[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 77 (Tuesday, May 19, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H3339-H3359]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2016
General Leave
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks
and to include extraneous material on consideration of H.R. 2250, and
that I may include tabular material on the same.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Georgia?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 271 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. 2250.
The Chair appoints the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter) to preside
over the Committee of the Whole.
{time} 1516
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. 2250) making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, with Mr.
Carter of Georgia 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 Georgia (Mr. Graves) and the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
When I joined the Appropriations Committee a little over 4 years ago,
I said that I wanted this committee to be known as a place where
taxpayer money was saved and not spent. In recent years, there has been
a major change in the perception of this committee.
Thanks in large part to the leadership of Chairman Rogers and the
members of the committee, the process is open, and it is transparent,
and this committee has made a priority of ensuring every taxpayer
dollar is spent wisely.
In keeping with that trend, the bill that we are here to debate today
holds the line on spending. It is a bill that honors and respects the
taxpayer while preserving the beauty of the Capitol campus, providing
essential security for visitors and staff, and ensuring that we are
able to provide the services that our constituents expect and deserve.
This bill is a total of $3.3 billion for the legislative branch,
excluding all Senate items. The bill continues the freeze on funding
for the House of Representatives, including leadership, committees, and
Member office budgets. It also continues the Member pay freeze that was
put in place in 2010.
[[Page H3340]]
In all, this represents a 14 percent reduction in funding for the
House of Representatives since Republicans have gained control of
Congress in January of 2011.
Now, more specifically, this bill increases funding for the Capitol
Police and allows small increases for several other agencies while
trimming budgets in less critical areas.
This bill recognizes the continuing challenges faced by our Architect
of the Capitol. There is a balance that must be struck between
preserving these historic buildings and funding other critical
projects, including life-safety projects.
Overall, the Architect's budget is one that was trimmed. This bill
puts a new emphasis on transparency and accountability in major
construction projects under the Architect. That is why this bill
transitions to direct appropriations for the Cannon restoration
project, rather than continuing to use the House historic building
revitalization fund. This change will significantly improve the
committee's ability to provide oversight for this major project.
Additionally, this bill includes language that places a 25 percent
cap on the amount available for larger projects within the legislative
branch. In order to receive the remaining 75 percent of their
appropriations, this new oversight feature requires a plan for any
project over $5 million to be submitted to the GAO and our committee
for approval.
The plan must address any projected changes to the project's schedule
and cost, and it must include a description of the safeguards taken to
ensure that the project remains on time and on budget.
Now, regarding the Library of Congress, this bill includes funding to
meet the Library's current needs, including an increase for the U.S.
Copyright Office to reduce claims processing and analyze possible
process improvements.
Additionally, the committee will be working with the Library in the
upcoming months to track its progress in addressing its critical IT
infrastructure problems which have been identified in a recent GAO
report.
In closing, I would like to thank Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz,
Chairman Rogers, Mrs. Lowey, and the members of our subcommittee and
full committee and staff for their hard work throughout this entire
process. This is a product that we can be proud of.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
[[Page H3341]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH19MY15.001
[[Page H3342]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH19MY15.002
[[Page H3343]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH19MY15.003
[[Page H3344]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH19MY15.004
[[Page H3345]]
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by congratulating Chairman Graves on
his maiden voyage as a chair of an appropriations subcommittee. I know
that he was diligent and focused, and we found agreement where we
could, and where we could not agree, I appreciate his willingness to
discuss it in a congenial and thoughtful manner.
Today, we consider the smallest of the appropriations bills; and,
while that is the case, it is one that does fund an entire branch of
our government. The bill provides, as the chairman mentioned, $3.3
billion to the legislative branch, without Senate items, and is equal
to the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
Unfortunately, this represents the third year in a row of flat
funding for the overall legislative branch. Certain agencies--the
Architect of the Capitol and the Government Publishing Office--are cut
below fiscal year 2015 to support increases in other agencies.
I know if there was overall relief in the budget allocation, we would
see more investment in the staff and facilities in the legislative
branch, but we are starting to cut into bone in some places, and it is
truly unwise.
It is regrettable that this bill is, as are all of the other
appropriations bills, bound by spending limits set by the Republican
budget resolution that continues sequestration.
The President put forward a plan that will avoid sequestration's
harmful budget cuts and reduce the deficit in a balanced way.
Unfortunately, the Republican budget does not at least meet the
President's plan halfway.
As we look to conference with the Senate later in the year on
appropriations bills, I am hopeful that both parties and the President
can come together for another reasonable bargain that gives us more
room for discretionary programs.
This bill is being considered under a structured rule, as is
tradition. Twenty amendments were filed, seven of which were filed by
Democratic Members. Regrettably, the Rules Committee only made three
Republican amendments in order, all of which would further erode the
Legislative Branch bill's funding.
No Democratic amendments were made in order, even though several were
aimed at improving the lives of our restaurant workers whose plight was
played out in very public display in the last several weeks.
Last night, in the Rules Committee, I asked the committee to attempt
to find some parity, Mr. Chairman, between the majority and minority
with regard to amendments made in order; instead of parity, the
minority was completely shut out of the process.
As a result of the allocation, several infrastructure projects with
life and safety elements are not funded in this bill, even though we
have been committed to funding those in past years.
Cutting necessary upgrades to our elevators will not get us out of
debt; what it will do is get people stuck in our elevators. We should
not be surprised if an accident happens because we didn't address
important life-safety projects.
This bill, as I have said many times before, is not the sexiest of
the 13 appropriations bills, but it is one that is incredibly
important, and it is important that we keep the people who visit the
Capitol and work in the Capitol safe, and this bill makes it less
likely that we will be able to do that.
There are not many new initiatives in the bill, given the allocation,
but I am pleased that the bill recognized the importance of the
Nation's copyright laws by providing some of the requested increase.
The Copyright Office must improve the backlog of registrations, as
well as their business processes. Currently, customers can only submit
documents on paper, which the Copyright Office turns into a digital
format, which is a glaring inefficiency. It is 2015, the 21st century.
Our Copyright Office should not be conducting 21st century business in
a 20th century format.
The Copyright Office said it best itself in a report released in
February of this year:
There is a widespread perception that our licensing system
is broken. Songwriters and recording artists are concerned
that they cannot make a living under the existing structure,
which raises serious and systemic concerns for the future.
Music publishers and performance rights organizations are
frustrated that so much of their licensing activity is
subject to government control, so they are constrained in the
marketplace. Record labels and digital services complain that
the licensing process is burdensome and inefficient, making
it difficult to innovate.
I am glad to see that this bill is beginning to address necessary
upgrades.
Mr. Chairman, I am also concerned with the cut to the Government
Publishing Office in the underlying bill. This office was formerly
known as the Government Printing Office. Congress changed the name in
December to reflect what the agency actually does in this digital
world. The office publishes information online and plays a vital role
in Congress' transparency.
Unfortunately, GPO's request to continue to improve its online site,
as it has been allowed to do each year before this one, even under full
sequestration, was denied in the bill. The cut to GPO's online site
continues to raise the concern from some that GPO could ultimately
decide to charge the public for access to legislative documents, as was
recommended to them by the National Academy of Public Administration in
2013.
I agree with Representatives Candice Miller and Bob Brady, the chair
and ranking member of House Administration, who wrote to GPO, stating:
``Charging the public to access legislative data and documents would be
a colossal setback to the progress Congress has made to improve
transparency and access to legislative information.''
They also said charging the public ``would be a direct assault on our
ability to engage Americans in a process that is of great consequence
to their livelihoods.''
GPO indicated at the time of the Miller-Brady letter that it had no
plans to charge users for what should be public information; but what
choice are we leaving them if we don't continue investing in their
online systems?
Also included in the bill is a requirement that the Architect seek
approval, as the chairman described, from the House Committee on
Appropriations and the Government Accountability Office for any project
or phase of a project over $5 million.
I support strong oversight, as I have demonstrated many times over
the last 8 years, but I do question whether or not the low threshold
would unnecessarily hold up the progress of essential projects.
We should require the assistance of GAO to review projects on the
scale of the Cannon building restoration. I have asked GAO to come in
and get involved very specifically in a number of things where
accountability was a concern, but I question the use of GAO's resources
on projects as small as $5 million. That begins to micromanage beyond
what is reasonable.
To end on a more positive note, I am pleased that we were able to
provide $10 million to add to the House historic buildings
revitalization trust fund. We have been banking funds for our large
projects over the last several years, which is imperative to help
ensure we avoid getting caught flatfooted if we experience unexpected
costs in the future.
As I conclude, I want to, again, thank Chairman Graves for an open
dialogue as he crafted this bill. I did have a lot of opportunity to
talk with him about the details of this bill and offer suggestions,
many of which he took. Again, I look forward to continuing to work with
the chairman as the bill moves to the Senate and then on to conference.
I particularly want to thank our incredible staff, one of whom is
sitting next to me, Shalanda Young, and the rest of our staff, Liz
Dawson, Chuck Turner, on the majority side; and Jenny Panone, as well
as Jason Murphy, with Chairman Graves' personal office; and Rosalyn
Kumar, on my personal staff. Thank you so much.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, before I yield to our full
committee chairman, I do want to thank the ranking member for her work
on this, her input. She worked diligently through the process and was
supportive in subcommittee and full committee, and I wanted to thank
her for that publicly.
Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the full Appropriations
Committee.
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Chairman Graves, thank you for yielding the
[[Page H3346]]
time, and thank you for the great work.
This is the first bill that Chairman Graves has brought to the floor
of the House. He is the newest cardinal that we have, one of the 12
subcommittee chairmen--they are called cardinals--and this is his first
bill.
I want to congratulate him and Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz for
putting together what I think is a pretty high standard for fiscal
responsibility for the House, freezing funding at last year's level,
$3.3 billion.
That is the third year in a row, Mr. Chairman, that we have frozen
the budget of the House of Representatives, making good on our promise
to rein in spending and do more with less.
{time} 1530
This level maintains the 14 percent reduction in House funding that
began when Republicans took control of the House 4 years ago.
In addition, we have continued the freeze on Member pay that has been
in place since 2010. We believe that in order for us to ask others to
sacrifice throughout the government, that we have to sacrifice,
ourselves, first; and that is what this bill does.
The bill includes numerous provisions designed to guarantee that the
House and its support agencies are spending their tax dollars
appropriately and to keep them accountable to the taxpayers. This
includes enhancing oversight of the Cannon building restoration project
and making sure that Congress approves any large-scale construction
project.
These steps will help ensure that this type of major undertaking
stays on time and on budget and are especially important given the
historical significance of our buildings and the importance of their
use.
The $3.3 billion this bill provides for the House is directed to
support the most important functions of our legislative branch: keeping
our Member and committee offices open for business, protecting the
safety of those who work in and visit the Capitol complex, and
improving the way we support our agencies--and the importance of doing
just that.
For instance, the Capitol Police budget has been increased by $21
million to ensure our men in blue have the resources needed to protect
this hallowed building and its grounds. And where we have seen issues
in the agencies funded by the bill--for example, IT infrastructure
challenges at the Library of Congress--we have taken the steps to make
sure that these will be fixed moving forward.
Again, I want to thank Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Wasserman
Schultz, and this great staff that has worked hard on this bill. They
have demonstrated their love of this institution and these grounds by
the hard work and devotion they have put into making this bill
possible. So we want to thank the staff on both sides of the aisle for
putting together this small but mighty bill. So I thank them for all of
their work.
Mr. Chairman, I am proud that the House can lead by example when it
comes to restoring fiscal discipline to the operations of the Federal
Government. This bill will allow the House to fulfill its core duties
within a responsible, realistic budget and preserve the democracy that
makes this Nation so great.
I thank the chairman for the time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield such time
as she may consume to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs.
Lowey), the ranking member of the full Appropriations Committee as well
as the ranking member of the State, Foreign Operations, and Related
Programs Subcommittee.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank Chairman Graves and Ranking Member
Wasserman Schultz for their hard work on this bill.
Today, during what the majority has labeled ``Innovation Week,'' we
consider the smallest of the appropriation bills, which funds the
operations of our Nation's legislative branch.
Mr. Chairman, there is absolutely nothing innovative about this bill.
Without Senate items, the bill is $3.341 billion. Despite years of
``tightening our belts,'' the majority has, yet again, kept funding
flat and further damaged this institution's reputation and ability to
function at the highest level.
Member representational allowances, or MRAs, would be frozen for a
third consecutive year and will continue to strain 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.
Furthermore, we will consider amendments to the bill which would
compound the problems legislative branch agencies face: our buildings
are crumbling, life and safety projects are postponed, and agencies
have hit the limits of what they can do with inadequate funding.
Further cuts proposed today will have even greater implications for the
operations of the Congress.
I am concerned that the majority continues funding for a partisan
lawsuit against the President. At a time when we are putting
appropriation bills under tight budgetary restrictions, this waste of
taxpayer dollars only distracts us from the serious work Congress
should get done.
Notwithstanding my misgivings, I want to again congratulate the
chairman for putting forth his first bill and working with the ranking
member, where possible. We need more cooperation between the majority
and the minority.
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield 5 minutes
to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Farr).
Mr. FARR. I thank the gentlewoman from Florida for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise on this bill, as a member of the subcommittee,
with very mixed emotions. There are some very good things in this bill,
but there is also some bad stuff. The question is whether the bill is
51 percent good or 51 percent bad.
I came to Congress because I believe that government can play a
positive role in American lives. Government is not the enemy.
But it makes me wonder then why this body refuses to invest in the
tools to do the job of government and, by extension, to do the job of
the American people. This bill contains the same funding levels it did
last year, and that is $172 million less than the budget request.
Any good corporation plots its investments so the company can
prosper. In terms of the House of Representatives, that would mean
setting spending at a level that would maximize its ability to serve
the people. By failing to make those investments, we disrespect the
American people, and we tell them that we are not worth the investment,
not worth the effort, not worth doing the job well.
This bill fails to invest in the very institution we depend upon to
make government function properly. This body is being given short
shrift.
I am on the Appropriations Committee. I think it is our
responsibility to meet the needs of the Nation in every respect, and
that includes investing in the legislative branch of government so it
can do its job.
Those low polling numbers that Congress gets--everybody here talks
about how low it is--I think they are the self-fulfilled policy of a
Congress that refuses to provide itself the tools they need to serve
the public.
Skimping isn't going to make this place work any better. Using
taxpayer dollars more wisely will.
Having said that, I am also supportive of what the committee brought
to the floor in a program called the Open World Leadership Center. It
is operated out of funds from Congress with the Library of Congress.
What Members may not know is that this program was begun as the
brainchild of the late Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska and the Librarian
of Congress. It was to expose young and emerging leaders--average age
about 38--in Russia and former Eastern bloc countries. Some of those
countries include Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Kazakhstan.
I think President Putin would love to see this program go away, the
way USAID has left the region.
It makes a difference to those young leaders to visit congressional
districts, to see how city councils work, to see how school boards
work, to see the United States, the State legislators, the judges. The
program belongs in the legislative branch because peer-to-peer
relationships do work.
[[Page H3347]]
The program reaches out to all 50 States. More than 23,000 rising
leaders have been hosted by the United States Government since the
program's inception. Eighty percent of those have met with Members of
Congress and visited their congressional districts. This is a very
robust exchange program.
I had a group in my district out in the central coast of California,
and one of the visitors had been a member of the Duma, their Congress.
He told me that he had been invited by our country to be here at least
about a dozen times. But only in visiting the communities and seeing
the local government in action did he actually understand what
democracy was all about, a bottom's-up process in America that is never
learned just visiting Washington or getting taught in a classroom. The
value of hands-on, from-the-ground-up democracy is a lesson that can't
be learned from a book. Open World experiences show these participants
that democracy is not just a dream. It is actually a working reality,
one that they can have in their home countries if they work at it. And
America shows them how.
There is an amendment coming up, the Ratcliffe amendment, and I hope
that all the Members of Congress will reject that amendment to delete
this program.
Mr. Chairman, I really appreciate the work of the gentleman from
Georgia, our new chairman. He has done a great job. I hope that we will
spend, though, a little bit more money investing in this institution so
that we can get the job done, not just talk about how we can cut,
squeeze, and trim, sacrificing the ability of Congress to be its best.
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume, and thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr). He is
a great member of the subcommittee and a strong advocate for a lot of
elements within our budget. The truth is, we had tough choices to make.
It wasn't easy. We are held within the constraints of what current law
is.
The President may have submitted a budget that didn't comply with the
constraints that we have to comply with, but that doesn't mean that we
can adhere to his budget numbers. So we are $170-something million
below what the President requested or what the budget request was, but
we are within the limits that are provided by law that many of the
Members within this body voted for--excluding myself--and the President
signed it into law.
At some point, we have to grapple with that, as a House, and
understand that is the law. And until that law is changed, tough
choices we will have to make.
As the chairman of the full committee so eloquently stated earlier,
it is up to us to lead by example, and that is who we have elected to
be our leaders and to represent our districts by example. So these are
tough choices, no doubt. I agree with the gentleman from California.
I know we had a goal, as a committee, and it was really bipartisan,
our objective; and that was to honor and respect taxpayers today and
preserve the institution for future generations, given the limited
resources we had to work with.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, let me just point out that the
chairman is right: we do have to lead by example.
Leading by example, as we have in the past, like last fiscal year--
after the President submitted his budget, we certainly could have and
should have, as a Congress, sat down with the President and negotiated
an adjustment to the sequester, which we were able to successfully do
last year, and that was to the betterment of making sure that people
who are simply trying to succeed have the opportunity to do so in this
country instead of living under the severe cuts and caps that
sequestration forced us into. That is Congress' job, which we
abdicated. That was not the choice of the minority; it was the choice
of the majority.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Price), the ranking member of the Transportation,
Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Subcommittee.
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I appreciate my colleague from Florida
yielding, and I appreciate the work that she and colleagues on both
sides of the aisle have done on this bill. I want to commend them for
their work.
Mr. Chairman, I do want to address an amendment yet to come, one that
I hope this body will reject. This is an amendment that will be offered
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ratcliffe). It will be an amendment to
undo the bipartisan work of our Appropriations Committee. It would
terminate the Open World program at the Library of Congress, which is a
major outreach effort of our legislative branch in Russia and former
Soviet and Soviet bloc countries.
At a time when these countries' democracies and sovereignty are under
threat, the Open World program, I believe, is more important than ever.
This isn't President Putin's favorite activity, as others have stated.
That puts it very mildly, believe me. But he has not been able to stop
it.
It is now more important than ever, not just in Russia but in fragile
democracies and would-be democracies, such as Ukraine, Moldova,
Kyrgyzstan, and Georgia.
This is the best program of its kind that I have ever seen. And I
have a lot of personal experience with Open World groups that have come
to Washington and have come to my district.
This is a program unique in both scope and concept. Most participants
aren't the people who typically participate in international exchange
programs. They are teachers, judges, local officials, young activists,
people who live in rural areas and small towns. This program penetrates
deeply, rather than just being another run-of-the-mill exchange
program.
{time} 1545
I invite any colleague to talk to any of our diplomats in the
participant countries. You will leave with no doubt about how unique
and how valuable the network of Open World participants is in the
struggle for democracy in those countries and for the way our country
is regarded, and there is a long list of veterans of Open World who are
now public and private sector leaders in their countries.
Mr. Chairman, some may question the placement of Open World in the
Legislative Branch Appropriations bill. In fact, I think that is a huge
asset. Because the program is not tied to a specific administration
with its goals and politics, there is no hurdle to participation. There
is no possibility that it will get lost as the State Department focuses
on our other regions or on other priorities.
Now, unlike the other programs in this bill, sure enough, Open World
is not about us. It is not about our salaries. It is not about our
staffs. It is not about our operations. It is not about us. But I
assure you, it is about our country. It is about what we stand for at
home and around the world. It is about projecting the value of our
democratic principles to countries with histories of oppressive rule.
The Appropriations Committee included funding for Open World
following a bipartisan effort led by Representatives Fortenberry and
Farr. Hopefully, today that wise decision will be sustained.
I strongly encourage this body to stand with the pro-democracy
advocates, many, many brave and courageous people in a critical part of
the world. Oppose the Ratcliffe amendment.
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Point of clarification because I know these proceedings are
documented well, and I know the ranking member stated that
sequestration was a decision of the majority and not the minority. In
some aspects, she is very correct, because at the time sequestration
was implemented, the majority of the Senate was held by Democrats, and
the concept came from Jack Lew, which is heavily documented, from the
President's administration. So just to make sure there is full clarity
here of majority and minority perspectives, there was a different
majority at the time when that was taking place.
If I could, just for a moment, address the Open World discussion
here. This is a program that has been ongoing for several years--it has
been decades, quite frankly--with great intentions in the beginning.
What hasn't been stated
[[Page H3348]]
today is that its intention was to be a one-time program to assist
during a transitional phase of the Soviet bloc countries at that time,
back in the Bill Clinton administration, to assist them with some
dialogue with free markets and diplomacy and such as we were
experiencing during that time.
As we know, with a lot of government programs that have good
intentions of being one time, singular, they tend to go on into
perpetuity. Yet we have heard claims today that there is not enough
money, that we don't have enough to spend on things that are so vital
and so critical to this body, to the institution, to meeting our
constituents' needs, to the $1.5 billion in deferred maintenance of
buildings, to MRAs not being enough, or whatever it might be. Yet there
is still this clinging to $5 million of training Russian diplomats or
Russian civic leaders is more important, more important than meeting
the critical needs that we have here as a body, whether it is the
Library of Congress, whether it is making sure that there is security
provided through the Capitol Police, that they are fully funded where
they need to be, whatever it might be.
I would claim, Mr. Chairman, that today, if we cannot cut $5 million
from a program that is duplicative, that there are 95 other programs
that do very similar things, a program that has not been transparent, a
program that has outlived its day, that is training Russians at a time
when Russia is causing aggression against our allies and it is
assisting our enemies, if we can't cut $5 million today and the
gentleman from Texas' amendment fails today, God help us, when can we
cut something from this budget?
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
While I intend to claim time in opposition to the amendment that
addresses Open World a little bit later, which I know will come as a
surprise to the chairman, I do want to point out now that what the
chairman says is not quite accurate, which is why I am going to oppose
the amendment. Because were we--and there were a number of options
available to the Rules Committee--taking the $5 million that is going
to Open World in the Legislative Branch bill now and putting it in to
some other place in the Legislative Branch bill, life safety programs,
restoring the cuts to GPO, or doing something that is going to make
sure that the legislative branch can be competitive and has the ability
to get our work done, then that would have been fine, because I agree
that Open World is actually a square peg in a round hole and shouldn't
be funded out of this bill, and I have made that case for many years.
Instead, what the majority did is they took an amendment that takes
that $5 million and puts it into the spending reduction account. We are
already $106 million below 2010 levels in our MRA, in our office
accounts. This bill is flat-funded for 3 years in a row. We are doing
ourselves a disservice and making it difficult for us to do our jobs
when we had a ripe opportunity to take that $5 million--which I would
have been for--and put it somewhere in the Legislative Branch bill
instead of sending it out of here. That is not responsible.
Additionally, I will point out that perhaps the chairman's comments
about sequestration demonstrate that he thinks that Congress' hands are
tied and that we don't have the ability to actually make changes. The
President has proposed what he believes we should do as an alternative
to the sequester. That was his proposed budget.
Like last year, we also have the ability to set aside and work with
the administration--set aside at least part of the sequester--so we
could provide improved allocations for each of these appropriations
bills and make sure that we can make life better for more Americans.
Unfortunately, the majority continues to act as if somehow we are
frozen in time and that we are paralyzed by sequestration as the law.
The last time I checked, the Founding Fathers in the Constitution gave
Congress the ability to change the law, which we should do.
Mr. Chairman, I will look forward to discussing some of the
amendments that we will be debating in a few moments.
Again, I want to thank the chairman for, really, the opportunity to
spend some time focusing on the needs of the legislative branch and
giving us the ability to at least move forward in some ways towards
addressing our role as a coequal branch of government. I think this
bill could have been far better. It has made several positive changes,
but as I have outlined, we have places where we disagree, but we did it
without being disagreeable.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
I thank the ranking member, and I appreciate her acknowledgment of
her opposition to the amendment that will arrive earlier. I would point
out to you, Mr. Chairman, that I am not a member of the Rules
Committee. I did not make that decision as to what amendment would be
adopted or not. There were three amendments very similar. They were
bipartisan. So there was bipartisan opposition to this program. We have
the amendment before us that is before us, and, for the record, I will
be supporting that amendment.
Let me say this has been a process that has been difficult. I
understand that. We have had some tough choices to make, but we have
made them. We made them in a bipartisan way in which we had unanimous
support out of subcommittee; we had no opposition that I recall in full
committee. And so I expect today that we might maintain some of that
bipartisanship, some of that ability to get something done here for the
American people and show them that we have priorities in place that
honor and respect them and preserve this institution for future
generations.
Mr. Chairman, to sum up what this bill does is we are here to hold
the line on spending. We are keeping it flat-funded, as we have for the
last year or two. This is a bill that is going to honor and respect our
taxpayers. It is one that is preserving the beauty of this Capitol
campus, providing a central security for all visitors and staff, and
ensuring that we are able to provide the services that our constituents
expect and deserve.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Hultgren). All time for general debate has
expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule. The bill shall be considered as read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 2250
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, 2016, and for
other purposes, namely:
TITLE I--LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Payment to Widows and Heirs of Deceased Members of Congress
For payment to Tori B. Nunnelee, widow of Alan Nunnelee,
late a Representative from the State of Mississippi,
$174,000.
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, 2016 until January 2, 2017.
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
[[Page H3349]]
such amount shall remain available for such salaries and
expenses until December 31, 2016.
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, $175,713,679, 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, 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, for official representation and reception expenses,
$24,980,898; 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, $14,827,120 of which $4,784,229 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, $115,010,000, of which $1,350,000 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, $1,413,450; 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, $1,974,606; for
salaries and expenses of the Office of the Law Revision
Counsel of the House, $3,119,766; for salaries and expenses
of the Office of the Legislative Counsel of the House,
$8,352,975; 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, $281,251,521, including: supplies,
materials, administrative costs and Federal tort claims,
$3,625,236; 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, $254,447,514, to remain
available until March 31, 2017; 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, $2,084,000, 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 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 2016. Any amount remaining after all payments are
made under such allowances for fiscal year 2016 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.
delivery of reports of disbursements
Sec. 106. 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).
delivery of daily calendar
Sec. 107. 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.
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, $10,095,000, 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) $2,692,000 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, $3,784,000, 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,
$300,000,000 of which overtime shall not exceed $30,928,000
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, $69,000,000, 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 2016 shall be
paid by the Secretary of Homeland Security from funds
available to the Department of Homeland Security.
Administrative Provision
deposit of reimbursements for law enforcement assistance
Sec. 1001. (a) In General.--Section 2802(a)(1) of the
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2001 (2 U.S.C. 1905(a)(1))
is amended by striking ``District of Columbia)'' and
inserting the following: ``District of Columbia), and from
any other source in the case of assistance provided in
connection with an
[[Page H3350]]
activity that was not sponsored by Congress''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2802(a)(2) of such Act
(2 U.S.C. 1905(a)(2)) is amended by striking ``law
enforcement assistance to any Federal, State, or local
government agency (including any agency of the District of
Columbia)'' and inserting ``any law enforcement assistance
for which reimbursement described in paragraph (1) is made''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply with respect to any reimbursement received
before, on, or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
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, 2017: 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, $47,270,000.
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
Capitol Construction and Operations
For salaries for the Architect of the Capitol, and other
personal services, at rates of pay provided by law; for all
necessary expenses for surveys and studies, construction,
operation, and general and administrative support in
connection with facilities and activities under the care of
the Architect of the Capitol including the Botanic Garden;
electrical substations of the Capitol, Senate and House
office buildings, and other facilities under the jurisdiction
of the Architect of the Capitol; including furnishings and
office equipment; including not more than $5,000 for official
reception and representation expenses, to be expended as the
Architect of the Capitol may approve; for purchase or
exchange, maintenance, and operation of a passenger motor
vehicle, $90,946,000.
Capitol Building
For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of the Capitol, $46,737,000, of which $22,737,000
shall remain available until September 30, 2020.
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, $11,880,000, of which
$2,000,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2020.
House Office Buildings
For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of the House office buildings, $149,962,000, of
which $23,886,000 shall remain available until September 30,
2020, and of which $62,000,000 shall remain available until
expended for the restoration and renovation of the Cannon
House Office Building.
In addition, for a payment to the House Historic Buildings
Revitalization Trust Fund, $10,000,000, 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, $91,549,898, of which $14,408,898
shall remain available until September 30, 2020: 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 2016.
Library Buildings and Grounds
For all necessary expenses for the mechanical and
structural maintenance, care and operation of the Library
buildings and grounds, $36,589,000, of which $11,646,000
shall remain available until September 30, 2020.
Capitol Police Buildings, Grounds and Security
For all necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and
operation of buildings, grounds and security enhancements of
the United States Capitol Police, wherever located, the
Alternate Computer Facility, and AOC security operations,
$22,058,000, of which $4,525,000 shall remain available until
September 30, 2020.
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, $11,892,000; of which $2,100,000 shall remain
available until September 30, 2020: 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, $20,557,000.
Administrative Provisions
no bonuses for contractors behind schedule or over budget
Sec. 1101. None of the funds made available in this Act
for the Architect of the Capitol may be used to make
incentive or award payments to contractors for work on
contracts or programs for which the contractor is behind
schedule or over budget, unless the Architect of the Capitol,
or agency-employed designee, determines that any such
deviations are due to unforeseeable events, government-driven
scope changes, or are not significant within the overall
scope of the project and/or program.
scrims
Sec. 1102. 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.
acquisition of parcel at fort meade
Sec. 1103. (a) Acquisition.--The Architect of the Capitol
is authorized to acquire from the Maryland State Highway
Administration, at no cost to the United States, a parcel of
real property (including improvements thereon) consisting of
approximately 7.34 acres located within the portion of Fort
George G. Meade in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, that was
transferred to the Architect of the Capitol by the Secretary
of the Army pursuant to section 122 of the Military
Construction Appropriations Act, 1994 (2 U.S.C. 141 note).
(b) Terms and Conditions.--The terms and conditions
applicable under subsections (b) and (d) of section 122 of
the Military Construction Appropriations Act, 1994 (2 U.S.C.
141 note) to the property acquired by the Architect of the
Capitol pursuant to such section shall apply to the real
property acquired by the Architect pursuant to the authority
of this section.
oversight plan for funds provided for large scale projects
Sec. 1104. (a) The Architect of the Capitol may not
obligate more than 25 percent of the amount made available to
the Architect under this Act for any project for which
$5,000,000 or more is appropriated under this Act until--
(1) the Architect submits to the Comptroller General and
the Committee on Appropriations of House of Representatives a
plan for the use of the funds provided for the project which
includes a description of any changes to the project's
schedule (including benchmarks for the timing of the
completion of various stages of the project) or the project's
costs (including estimates of the total costs of the project
or the total life cycle costs of the project), as well as a
description of the accounting and other safeguards the
Architect will implement to ensure that the project will be
carried out in a timely and cost-effective manner; and
(2) the Comptroller General and the Committee on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives approves such
plan.
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; 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, $419,357,000, of which not more than $6,000,000
shall be derived from collections credited to this
appropriation during fiscal year 2016, 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
2016 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
[[Page H3351]]
$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,
$57,008,000, of which not more than $30,000,000, to remain
available until expended, shall be derived from collections
credited to this appropriation during fiscal year 2016 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
$5,777,000 shall be derived from collections during fiscal
year 2016 under sections 111(d)(2), 119(b)(3), 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 $35,777,000:
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, $106,945,000:
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),
$50,248,000: Provided, That of the total amount appropriated,
not more than $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. 1201. (a) In General.--For fiscal year 2016, the
obligational authority of the Library of Congress for the
activities described in subsection (b) may not exceed
$186,015,000.
(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 PUBLISHING OFFICE
Congressional Publishing
(including transfer of funds)
For authorized publishing of congressional information 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); publishing of
Government publications authorized by law to be distributed
to Members of Congress; and publishing, 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 Publishing Office business
operations 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.
Public Information Programs of the Superintendent of Documents
salaries and expenses
(including transfer of funds)
For expenses of the public information programs 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,
$30,500,000: 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 2014 and 2015 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 Publishing Office
business operations 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 Publishing Office Business Operations Revolving Fund
The Government Publishing Office is hereby authorized to
make such expenditures, within the limits of funds available
and in accordance with law, and to make such contracts and
commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations as
provided by section 9104 of title 31, United States Code, as
may be necessary in carrying out the programs and purposes
set forth in the budget for the current fiscal year for the
Government Publishing Office business operations revolving
fund: Provided, That not more than $7,500 may be expended on
the certification of the Director of the Government
Publishing Office in connection with official representation
and reception expenses: Provided further, That the business
operations 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 Director of the
Government Publishing Office shall be deemed necessary to
carry out the provisions of title 44, United States Code:
Provided further, That the business operations 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 business operations
revolving fund may provide information in any format:
Provided further, That the business operations revolving fund
and the funds provided under the heading ``Public Information
Programs of the Superintendent of Documents'' may not be used
for contracted security services at GPO's passport facility
in the District of Columbia.
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of the Government Accountability
Office, including not more than $12,500 to be expended on the
certification of the Comptroller General of the United States
in connection with official representation and reception
expenses; temporary or intermittent services under section
3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, but at rates for
individuals not more than the daily equivalent of the annual
rate of basic pay for level IV of the Executive Schedule
under section 5315 of such title; hire of one passenger motor
vehicle; advance payments in foreign countries in accordance
with section 3324 of title 31, United States Code; benefits
comparable to those payable under sections 901(5), (6), and
(8) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4081(5),
(6), and (8)); and under regulations prescribed by the
Comptroller General of the United States, rental of living
quarters in foreign countries, $522,000,000: Provided, That,
in addition, $25,450,000 of payments received under sections
782, 791, 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
[[Page H3352]]
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
Federal Government Details
Sec. 1301. (a) Permitting Details From Other Federal
Offices.--Section 731 of title 31, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(k) Federal Government Details.--The activities of the
Government Accountability Office may, in the reasonable
discretion of the Comptroller General, be carried out by
receiving details of personnel from other offices of the
Federal Government on a reimbursable, partially-reimbursable,
or nonreimbursable basis.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply with respect to fiscal year 2016 and each
succeeding fiscal year.
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), $5,700,000, except
that any funds made available under this heading to support
Russian participants shall only be used for those engaging in
free market development, humanitarian activities, and civic
engagement, and shall not be used for officials of the
central government of Russia.
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
maintenance and care of private vehicles
Sec. 201. No part of the funds appropriated in this Act
shall be used for the maintenance or care of private
vehicles, except for emergency assistance and cleaning as may
be provided under regulations relating to parking facilities
for the House of Representatives issued by the Committee on
House Administration and for the Senate issued by the
Committee on Rules and Administration.
fiscal year limitation
Sec. 202. No part of the funds appropriated in this Act
shall remain available for obligation beyond fiscal year 2016
unless expressly so provided in this Act.
rates of compensation and designation
Sec. 203. Whenever in this Act any office or position not
specifically established by the Legislative Pay Act of 1929
(46 Stat. 32 et seq.) is appropriated for or the rate of
compensation or designation of any office or position
appropriated for is different from that specifically
established by such Act, the rate of compensation and the
designation in this Act shall be the permanent law with
respect thereto: Provided, That the provisions in this Act
for the various items of official expenses of Members,
officers, and committees of the Senate and House of
Representatives, and clerk hire for Senators and Members of
the House of Representatives shall be the permanent law with
respect thereto.
consulting services
Sec. 204. The expenditure of any appropriation under this
Act for any consulting service through procurement contract,
under section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, shall be
limited to those contracts where such expenditures are a
matter of public record and available for public inspection,
except where otherwise provided under existing law, or under
existing Executive order issued under existing law.
costs of lbfmc
Sec. 205. Amounts available for administrative expenses of
any legislative branch entity which participates in the
Legislative Branch Financial Managers Council (LBFMC)
established by charter on March 26, 1996, shall be available
to finance an appropriate share of LBFMC costs as determined
by the LBFMC, except that the total LBFMC costs to be shared
among all participating legislative branch entities (in such
allocations among the entities as the entities may determine)
may not exceed $2,000.
landscape maintenance
Sec. 206. For fiscal year 2016 and each fiscal year
thereafter, the Architect of the Capitol, in consultation
with the District of Columbia, is authorized to maintain and
improve the landscape features, excluding streets, in Square
580 up to the beginning of I-395.
limitation on transfers
Sec. 207. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality
of the United States Government, except pursuant to a
transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act
or any other appropriation Act.
guided tours of the capitol
Sec. 208. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), none of
the funds made available to the Architect of the Capitol in
this Act may be used to eliminate or restrict guided tours of
the United States Capitol which are led by employees and
interns of offices of Members of Congress and other offices
of the House of Representatives and Senate
(b) At the direction of the Capitol Police Board, or at the
direction of the Architect of the Capitol with the approval
of the Capitol Police Board, guided tours of the United
States Capitol which are led by employees and interns
described in subsection (a) may be suspended temporarily or
otherwise subject to restriction for security or related
reasons to the same extent as guided tours of the United
States Capitol which are led by the Architect of the Capitol.
battery recharging stations for privately owned vehicles in parking
areas under the jurisdiction of the librarian of congress at no net
cost to the federal government
Sec. 209. (a) Definition.--In this section, the term
``covered employee'' means--
(1) an employee of the Library of Congress; or
(2) any other individual who is authorized to park in any
parking area under the jurisdiction of the Library of
Congress on the Library of Congress buildings and grounds.
(b) Authority.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (3), funds
appropriated to the Architect of the Capitol under the
heading ``Capitol Power Plant'' under the heading ``ARCHITECT
OF THE CAPITOL'' in any fiscal year are available to
construct, operate, and maintain on a reimbursable basis
battery recharging stations in parking areas under the
jurisdiction of the Library of Congress on Library of
Congress buildings and grounds for use by privately owned
vehicles used by covered employees.
(2) Vendors authorized.--In carrying out paragraph (1), the
Architect of the Capitol may use 1 or more vendors on a
commission basis.
(3) Approval of construction.--The Architect of the Capitol
may construct or direct the construction of battery
recharging stations described under paragraph (1) after--
(A) submission of written notice detailing the numbers and
locations of the battery recharging stations to the Joint
Committee on the Library; and
(B) approval by that Committee.
(c) Fees and Charges.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Architect of
the Capitol shall charge fees or charges for electricity
provided to covered employees sufficient to cover the costs
to the Architect of the Capitol to carry out this section,
including costs to any vendors or other costs associated with
maintaining the battery recharging stations.
(2) Approval of fees or charges.--The Architect of the
Capitol may establish and adjust fees or charges under
paragraph (1) after--
(A) submission of written notice detailing the amount of
the fee or charge to be established or adjusted to the Joint
Committee on the Library; and
(B) approval by that Committee.
(d) Deposit and Availability of Fees, Charges, and
Commissions.--Any fees, charges, or commissions collected by
the Architect of the Capitol under this section shall be--
(1) deposited in the Treasury to the credit of the
appropriations account described under subsection (b); and
(2) available for obligation without further appropriation
during the fiscal year collected.
(e) Reports.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the end of
each fiscal year, the Architect of the Capitol shall submit a
report on the financial administration and cost recovery of
activities under this section with respect to that fiscal
year to the Joint Committee on the Library and the Committees
on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and Senate.
(2) Avoiding subsidy.--
(A) Determination.--Not later than 3 years after the date
of enactment of this Act and every 3 years thereafter, the
Architect of the Capitol shall submit a report to the Joint
Committee on the Library determining whether covered
employees using battery charging stations as authorized by
this section are receiving a subsidy from the taxpayers.
(B) Modification of rates and fees.--If a determination is
made under subparagraph (A) that a subsidy is being received,
the Architect of the Capitol shall submit a plan to the Joint
Committee on the Library on how to update the program to
ensure no subsidy is being received. If the Joint Committee
does not act on the plan within 60 days, the Architect of the
Capitol shall take appropriate steps to increase rates or
fees to ensure reimbursement for the cost of the program
consistent with an appropriate schedule for amortization, to
be charged to those using the charging stations.
(f) Effective Date.--This section shall apply with respect
to fiscal year 2016 and each fiscal year thereafter.
cost of living adjustment
Sec. 210. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
adjustment shall be made under section 601(a) of the
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 4501)
(relating to cost of living adjustments for Members of
Congress) during fiscal year 2016.
spending reduction account
Sec. 211. The amount by which the applicable allocation of
new budget authority made by the Committee on Appropriations
of the
[[Page H3353]]
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, 2016''.
The Acting CHAIR. No amendment to the bill shall be in order except
those printed in part B of House Report 114-120. 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. Ratcliffe
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1
printed in part B of House Report 114-120.
Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 29, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $5,700,000)''.
Page 37, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $5,700,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 271, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Ratcliffe) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I thank Chairman Graves and Ranking
Member Wasserman Schultz for their hard work in crafting this bill.
Mr. Chairman, in this fiscal environment, we have to be better
stewards of taxpayer dollars, and we have to scrutinize every program
that we allocate money towards. We can't ever forget that every dollar
that we spend is a dollar taken from our constituents' hard-earned
paychecks. It is for that reason, Mr. Chairman, that I have offered
this amendment to eliminate funding for the Open World Leadership
Center--a program started in 1999 and housed in the Library of Congress
with the purpose of bringing leaders from post-Soviet countries to the
United States to learn about our legislative process.
The gentleman from California spoke passionately a few minutes ago
about his belief that we need to have programs like this, but his
comments ignore the fact that there are nearly 90 other similar or
nearly identical programs throughout the government aimed at achieving
this same goal. At the same time, this program has now spent more than
$150 million towards that duplicative purpose.
So when you consider that duplicative purpose alongside a national
debt of $18.2 trillion, we have got to honestly examine and reconsider
whether this is the best use of taxpayer money. This is especially true
when accounts and programs across the legislative branch have seen
reductions in recent years, but yet not a single dollar has been cut
from the Open World program despite the fact that, after this
subcommittee's examination of this program, Chairman Graves reported
that, ``In light of both the lack of quantifiable results from the Open
World Leadership Center and its duplications of programs more
appropriately offered by the State Department, the program has long
outlived its short-term intent.''
Mr. Chairman, I agree with the chairman's assessment, which is, by
the way, not a partisan one. In fact, this is the all-too-rare
situation and opportunity where Republicans and Democrats, alike, agree
that we can cut spending without hurting American citizens.
The American people have entrusted us with the responsibility of
seeing that their tax dollars don't go to waste. And while Mr. Graves'
bill allocates funds to the legislative branch to do the important work
that we need to on behalf of the American people, the Open World
program is one area where we can and should make this spending cut.
Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Graves), the chairman.
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for
bringing this forward. He has done a lot of work on this topic. He is
new to the body--I think everybody knows that--and with haste he has
moved to find an area in which we can continue to provide savings for
taxpayers.
Mr. Chairman, I support the gentleman's amendment here, and I
appreciate his bringing it forward.
Mr. RATCLIFFE. I thank the chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), the majority whip.
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague for bringing
this amendment and for focusing in on areas where we can actually
eliminate spending here in Washington. Again, you have to recognize
that about 35 cents of every dollar spent is money borrowed from
countries like China, so we ought to be combing every different piece
of this budget and finding areas where we can say that this isn't
something that the Federal Government should be doing.
It might be a noble program to have exchanges with other countries,
but to be spending millions of dollars at a time when our country has
needs that aren't being met and that we are borrowing money from other
countries and sending that bill to our children, this is a time where
we have got to be combing through these kinds of programs, and I want
to thank him for his leadership.
{time} 1600
This is a time where we have got to be combing through these kind of
programs, and I want to thank him for his leadership. This is something
that should be eliminated. We shouldn't be spending millions of dollars
of taxpayer money to bring people over to this country. If they want to
come, we welcome them.
Many countries do send people over here to observe how democracy
works; we send people on occasion to other countries to spread
democracy, but there are duplications in so many other areas of our
budget where this is already being done, and this is just one more area
where we ought to be saving taxpayers' money and being fiscally
responsible.
This isn't something we can afford to do; it isn't something we
should be doing. I am glad the gentleman is bringing the amendment to
eliminate this spending. I support it and hope the House approves it.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I want to note for the Members
that this would be the first time that I am actually opposing an
amendment that cuts the Open World program.
Initially, when I became chair of the Legislative Branch Subcommittee
8 years ago, this program was at $14 million. I have consistently tried
to cut this program and move its funding to the State Department bill
for every single year since then. We have not been successful, but we
are only at $5.7 million now, which is a more appropriate amount.
We are, as I said, in general debate. This funding going somewhere
else in the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill would be more
appropriate. Since we are sending it out of the bill in a bill that is
already inadequately funded, it is not an amendment I can support.
At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr.
Fortenberry), who wishes to speak in opposition to the amendment.
Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for the
time. I also want to thank the subcommittee chairman, Mr. Graves, for
the gentlemanly way in which we have conducted this debate.
This is a transpartisan issue. We have got Democrats and Republicans
divided on each side of the aisle, which is a bit unusual, but
nonetheless, this is important.
I support the Open World Leadership Center. I am on its board. It has
been mentioned that this is better nested within the State Department.
The State Department does have a myriad of programs. However, this is a
legislative branch program, and we should not outsource our
responsibility there.
[[Page H3354]]
This program was formed in the wake of the fall of the Soviet Union
in order to give a chance for the development of legal structures,
stabilized civil society, and the opportunity for democracy to evolve.
While the primary focus was on Russia, that component has been
suspended, and this program has taken a very substantial cut down from
$10 million to about $6 million now.
To jettison it gets rid of very important deliverables. Over 23,000
judges, politicians, emerging civil society leaders, and young people
have participated in this program, including 15 members of Ukraine's
parliament, 15 members of Moldova's parliament, 8 Russian governors; 51
percent of the participants are women.
Mr. Chairman, the military tells me: Send us in last.
We will send billions and billions of dollars of lethal military aid
to a country, but the military says: Do everything you can to build up
good will and trust and relationships in stable societies so that we do
not have to resort to what none of us wants to resort to.
The Open World Leadership Center fulfills that role in an effective
way. There are changes that I hope will be forthcoming to make it more
effective in the future. I hope we will preserve this important
legislative priority which cannot be replicated, essentially, by the
State Department.
Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. At this time, I yield 30 seconds to the
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt).
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentlewoman for
yielding, and as someone who served as ranking member for this
subcommittee back several years ago, I just want to express my support
and the work for the Open World Leadership Center than the opposed
amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas.
I am sure it is well intended, but I do want to say that I think that
this amendment is not going in the right direction. We do need to keep
this partnership. It is a partnership. It is a relationship that has
developed with these former Soviet countries.
I think it is very important. It has served us well. It is a program
that a lot of people say is duplicated in other agencies of government,
but I will say it is unique. It is a unique approach to working across
borders to highlight the critical role of the legislative branch in
emerging democracies.
I just want to say that I support this bill as it currently is and
would oppose the gentleman's amendment.
Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, can you tell me how much time we
have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Florida has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Texas has 30 seconds remaining.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield 1 minute
to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I thank Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz
for the time.
I rise in strong opposition to the Ratcliffe amendment.
If anyone has been watching, you have seen Russia's invasion of
Ukraine. Now, more than ever, it is critical to engage with rising
stars in the former Soviet Union because the old tactics of Soviet
Russia are still being employed.
This program belongs to Congress. Yes, it is a legislative branch
program, so it is small; it is efficient; it is ours. It is our one
tool to reach out to these countries to their rising leaders to expand
accountable governance and the rule of law. Who better to teach it than
those engaged, those of us who communicate with citizens in these
countries that so very much want to be free?
Open World directly connects us with changemakers in this very, very
fluid region of the world. It reaches beyond the big cities, into the
country side. I personally have greeted some of the leaders that have
come from several countries, including Moldova and Ukraine.
Let me tell you, it will be our generation and the next that will pay
the price if this amendment is passed. We simply must engage with this
part of the world. We cannot leave her in the hands of the Russian
bear.
I urge very strong opposition to the Ratcliffe amendment.
Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining on both
sides?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas has 30 seconds remaining.
The gentlewoman from Florida has 30 seconds remaining.
Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. At this time, I yield 10 seconds to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Farr).
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to respond that there is no
legislative program in the State Department like this. You can't
transfer it there. They are not operative in these countries, so to say
that this could be moved over--look, you were in professional
organizations.
This is legislator to legislator, judge to judge, and we need to keep
it that way.
Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, my constituents sent me to Washington to
cut wasteful spending. The Open World program is one of many, many
programs that have the same purpose throughout the Federal Government.
This is a chance to cut $5 million in spending for a duplicative
program that we simply don't need.
I urge my colleagues to vote in support of passage of the Ratcliffe
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately, what this
amendment is, is a missed opportunity to be fiscally responsible.
I also support not spending money on the Open World program any
longer and moving it to the State Department. Unfortunately, the
majority has chosen to make a rule in order that focuses on an
amendment to shift the $5.7 million completely out of the legislative
branch when we have plaster falling off buildings, elevators badly in
need of repair, we have cuts to our MRA--our office accounts--our staff
that isn't well paid enough; and it just not responsible.
This is a missed opportunity. I urge the Members, unfortunately, to
oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ratcliffe).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Flores
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2
printed in part B of House Report 114-120.
Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to deliver a printed copy of the Congressional
Pictorial Directory to the office of a Member of the House of
Representatives (including a Delegate or Resident
Commissioner to the Congress).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 271, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Flores) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer a simple amendment to
prohibit funds for delivering printed copies of the Congressional
Pictorial Directory in the House of Representatives.
The pictorial directory is a book with pictures of Members of
Congress printed by the Government Publishing Office. The most recent
edition cost over $200,000 to print and distribute. While I realize
this is not much money, I think with an $18 trillion debt, that we need
to be looking for the pennies, as well as the $100 bills.
The most important thing is this book is no longer necessary to print
in hard copy. We are almost 6 months into the 114th Congress, and the
GPO has still not published the book. During the 113th Congress, it
took the GPO 9 months, until September, to release the pictorial
directory. Here is what one of them looks like.
[[Page H3355]]
Private groups make similar directories that are actually more useful
and include contact information and biographies of Members, in addition
to their pictures. I have a copy of the directory that was dropped off
at my office by a trade association in the last few days, and unlike
the GPO directory, it is up to date, and they keep it up to date.
Of course, pictures of Members of Congress are readily available for
free online. If needed, the Clerk could ensure that appropriate
photographs of current Members are available to create an online
pictorial directory.
The language of this amendment mirrors several riders already in the
bill that prohibit funds for the delivery of printed copies of bills
and resolutions, printed copies of the Congressional Record, printed
copies of the statements of disbursements, and printed copies of the
daily calendar.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support my commonsense
amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I think it is worth stating for
the Record that this amendment would maybe save somewhere between
$9,000 and $29,000. I mean, let's bear the full impact of that weighty
sum, depending on how it is interpreted.
This is an amendment that would prevent the delivery of a printed
copy that I have in my hand of the Congressional Pictorial Directory--
which, by the way, Mr. Flores, no offense, but some of us used this
directory to identify you during the course of this discussion.
This is a book that is actually necessary and one that we shouldn't
be farming out or relying on lobbyists to print for us.
Every year, we seem to get an amendment that stops some sort of
printing or delivery of a paper copy of some document to Member
offices.
Just so Members know, we have actually made real savings in this bill
in the past--in the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill--by no
longer delivering a printed copy of a bill unless a Member requests a
copy; we no longer deliver the Congressional Record to Member offices;
we no longer allow more than 50 printed copies of the Code to go to
House offices; we no longer deliver a printed copy of the statements of
disbursement to Member offices; we no longer deliver a printed copy of
the daily calendar to Member offices--all of which cost far more than
stopping the printing of these books.
It isn't really realistic to expect Members to print out a piece of
paper--or staff--and carry around a whole bunch of printed faded copies
of paper to help identify Members. We have new Members every 2 years.
My point is we are about out of low-hanging fruit here. I hope this
is the last of this type of amendment because, if we want to change
printing, the Members have an opportunity to take their grievances up
with the Joint Committee on Printing.
The distribution of the Congressional Pictorial Directory is actually
set by the Joint Committee on Printing. Maybe the gentleman is unaware
of that, and it doesn't need to be legislated through this bill. We
don't need to be creating a false impression that we are actually
saving taxpayer dollars that would not have been saved through another
means.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, I think the gentlewoman from Florida made a
great case for putting this book in the same stack of dinosaurs that
she was talking about when it comes to eliminating all other waste in
terms of government printing.
I have an app that cost me $1.99 that gives me current pictures of
Members of Congress. I don't have to carry any paper around. I don't
have to carry this book around. I don't have to carry this book around.
I just have to have an app.
Look, we are a 21st century Congress. Why don't we act like a 21st
century Congress and get rid of the dinosaurs like this?
{time} 1615
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Will the gentleman yield for a question?
Mr. FLORES. I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I am wondering whether that app was privately
produced or was produced by taxpayers. As for the $1.99 that you spent
on it, were those taxpayer dollars you used to pay for it or from your
own personal funds?
Mr. FLORES. That was my personal money.
Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, my point is that it would be one
thing if a congressional tutorial directory were unnecessary, but that
is not the case. It is necessary. What isn't necessary is for us to be
wasting time in debate on the House floor over something that could
actually be handled differently. If the gentleman or any other Member
thought that the Joint Committee on Printing should handle it
differently, just go talk to them.
Instead, what we are doing is pretending that we are actually saving
taxpayer dollars. This is about $9,000, and what we shouldn't be doing
is outsourcing the things that we need in terms of the materials to do
a better job serving the public to lobbyists and the private sector.
That does not make sense, and it isn't necessary, and the majority
should not leave the impression that they are actually doing something
fiscally responsible here.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, this has been a fascinating discussion. The
gentlewoman from Florida claims that the savings are between $9,000 and
$29,000 while the numbers that we have are $200,000. If you ask your
typical hard-working family if $9,000 is a lot of money, they will say,
yes, it is. Is $29,000 a lot of money? They will say yes. Is $200,000 a
lot of money? They will say yes. If you say, ``You are paying for that.
Would you like the government to stop wasting that money?'' then they
would say, absolutely, yes.
If the gentlewoman does not want to waste any time on this and vote
``aye,'' then let's stop.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I will point out that the
gentleman's amendment does not actually stop the printing of the
pictorial directory. It simply stops the delivery of the directory to
Members' offices. So it does not provide the savings that the gentleman
is talking about. It provides between $9,000 and $29,000 because the
only cost that he is saving is on the delivery and not on the printing.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Graves), the chairman of the subcommittee.
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. I thank the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. Chairman, I read the amendment's intent as well. As the ranking
member just stated and as the argument seems to go around in a circle
here, it doesn't stop the printing of these items, of these
directories. It just says that Members of Congress shouldn't have
somebody privately deliver them to their offices. If they want one, go
get one. If they want to look it up online, look it up online. If they
want to spend $1.99 and get an app, they can get an app. This just says
that the Congressional Pictorial Directory is just not going to be
delivered to a Member's office. I don't know how controversial that can
be.
I thank the gentleman for his amendment.
Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote for this
commonsense amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I conclude by pointing out that
the offerer of the amendment, and the chairman, are suggesting that now
we should print things that we don't use. If that isn't an example of a
waste of taxpayer dollars in suggesting that we should print this
document but not make sure that it is delivered to Members' offices for
their utilization, that pretty much sounds like government waste under
the classic definition.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Flores).
The amendment was agreed to.
[[Page H3356]]
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mrs. Blackburn
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3
printed in part B of House Report 114-120.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. (a) Each amount made available by this Act is
hereby reduced by 1 percent.
(b) The reduction in subsection (a) shall not apply with
respect to--
(1) accounts under the heading ``Capitol Police'';
(2) ``Architect of the Capitol--Capitol Police Buildings,
Grounds and Security''; or
(3) the amount provided for salaries and expenses of the
Office of the Sergeant at Arms under the heading ``House of
Representatives--Salaries, Officers and Employees''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 271, the gentlewoman
from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Tennessee.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, first, I want to begin by thanking the
subcommittee chairman for his hard work on this effort that is in front
of us and for the committee's identifying ways to reduce what the
Federal Government spends, especially in the leg branch.
The fiscal year 2016 proposed funding level is $3.3 billion. That is
$173 billion below the President's request. I think there is more work
that we could do, and my 1 percent across-the-board spending reduction
will save taxpayers an additional $29 million in budget authority and
$25 million in outlays for fiscal year 2016. It is a targeted cut in
discretionary spending that exempts the Capitol Police, the Sergeant at
Arms, and security maintained by the Architect of the Capitol.
Again, as I said, I want to recognize the work of Chairman Graves and
his committee. They have done several very important things that, I
think, we ought to highlight.
First, this measure continues to freeze Member pay in place, where it
has been since 2010. Second, it continues a 14 percent reduction in
funding for the House of Representatives, which Republicans began in
2011. I appreciate that Chairman Rogers brought attention to that as
general debate began. Third, the bill cuts funding for programs such as
the Government Publishing Office, which we have just been discussing--
many programs that have outlived their usefulness.
We can cut more, and a penny on a dollar is worth the effort. We are
a country that has over $18 trillion in debt. Financial security has
become an issue of national security. Admiral Mullen said the greatest
threat to our Nation's security is our growing national debt. That is a
reason for our getting our fiscal house in order and looking to future
generations and saying, let's go in and cut one more penny out of a
dollar. This effort that I bring before you would do just that--one
more cent--and do it for future generations.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to
this amendment.
It takes a meat-ax approach to cutting this bill by over $29 million
with an across-the-board cut of 1 percent. I want to point out that it
also exempts the Capitol Police and its buildings, as well as the
Sergeant at Arms.
If the gentlewoman, who I know offers these amendments over and over
again, were truly committed to an across-the-board cut, then she would
just simply offer an across-the-board cut.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Hoyer), the minority whip.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this.
This is a mindless but easy cut. Tough words. By the way, this is
sequester, which is a Republican proposal. It started in about 2011
but, really, before that with all of these across-the-board cuts
because you don't have to make any choices, and you don't have to make
priorities. You just say, Oh, let's save money.
Frankly, so many of the people in this country want this Congress to
have vigorous oversight of the executive department, which has expanded
very substantially while the legislature has continued to undermine its
ability to function as an effective oversight agency of the American
people. The legislative branch is underfunded. We do not have the
capacity to do the effective oversight as we ought to be doing. The
Department of Veterans Affairs is a perfect example of that where we
were not vigorous enough in oversight to ensure that money was being
applied properly.
If you want to cut and if you want to say something--this is not
good; that is not good; we are wasting money there--then specify it.
Debate that issue up or down. That is why sequester is so abysmally
wrong and why the chairman of the committee called it unrealistic and
ill-conceived. This is not Obama's proposal of a sequester. I am not
talking about this amendment, but to say, as you repeatedly say on your
side of the aisle, that this is Obama's proposal is baloney. In fact,
the only reason Jack Lew suggested that to Reid as an option was
because you--and I refer to the Republican friends on the other side of
the aisle--were threatening not to honor the Nation's debt.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. HOYER. That is the only reason we passed sequester, and nobody
intended sequester to go into effect. It was always a backup. Because
we have failed to come to an agreement on a fiscally responsible,
sustainable path, we have repaired to this ill-conceived, unrealistic
concept of sequester. This 1 percent across the board is exactly that.
It puts intellect on hold and judgment on hold. That is not why the
American people sent us here.
Reject this amendment. Respect this institution, and respect our
responsibility to the American people.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have
remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Florida has 2 minutes
remaining.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute and 15 seconds
to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop).
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I want to say a few words about one part of the bill
that I find very troubling. This is a cut that is a penny-wise and
pound-foolish.
Last year, we named the GPO as the Government Publishing Office, and
that is because of the range of digital services that it provides. This
year, the Legislative Branch Subcommittee voted to cut those operations
by eliminating the appropriated funding for the GPO's Federal digital
system, which provides free digital access to more than a million
congressional and other government document titles that have been
downloaded by the public more than 1 billion times over the past 5
years. It does not make sense. Cutting this will severely eliminate
money to upgrade the GPO's Federal digital system and the new search
and retrieval system.
In recognition of the fiscal pressures we all face, the GPO came in
with a flat budget request this year, asking only that we support the
commitment to their digital transformation. We said ``yes'' to it last
year, and I am hopeful that we can restore that funding this year. It
makes no sense to cut this. There are millions of people in local
libraries all across this country who depend on this digital system,
and we do not need to cut it. This is penny-wise and pound-foolish.
Mr. Chair, as a former Member of the House Legislative Branch
Appropriations Subcommittee, I wanted to say a few words about one part
of this year's spending bill which I find very troubling.
A year ago, Congress and the President agreed to rename GPO as the
Government Publishing Office, based on the broad range of
[[Page H3357]]
digital services the agency now provides. The Subcommittee supported
this legislative change.
This year, the House Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee
voted to cut those operations by eliminating appropriated funding for
GPO's Federal Digital System, which provides free digital access to
more than 1 million congressional and other Government document titles
that have been downloaded by the public more than 1 billion times over
the past five years. This cut just doesn't make sense.
It will severely curtail GPO's ability to add new digital documents
to its Federal Digital System. It will zero out the funding for
initiatives that support the missions of congressional and legislative
branch organizations such as the Clerk of the House of Representatives,
the Secretary of the Senate, and the Library of Congress who rely on
information from the Federal Digital System to feed websites such as
Congress.gov and Docs.House.gov.
GPO's Federal Digital System, though just 5 years old, is already
beginning to show its age. The rapid changes in today's digital
technical environment remind us why it's essential for GPO to keep up
with the times.
But this funding cut will eliminate money to upgrade GPO's Federal
Digital System with a new search and retrieval system, an improved user
interface, and other needed hardware and software improvements,
including migrating the system to the cloud. Due to the critical role
the Federal Digital System plays in making our legislative information
transparent and available online, we need to make this investment.
In recognition of the fiscal pressures we all face, GPO came in with
a flat budget request this year, asking only that we support their
commitment to their digital transformation. We said yes to that
transformation last year, and I am hopeful that we can restore this
funding in the final legislation.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I find it so interesting that this is
called a ``meat-ax approach.'' Yes, I do come regularly to offer these
amendments, because I care what happens with our Nation. I care about
our future, and I want to make certain that we are on solid financial
footing. We have a responsibility to be good stewards of the taxpayers'
money. It is their money.
To say this is mindless and easy, how interesting that is. Go tell
all of the Governors from coast to coast--Democrat and Republican--who
use across-the-board spending cuts to get budgets in balance. Tell that
to mayors who use this same process. The reason it is done is it works.
It helps the bureaucracy hold itself accountable, and that is
absolutely what we ought to be doing at this point in time.
As you can see, cutting is a very emotional issue. Cutting brings
forward a lot of emotions. Talking about doing more with less, being
resourceful, that is what we should do every single day. In order to be
a good steward of the taxpayers' money, we should want to do more with
less. We should do it in the name of freedom, for freedom's sake--for
the sovereignty of this Nation.
Ill-conceived and unrealistic? When is operating by a balanced budget
and spending and living within the means the taxpayers have said they
are going to have for this Federal Government ever considered ill-
conceived? When would it be considered unrealistic? It is what we ought
to be doing. Indeed, if every department did what the legislative
branch did of cutting 14 percent, we would be getting close to budget.
To say that we are suspending intellect and judgment, do you know
that is almost frivolous and almost silly to say.
{time} 1630
We spend less and should be spending less and should try to continue
to spend less and reform this government and hold it accountable to the
taxpayer who is footing the bill because, yes, the Nation's future
depends on it; our national security, yes, depends on it; and respect,
it is respecting future generations and the taxpayer to be a wise
steward.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I yield 30 seconds of my remaining time to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Farr).
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chair, I wish the gentlewoman had made that same speech
when we were discussing defense, the biggest spending bill we have, but
she didn't offer this amendment at all.
I happen to come from a State where the legislators didn't have
enough guts to raise taxes, so the people went out and did it because
they want their government to run wisely and smartly, and they knew
they didn't have enough money to do it.
Look, we are cutting this budget; yet the Senate, which we don't vote
on their bit, is increasing their budget by 12 percent. They are going
to be able to give cost-of-living adjustments to every one of their
Members. Nobody sitting in this room who works for us is going to get a
cost-of-living adjustment because of cuts like this. This is
ridiculous. We are penalizing our whole House, not the Senate. This is
not a smart way to make legislative business.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time I
have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Florida has 15 seconds
remaining.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. To close, Mr. Chairman, the bottom line is
that what would be fiscally responsible and responsible in general is
to not further take a meat ax to a bill that has already been flat-
funded for the last 3 years. Our employees deserve a raise. We deserve
to be able to be a coequal branch of government, funded well enough to
be able to hold the administration accountable and make sure we can do
our jobs. This bill does not allow us to achieve that.
I urge the Members to oppose this irresponsible amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Tennessee
will be postponed.
announcement by the acting chair
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in part B of House Report
114-120 on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following
order:
Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Ratcliffe of Texas.
Amendment No. 3 by Mrs. Blackburn of Tennessee.
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. Ratcliffe
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Ratcliffe) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 224,
noes 199, not voting 9, as follows:
[Roll No. 245]
AYES--224
Abraham
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
Denham
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gibbs
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Katko
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
[[Page H3358]]
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schrader
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoho
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke
NOES--199
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Ashford
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Dent
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fortenberry
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Gibson
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanna
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kinzinger (IL)
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
MacArthur
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
McSally
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Moulton
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Roskam
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Shimkus
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stefanik
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Turner
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
Yoder
Young (AK)
NOT VOTING--9
Brady (PA)
Capps
Chaffetz
Donovan
Fattah
Garamendi
Moore
Sanchez, Loretta
Tsongas
{time} 1700
Ms. KUSTER, Ms. BROWNLEY of California, Messrs. HANNA, SCHWEIKERT,
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Messrs. YODER, HIMES, and DENT
changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. WESTMORELAND, GRAVES of Missouri, SHUSTER, CRAWFORD, and
SMITH of Texas changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mrs. Blackburn
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from
Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 172,
noes 250, not voting 10, as follows:
[Roll No. 246]
AYES--172
Allen
Amash
Ashford
Babin
Barton
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Cooper
Crawford
Curbelo (FL)
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gibbs
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hensarling
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Jenkins (KS)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Katko
King (IA)
Knight
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Marchant
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Messer
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Olson
Palmer
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Roe (TN)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Sinema
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Stutzman
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Woodall
Yoder
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke
NOES--250
Abraham
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Amodei
Barletta
Barr
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boustany
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Comstock
Connolly
Conyers
Costa
Costello (PA)
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fortenberry
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Gibson
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanna
Hastings
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jolly
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
MacArthur
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marino
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McKinley
McNerney
Meehan
Meng
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Newhouse
Nolan
Norcross
Nugent
Nunes
O'Rourke
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Rigell
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rooney (FL)
Roskam
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Shimkus
Simpson
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stefanik
[[Page H3359]]
Stewart
Stivers
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Turner
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Webster (FL)
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Womack
Yarmuth
Yoho
Young (AK)
NOT VOTING--10
Brady (PA)
Capps
Chaffetz
Donovan
Fattah
Meeks
Mica
Moore
Sanchez, Loretta
Tsongas
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1707
Mr. GARAMENDI changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 246 my voting card did not
record and if it had recorded, it would be a ``yes.'' I would have
recorded my vote as ``yes.''
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Rodney Davis of Illinois). 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, Mr. Rodney Davis of Illinois,
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. 2250) making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, and,
pursuant to House Resolution 271, he reported the bill back to the
House with sundry amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the
Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
Pursuant to clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the order of the House of today,
this 5-minute vote on passage of H.R. 2250 will be followed by 5-minute
votes on the motion to recommit on H.R. 2353, and passage of H.R. 2353,
if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 357,
nays 67, not voting 8, as follows:
[Roll No. 247]
YEAS--357
Abraham
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Allen
Amodei
Ashford
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bera
Beyer
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bonamici
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (IN)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Butterfield
Byrne
Calvert
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Connolly
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Costello (PA)
Courtney
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Esty
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graham
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinojosa
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kaptur
Katko
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kildee
Kilmer
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Knight
Kuster
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Latta
Lawrence
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lowenthal
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lummis
Lynch
MacArthur
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Matsui
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nolan
Norcross
Nugent
Nunes
O'Rourke
Olson
Palazzo
Pallone
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Quigley
Rangel
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Richmond
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Russell
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanford
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schiff
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Speier
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Walz
Watson Coleman
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke
NAYS--67
Amash
Bass
Blumenauer
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brooks (AL)
Brown (FL)
Capuano
Cardenas
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cummings
DeGette
Deutch
Doyle, Michael F.
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Franks (AZ)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hastings
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson, E. B.
Keating
Kennedy
Kind
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lofgren
Lowey
Massie
McDermott
McGovern
Meeks
Meng
Moulton
Napolitano
Neal
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Pocan
Price (NC)
Rice (NY)
Roybal-Allard
Ryan (OH)
Schakowsky
Smith (WA)
Thompson (MS)
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--8
Brady (PA)
Capps
Chaffetz
Donovan
Fattah
Moore
Sanchez, Loretta
Tsongas
{time} 1716
Mr. CUMMINGS changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. DOGGETT 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.
____________________