
Miller, George
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salmon
Saanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Velaazquez
Visclosky
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOES--248
Aderholt
Amash
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Butterfield
Byrne
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clyburn
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Costa
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Daines
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gabbard
Gallego
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Holding
Horsford
Hoyer
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
Kildee
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McAllister
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moore
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
O'Rourke
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Peterson
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Rahall
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Sanford
Scalise
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tipton
Titus
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Vela
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--19
Amodei
Becerra
Coble
Enyart
Gingrey (GA)
Gutieerrez
Hinojosa
Kaptur
Matsui
McCollum
Miller (FL)
Negrete McLeod
Richmond
Rogers (KY)
Schwartz
Speier
Stockman
Tsongas
Waters
{time} 1141
Ms. KELLY of Illinois changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIR. There being no further amendments, under the rule,
the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Hultgren) having assumed the chair, Ms. Foxx, 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. 4487)
making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2015, and for other purposes, and, pursuant to
House Resolution 557, she reported the bill back to the House with
sundry amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the
Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit
Mr. RUIZ. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. RUIZ. I am opposed in its current form, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Ruiz moves to recommit the bill H.R. 4487 to the
Committee on Appropriations with instructions to report the
same back to the House forthwith with the following
amendment:
Page 2, line 11, strike ``$1,180,736,000'' and insert
``$1,181,236,000''.
Page 5, line 16, strike ``$285,620,336'' and insert
``$286,120,336''.
Page 6, line 2 (relating to amounts made available for the
Wounded Warrior Program), strike ``$2,500,000'' and insert
``$3,000,000''.
Page 19, line 12 (relating to amounts made available for
Books for the Blind and Physically Handicapped), strike
``$50,429,000'' and insert ``$50,696,000''.
Page 22, line 16 (relating to amounts made available for
the Government Printing Office Revolving Fund), strike
``$11,348,000'' and insert ``$10,581,000''.
{time} 1145
Mr. COLE (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
to dispense with the reading of the amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Oklahoma?
Mr. HOYER. Objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk continued to read.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. RUIZ. Mr. Speaker, this is the final amendment to the bill, which
will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If adopted, the
bill will immediately proceed to final passage, as amended.
Here in Congress, we wrestle with some of the hardest choices about
the future of our great Nation, but sometimes these choices are very
easy. Some choices cut across party lines, define our values as
Americans, and give us an opportunity to stand together and fight for
what is important.
The easy choice today is to either fund more wasteful and outdated
printing services or fund the Wounded Warrior Program. The Wounded
Warrior Program in Congress provides paid fellowships for injured
veterans to work in congressional offices across the country to help
serve other veterans and gain work experience as they assimilate back
into civilian life.
There has never been a more important time for the heroes who have
defended our country to play these pivotal roles in shaping our laws. I
have the honor of working with a Wounded Warrior fellow in my office,
and I have seen firsthand their dedication and greatness.
Chris Rennick is a marine from the 1st Battalion in Twentynine Palms,
California, who served in Iraq. He was raised on a farm by his
godparents, Linda and David Matheny. Mr.
[[Page H3391]]
Matheny always told him, ``Chris, do your best,'' and that is exactly
what Chris did.
He deployed twice with the United States Marine Corps. His first was
with the ``tip of the spear'' in the first invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Chris was injured in an IED blast in his first deployment and still
returned to Iraq for a second tour in 2004, and again was injured in an
IED explosion.
Chris served honorably and received the Good Conduct Medal, the
Combat Action Medal, and the Iraq Expeditionary Medal. Chris' unit
received the Presidential Unit Citation.
After serving in the Marines, Chris came home and dealt with a
traumatic brain injury and posttraumatic stress disorder. He told me he
was in a bad place. He struggled to hold down three jobs while caring
for himself. It was a fellow veteran in the Wounded Warrior battalion
who reached out and helped Chris get back on track. Now Chris does the
same for others, as a Wounded Warrior fellow.
Chris joined the Wounded Warrior Program because he still firmly
believes in the Marine Corps motto, ``Semper Fidelis,'' always
faithful. Chris remains always faithful to his brothers in arms and to
this day is always faithful to our great country that he sacrificed
for.
In his short time with my office, less than 1 year, Chris has helped
over 300 veterans in my district alone receive the benefits that they
have earned and get the care that they need. Chris' passion for helping
veterans is an inspiration for me and, I know, for all of you, and that
is the reason why we must fully fund the Wounded Warrior Program.
My motion to recommit would fund the Wounded Warrior Program with 30
slots for both Republicans and Democrats by redirecting $767,000 from
the Government Printing Office. Additionally, it would provide $267,000
for Books for the Blind and Handicapped. We can do all of this with no
new spending.
So the choice today is clear and it is easy: Would you rather fund
more printed outdated copies of the Congressional Record and House
legislative calendar, or would you rather support our Wounded Warrior
fellows like Chris?
This institution and this entire country needs heroes' voices like
Chris' in every decision that we make. I urge you to vote ``yes'' and
support our veterans and those with disabilities by supporting these
critical programs.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to
recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, after spending the last few hours debating and
amending this bill, we have before us a bipartisan piece of legislation
that funds this House, its safety, and the agencies that support the
legislative process, and all in a fiscally responsible and, frankly,
bipartisan way.
Yesterday, in nearly a unanimous fashion, this House passed a bill
that provided nearly $4 billion in funding that directly supports and
assists our wounded warriors, and I think most all of us on both sides
of the aisle are proud of that.
This includes $2.6 billion for the Prosthetic and Sensory Aids
Service, $560 million for the largest system of spinal cord injury of
care in the United States, and $135 million to assist blind and
visually impaired veterans. It also includes $96 million for research
that benefits wounded warriors in areas like prosthetics, traumatic
brain injury, spinal cord injuries, and the like.
The total medical care budget of the VA for FY15 is $59.1 billion,
enough to care for 6.7 million patients and, again, is something that I
think every Member in this House ought to be proud of and was more than
delighted to support.
This legislation, as with all appropriations legislation that we
bring to the floor, makes every stride to ensure that the very best
care for our wounded warriors and veterans is available. I know that I
speak for this entire body when I say we deeply respect and respect the
service and sacrifices of our troops and veterans and that the bill we
passed yesterday is hard-and-fast proof of that.
Frankly, had we wanted to do more, I would suggest that yesterday
would have been the time to do more because, clearly, everybody was
willing to support that measure.
Keep in mind, the bill before us now is the smallest of the 12
appropriations bills, but it is still incredibly important; and
advancing this bill gets us one step closer to completing our necessary
work, our constitutional duty of funding the Federal Government.
Motions to recommit like this one, quite frankly, are mostly
political ``gotcha'' tactics, and both sides do it. I cast no partisan
stones here. I have seen it happen on this floor many, many times
before. But I think both sides probably ought to stop and reflect if we
are really honoring the veterans or if we are using them to make a
political point. I would hope not the latter, because yesterday we did
the right thing; today we are trying to score points at one another's
expense.
Yes, both sides have done this. I am sorry it happens. My personal
opinion is that it shouldn't, and I hope we will dispense with it going
forward.
The bill in front of us has bipartisan support. If it is allowed to
proceed, it will pass overwhelmingly.
Over the past 2 days, we have done some great work, kicking off the
appropriations process at the earliest date in decades and passing our
first bill yesterday with overwhelming support from both sides of the
aisle. Let's continue that good work today. Let's pass this bill. Let's
reject the motion to recommit. Let's get the work of the people done.
With that, 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
Mr. RUIZ. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 5-
minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by a 5-minute
vote on passage of the bill.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 194,
noes 222, not voting 15, as follows:
[Roll No. 192]
AYES--194
Barber
Barrow (GA)
Bass
Beatty
Bera (CA)
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Caardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujaan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matheson
McCarthy (NY)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Saanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velaazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman
[[Page H3392]]
Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOES--222
Aderholt
Amash
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Daines
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McAllister
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--15
Becerra
Coble
Enyart
Franks (AZ)
Gingrey (GA)
Gutieerrez
Hinojosa
Matsui
McCollum
Miller (FL)
Negrete McLeod
Richmond
Rogers (KY)
Schwartz
Stockman
{time} 1202
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
Under clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 402,
nays 14, not voting 15, as follows:
[Roll No. 193]
YEAS--402
Aderholt
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Bass
Beatty
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Butterfield
Byrne
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Caardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cartwright
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Courtney
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Daines
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Hahn
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Holding
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jordan
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Long
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujaan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lummis
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
McAllister
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meadows
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Messer
Mica
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neugebauer
Noem
Nolan
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
O'Rourke
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pittenger
Pitts
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velaazquez
Visclosky
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NAYS--14
Amash
Broun (GA)
Duncan (TN)
Engel
Franks (AZ)
Green, Gene
Holt
Jones
Labrador
Massie
Matheson
Rogers (AL)
Saanchez, Linda T.
Wittman
NOT VOTING--15
Becerra
Coble
Enyart
Gingrey (GA)
Gutieerrez
Hinojosa
Matsui
McCollum
Miller (FL)
Negrete McLeod
Payne
Richmond
Rogers (KY)
Schwartz
Stockman
{time} 1208
Mr. RANGEL changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
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. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 193, please let the record
show that my vote on final passage would have been a ``yes.'' Had I
been present, I would have voted ``yes.''
Personal Explanation
Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, due to the devastating impact of
recent flooding in my district, I missed the following rollcall votes:
No. 188-193 on May 1, 2014. If present, I would have voted: rollcall
vote No. 188--Nugent of Florida Amendment to H.R. 4487, ``aye,''
rollcall vote No. 189--Gosar of Arizona Amendment to H.R. 4487,
``aye,'' rollcall vote No. 190--Broun of Georgia Amendment to H.R.
4487, ``aye,'' rollcall vote No. 191--Holt of New Jersey Amendment to
H.R. 4487, ``nay,'' rollcall vote No. 192--H.R. 4487, Motion to
Recommit, ``nay,'' rollcall vote No. 193--H.R. 4487, Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 2015, ``aye.''
[[Page H3393]]
____________________