[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 113 (Wednesday, July 13, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H4882-H4921]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2017

  The Committee resumed its sitting.


                 Amendment No. 81 Offered by Mr. Perry

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Palmer). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 81 printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. PERRY. 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 
     shall be used to give formal notification under, or prepare, 
     propose, implement, administer, or enforce any rule or 
     recommendation pursuant to, section 115 of the Clean Air Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 7415).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. PERRY. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment will prevent funds from being used to 
expand the EPA authority pursuant to section 115 of the Clean Air Act.
  The Clean Air Act, which has served us well since 1973, hasn't needed 
to be expanded, it has been used over and over again to make sure that 
we clean up our act.
  Section 115 of the Clean Air Act allows the EPA to mandate State 
emission levels to whatever amount the Agency deems appropriate if they 
find two things. Listen to that again. The Clean Air Act, section 115, 
allows the EPA--the Federal Government--to mandate all 50 of our 
States' emission levels to whatever amount the Agency deems 
appropriate--whatever amount--if they find two things. This has been 
there since 1973. It hasn't been relevant, but it is now. If the EPA 
finds that U.S. emissions endanger a foreign nation and the endangered 
nation has a reciprocal agreement to prevent or control emissions in 
their own nation.

                              {time}  1915

  Now, where that comes into play is the Paris climate agreement. It 
was just signed, and even though it is not a treaty, because we have 
the Clean Air Act and section 115, it is now operative or potentially 
operative.
  Many believe and have argued that the U.N. Paris climate agreement 
meets these requirements and, once again, would allow the Federal 
Government to mandate our State emission levels to whatever amount the 
agency deems appropriate, period.
  The President has proven time and time again that he has no problem 
circumventing Congress and working unilaterally to achieve his policy 
priorities. I suspect since he is in favor of the Paris climate 
agreement, that this is one of his policies.
  With the Clean Power Plan caught up in the courts as the President's 
administration comes to an end, there is a serious concern and a 
legitimate concern that he will act unilaterally to cement his 
environmental legacy by enforcing section 114 in this way.
  This amendment would block this attempt to delegate nearly unlimited 
power and authority over the energy sector in each one of our States to 
unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats at the EPA. Such expansive 
authority of the EPA would be economically devastating and could 
threaten the reliability and viability of our Nation's energy sector.
  I know the President has got 5, 6 months left to go, and he would 
like to get as many regulations on the books as possible. We simply 
cannot let this happen, and we cannot leave it to chance.
  I would urge my colleagues to an affirmative vote on this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, as has been pointed out, this would block 
the EPA from regulating air pollution under section 115 of the Clean 
Air Act.
  Section 115 deals with international pollution and allows the United 
States to work with other countries in transboundary pollution issues. 
As we know, pollution doesn't stop at a border. It moves. And it is 
moving around the planet.
  This amendment is a transparent attempt to clearly stop the Paris 
climate change agreement reached in December 2015. The Paris climate 
agreement is a milestone in the global effort to combat climate change, 
something which my constituents feel is very clear, very present, and 
is a huge problem of which the United States should show leadership in.
  More than 190 nations have made commitments to limit their climate-
damaging pollution, including all the largest developed and developing 
countries.
  Future U.S. administrations could use section 115 to help ensure that 
the United States does its part and to provide that other countries do 
their part too.
  The Perry amendment would prohibit the EPA and the White House from 
even developing a well-considered recommendation or whether or not to 
use this authority. Congress should not take a tool out of the toolbox 
for a future administration's climate change mitigation toolbox.
  This is a matter of global leadership. The United States needs to 
meet its Paris climate commitment and, subsequently, any commitment to 
act in the future.
  Congressman Perry's amendment and similar efforts to thwart the 
progress on climate change could--I would say ``would''--undermine our 
ability to achieve needed pollution reductions and hit our Paris 
targets.
  This amendment is the latest in a long line of Republican attacks on 
the Clean Air Act and the EPA's authority to respond to the urgent 
threat of climate change. A vote for this amendment is another vote, in 
my opinion, for those who deny climate change is real and to block 
action to curb the carbon pollution that is driving dangerous climate 
change.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, how much time is remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania has 2\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, this is not to deny climate change. This is 
about authority. Whose authority? The United States and the individual 
States don't need foreign governments through the Federal 
administration telling us, telling them how to run their railroads and 
their businesses and how much they regulate their own clean air 
pursuant to the 1973 Clean Air Act. That is why we have the Federal 
Government, and that is why it collaborates with the State.

[[Page H4883]]

  This agreement is not a treaty ratified by the United States Senate. 
This is an agreement between individuals that potentially gives the 
power to the Federal Government to regulate in an unlimited fashion 
every one of our States.
  No one in the States signed up for this. No one in the United States 
Senate voted on this. This is an agreement between individuals, and it 
should not be left to stand in this fashion.
  This amendment just says that we are going to follow the Clean Air 
Act, passed in 1973, just like we have been. Nothing has changed. 
Nothing has changed for the States. It has changed between individuals 
in this administration and people all around the globe that wish to 
limit the United States' productivity through regulation.
  That is why this amendment is important, and that is why I hope 
Members will support it.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I had the opportunity recently to be in 
China, and because of our administration and as the Chinese people and 
government saw, our bold leadership in standing up and saying that the 
United States was going to play its role in reducing the harmful 
effects of climate change, China came to the table for the first time 
ever and said: You know, we are going to do something about it too.
  Now, the gentleman keeps saying that the Senate never voted on it. 
This has never happened. Well, the Clean Air Act is a law and climate 
change is real.
  This is not 1972, 1973, when I graduated from high school back many 
years ago. The planet, the climate, the oceans, the ice shelves are all 
changing. The legacy that we leave for our children and for future 
generations will be: What does the United States, what does our country 
do? How do we stand up and show leadership?
  So this amendment clearly is an attempt to stop the Paris climate 
change agreement reached in 2015, something that I say with great pride 
my constituents in the State of Minnesota think is a good idea and 
something that we need to move forward on.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, no one denies that the 1973 Clean Air Act isn't 
law. No one denies that. But what we are pointing out is that, with the 
Paris accord, it activates section 115 in a way never perceived that to 
happen in 1973 when the law was passed. They didn't think that other 
governments were going to control the United States State by State by 
State. But that is indeed what can happen here--and probably what will 
happen here.
  Pursuant to the agenda of the administration to reduce CO2 
produced by United States by 80 percent, I know that the air was 
dirtier in 1973, as you said, when you were in high school or what have 
you, but what this is going to do is take us back to the 1900s, before 
the time of cars and X-rays and refrigerators and everything that makes 
a 21st century life livable for us. That is what this is going to do, 
if we allow the President's agenda to role forward with the Paris 
climate accord enshrined and then enacted through the Clean Air Act and 
section 115.

  All this amendment wishes to do and seeks to do is make sure that 
that statute isn't enacted, per the Paris climate agreement--not a 
treaty, an agreement--between individuals, not between our countries
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota has 1 minute 
remaining.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, the debate couldn't be clearer here right 
now. Either you believe that climate change is real and it presents a 
clear and present danger--if you read some of the reports from the 
Department of Defense, they are very concerned about what is going on 
in the world with food scarcity, with rising sea levels, with all kinds 
of potential things that could bring real security risks to our Nation. 
Do we as a country stand up and do something about it and bring other 
countries with us? My State is not going to be compelled by a foreign 
government. My State is part of the United States of America, where we 
will work together under leadership to do something about climate 
change. Or do we continue to deny that climate change is real? We 
ignore what the Department of Defense is saying, and the United States 
doesn't play a clear leadership role in moving forward and bringing 
people with us on this issue that affects today, tomorrow, future 
generations and what this planet will be like for our children.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 82 Offered by Mr. Pompeo

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 82 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. POMPEO. Mr. Chair, 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 finalize, implement, administer, or enforce the 
     proposed rule entitled ``Accidental Release Prevention 
     Requirements: Risk Management Programs Under the Clean Air 
     Act'' published by the Environmental Protection Agency in the 
     Federal Register on March 14, 2016 (81 Fed. Reg. 13638 et 
     seq.).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Kansas (Mr. Pompeo) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kansas.
  Mr. POMPEO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment would prohibit funds for the EPA's 
proposed Risk Management Plan rulemaking for the remainder of this 
year.
  This RMP is the EPA's program implementing section 112(r) of the 1990 
Clean Air Act that requires facilities that use certain materials to 
develop a plan to prevent accidental releases.
  Safety is at the very core of the chemical industry, and industry 
stakeholders have worked cooperatively with the EPA to achieve a 
dramatic 60 percent reduction in accidental releases in the 20 years of 
the RMP program, to date.
  While the EPA has proposed several changes, many of the new 
regulations they have put forward are highly problematic and could 
actually lead to an increased likelihood of an incident.
  The EPA has raced ahead of the other agencies participating in the 
Federal interagency working group created to improve chemical safety 
and security, and it is no longer working in coordination with the 
other Federal agencies involved in this process.
  Yet the EPA is moving to finalize the rule, even though changes 
planned to OSHA's similar program, the process safety management 
program, are still in their early stages. This lack of coordination has 
the potential to create duplicative rules for individuals and companies 
struggling to comply with multiple Federal oversight programs.
  I urge Members to adopt my amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, this amendment would block the EPA from 
finalizing or implementing a proposed rule that establishes accidental 
release prevention requirements.
  Earlier this year, the EPA issued a proposed rule to amend its risk 
management program regulations response to a 2013 executive order on 
improving chemical safety. The proposed rule seeks to improve chemical 
process safety, assist local emergency authorities in planning and 
responding to accidents, and improve public awareness to chemical 
hazards at regulated sources.
  This is an important regulation and its need was underscored in the 
tragedy like the one that occurred in 2013 in west Texas, where a 
massive explosion in a fertilizer plant killed 15 people and injured 
more than 160.
  This amendment would needlessly and recklessly block efforts to 
further improve chemical safety and security

[[Page H4884]]

in coordination with owners and operators, and I strongly oppose that.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Pompeo).
  The amendment was agreed to.


     Amendments En Bloc No. 1 Offered by Mr. Calvert of California

  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 820, I offer 
amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 1 consisting of amendment Nos. 83, 86, 107, 
118, 127, and 129 printed in House Report 114-683, offered by Mr. 
Calvert of California:

          Amendment No. 83 Offered by Mr. Tom Price of Georgia

       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 carry out any rule issued after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act that is a major rule described in 
     subparagraph (A) of section 804(2) of title 5, United States 
     Code.


           Amendment No. 86 Offered by Mr. Smith of Missouri

       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 by the Environmental Protection Agency to make grants 
     pursuant to section 6 of the National Environmental Education 
     Act (20 U.S.C. 5505).


            Amendment No. 107 Offered by Mr. Yoho of Florida

       Page 8, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.


          Amendment No. 118 Offered by Mr. Duncan of Tennessee

       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 destroy any buildings or structures on Midway 
     Island.


         Amendment No. 127 Offered by Mr. Westerman of Arkansas

       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 by the Department of the Interior for the purpose of 
     destroying any records regarding, related to, or generated by 
     the Inorganic Section of the United States Geological Survey 
     Energy Geochemistry Laboratory in Lakewood, Colorado.


       Amendment No. 129 Offered by Mr. Rohrabacher of California

       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 consult with the National Science Foundation with 
     respect to section 106 of the National Historic Preservation 
     Act of 1966 or section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 
     1973 with respect to any Environmental Impact Statement 
     prepared pursuant to the ``Notice of Intent to Prepare an 
     Environmental Impact Statement and Initiate Section 106 
     Consultation for Proposed Changes to Arecibo Observatory 
     Operations, Arecibo, Puerto Rico and Notice of Public Scoping 
     Meetings and Comment Period'', published in the Federal 
     Register May 23, 2016.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Calvert) and the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. 
McCollum) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.

                              {time}  1930

  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, the majority and the minority have agreed 
to these amendments being offered en bloc. They are amendments that 
address a variety of issues. Additionally, the sponsors of the 
amendments have agreed to consideration of these amendments en bloc. I 
urge the adoption of the amendments.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I just oppose this. I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  July 13, 2016, on page H4884, the following appeared: The 
amendments en bloc were agreed to.
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: The en bloc 
amendments were agreed to.


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 



               Amendment No. 84 Offered by Mr. Ratcliffe

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 84 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  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:

       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 finalize, implement, administer, or enforce the 
     proposed rule entitled ``Clean Energy Incentive Program 
     Design Details'' published by the Environmental Protection 
     Agency in the Federal Register on June 30, 2016 (81 Fed. Reg. 
     42939 et seq.), or any rule of the same substance.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, 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 yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I am here today to offer a very simple amendment to 
restrict funding to the EPA for finalizing, implementing, 
administering, or enforcing its proposed rule called the Clean Energy 
Incentive Program Design Detail, or CEIP.
  As many in this Chamber are aware, the United States Supreme Court 
issued an historic stay back in February on the EPA's so-called Clean 
Power Plan, halting the EPA from proceeding on any plans to move 
forward this harmful and costly regulation, a regulation that would 
raise household electricity prices by up to 34 percent in some areas of 
our country.
  Despite the Supreme Court ruling, we found that since the stay, the 
EPA has continued barreling forward, acting as if the Clean Power Plan 
will most certainly be upheld.
  According to the EPA's own documents, the final regulations of the 
Clean Power Plan already included the CEIP, meaning that the EPA's 
decision to move forward on its implementation, would, in fact, be 
unlawful and clearly forbidden by the Supreme Court's stay. Sadly, it 
is no surprise to many of us that the unelected bureaucrats at the EPA 
are once again choosing to ignore an order from the highest court in 
the land, but this amendment will stop the EPA from committing this 
blatant and unconstitutional violation.
  I commend Chairman Calvert for prohibiting funding to implement the 
Clean Power Plan in the underlying bill so we can ensure that the will 
of the Supreme Court and the provisions of the underlying bill are 
consistent in stopping the regulatory overreach of the EPA.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prohibit the EPA 
from finalizing or implementing designs and details for the Clean 
Energy Incentive Program. The Clean Energy Incentive Program is 
voluntary. It is an option for States. States can choose whether or not 
to do it. It is not a mandate. The program provides incentives to 
develop renewable energy and energy efficiency projects.
  The amendment is another example of some in the majority's 
obstruction to anything that the EPA or this administration does to 
attempt to address climate change. This program is designed to 
diversify energy supplies used by power generation and provide cleaner 
power generation to improve air quality. This amendment is a job 
creator.
  Let me highlight again, this program is designed to reward early 
investments in renewable energy generation and energy efficiency to 
reduce harmful emissions from electric-generated facilities. Many 
States have embraced this. Many States are voluntarily moving forward 
with this.
  But this amendment seeks to remove the barriers that we are trying to 
bring down in low-income communities so that they are able to invest in 
renewable energy, they are able to help low-income customers reduce 
their energy bills; and that is what we should be working forward with 
States and with consumers who want to reduce their energy bills and 
reduce the effects of climate change.
  I want to state again, State participation in this program is totally 
optional, so this amendment is another

[[Page H4885]]

attempt by some in the majority to block any action to address climate 
change and to continue this Nation's dependency on Big Oil. There is no 
reason to block a voluntary program from moving forward. I urge my 
colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I once again encourage all Members to 
vote for my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Once again, Mr. Chairman, I can't stress enough, the 
Clean Energy Incentive Program is voluntary.
  Why would we tell States that they couldn't choose to participate in 
something that will help their customers have lower utility bills, help 
with renewable energy, and help with the environment at the same time?
  I urge my colleagues to strongly oppose this amendment.
  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. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, 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. 85 Offered by Mr. Smith of Missouri

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 85 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. 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 carry out the third sentence of section 107(f)(1) 
     of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 
     and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607(f)(1)) (relating to 
     use of recovered sums by the United States Government without 
     further appropriation).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Missouri (Mr. Smith) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, Natural Resource Trustees are 
Federal officials designated by the President to act on behalf of the 
public to assess potential damage to natural resources at certain 
sites.
  These trustees are authorized to seek compensation for natural 
resource damages from responsible parties. Under the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act, CERCLA, these 
funds collected by trustees are currently not subject to appropriation 
by Congress.
  Unfortunately, in southeast Missouri, we have seen trustees run 
amuck. They have used money from settlements in places other than where 
the funds were intended to remedy, essentially resulting in land grabs 
by the Federal Government.
  My amendment would provide congressional oversight in the Natural 
Resource Damage Assessment process by sending funds collected by the 
trustees under CERCLA back to the general funds of the Treasury.
  This amendment is a necessary step in reining in overreach of the 
Federal Government and reasserting congressional authority, and I urge 
my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would limit the Department 
of the Interior's ability to conduct damage assessments and inland oil 
spill preparedness by prohibiting the support of restoration work that 
is paid for by recovered settlement funds under the Superfund.
  In fiscal year 2017, the Department of the Interior will receive 
nearly $500 million from the Deepwater Horizon settlement. This 
amendment would prohibit the distribution of any of those funds to the 
impacted Gulf States.
  The Department's inability to distribute jointly recovered funds to 
its co-trustees would have a devastating affect on strong Federal, 
State, Tribal cooperation that the Interior Department has developed 
over the years, and could lead to a reduction of future joint 
restoration settlements and a splintering of cooperative restoration 
efforts among co-trustees, and that would be a travesty.
  The amendment could also create uncertainty about its impacts on 
authorities under CERCLA to retain recovered settlement funds and 
manage the $800 million previously recovered in past settlements. This 
is a reckless amendment with far-reaching impacts.
  If the Department of the Interior is unable to effectively administer 
its Natural Resource Damage Assessment program due to a change in its 
ability to use appropriated funds, it would likely have a significant 
effect on NOAA's own ability to effectively manage many of these cases, 
including the Deepwater Horizon. So I strongly oppose this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is simple. It is 
about making sure elected Members of Congress appropriate funds that 
are collected under CERCLA instead of being delegated to unelected 
bureaucrats. It is not reckless. It is being responsible, and it is 
exerting our Article I authority of the power of the purse. So I 
encourage this body to support the amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I believe I have the right to close if the 
gentleman has no further speakers.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is correct.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I would encourage this body to 
support this amendment. If they are in support of holding the power of 
the purse, support the Article I authority to make sure that Congress 
would actually appropriate the funds instead of an unelected 
bureaucrat.
  This is just bringing back the power that has been delegated in the 
past and making sure that there is more congressional oversight when 
this money goes to the U.S. Treasury and that the appropriations 
process is done.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I want to state again that this would not 
allow the Department to distribute jointly recovered funds with co-
trustees. It would have a devastating effect in the way the Federal, 
State, and Tribal governments work together and as they have worked 
together over the years. It could lead to a reduction of joint future 
restoration settlements and a splintering of cooperation restoration 
among co-trustees. And when people work together, we have better 
outcomes, we have better results, and that saves the taxpayers money.
  This amendment would clearly limit the Department of the Interior's 
ability to conduct damage assessments and inland oil spill preparedness 
by prohibiting the support of restoration work that is paid for by 
recovered settlement funds under the Superfund. I recommend that the 
amendment be defeated.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, 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 Missouri 
will be postponed.


               Amendment No. 87 Offered by Mr. Westerman

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 87 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. 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 enforce the decision in Civil Action No. 14-1807 
     (JDB), United States District Court for the District of 
     Columbia, issued March 29, 2016.


[[Page H4886]]


  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I rise today in support of my amendment. My amendment would bar 
implementation of a Federal court decision issued on March 29, 2016, 
that stopped implementation of the 2014 U.S. Fish and Wildlife's 
decision to issue an Environmental Assessment extension for the 
issuance of depredation permits for double-crested cormorants.
  Since 1998, Fish and Wildlife has allowed the issuance of depredation 
permits for cormorants that threaten commercially raised fish stocks.
  In 2003, Fish and Wildlife issued the Public Resource Depredation 
Order through a final Environmental Impact Statement which allowed for 
the Federal Government, State officials, and tribal leaders to take 
cormorants found committing depredations of public supplies of fish.
  Environmental Assessments in 2009 and 2014 renewed both of these 
depredation orders. On March 29, 2016, the U.S. Court for the District 
of Columbia issued a decision stopping implementation of the 2014 
Environmental Assessment extension as a result of a special interest 
lawsuit.
  In the meantime, Fish and Wildlife Service is beginning a new 
Environmental Assessment, but new depredation permits are not being 
issued to many farmers whose fish stocks are being depleted by 
cormorant populations. This is leading to considerable losses for 
farmers. Farmers are constantly living on the margin and just getting 
by.
  My amendment prevents the use of funds by Fish and Wildlife for the 
enforcement of the March 29, 2016, court decision. It ensures that a 
successful depredation program continues so that our farmers continue 
to farm and feed America.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from California, Chairman 
Calvert, for the opportunity to offer this amendment. I ask my 
colleagues to support this amendment. Let's stand up for small farmers 
in our communities who find themselves under constant pressure 
economically. They should not have to compete with bad rulings from 
activist judges.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1945

  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, in March 2015, the court found the Fish 
and Wildlife Service had violated NEPA, in giving an open-ended 
approval for the lethal removal of the double-crested cormorant, and 
that they were committing or were about to commit predation on fish, 
saying that there was not current data or adequate analysis to support 
this depredation order. The court didn't stop depredation but required 
a mediation plan.
  In May 2016, the court revoked these depredation orders stating that 
individual permits should be sufficient. The court noted in its 
decision that the service had ignored environmental benefits of the 
double-crested cormorants by controlling invasive species fish and 
economic disruption claims were imprecise, speculative, and not 
compelling.
  This amendment seeks to ignore the findings of the court. In other 
words, this amendment would tell Fish and Wildlife you don't have to 
follow what the court said you needed to do, and it prevents the 
service from using appropriated funds to enforce a court's order on the 
taking of the double-crested cormorant.
  This language does not affect the law's prohibition against the 
taking of migratory birds, and people who would take the cormorant 
would knowingly be violating the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and be 
subject to charges from wildlife officials or other law enforcement 
agencies.
  So the gentleman might not like how the court ruled, but this is the 
ruling of the court. We are a society that follows the law, and Fish 
and Wildlife is compelled to comply with the court.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Chairman, this is a unique situation where the 
Fish and Wildlife Service has already begun a new environmental 
assessment. In the meantime, there are fish farmers who are hurting 
because of this ruling as they are seeing their stock being eaten by 
these cormorants, with no recourse to take against them.
  These cormorants not only affect fish farmers, they also affect 
smallmouth bass populations in the Lake States. These farmers should 
have the right to protect their crops while this new environmental 
assessment is being put in place, and I encourage my colleagues to 
support this amendment so that we can stand up for small farmers that 
are doing their best to feed our country.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
  The amendment was agreed to.


           Amendment No. 88 Offered by Mr. Smith of Missouri

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider Amendment No. 88 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of 
Representatives Westmoreland, Collins, and Smith, I offer amendment No. 
88.
  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 pay legal fees pursuant to a settlement in any 
     case, in which the Federal Government is a party, that arises 
     under--
       (1) the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.);
       (2) the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 
     et seq.); or
       (3) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
     seq.).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Missouri (Mr. Smith) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, if this election cycle has shown 
us anything, it is that the American people are tired of our officials 
in Washington, D.C., not listening to the voice of the people. They are 
tired of a Federal bureaucracy that is accountable to no one and 
operates in the shadows without proper oversight.
  The United States is facing a crisis of executive overreach, and 
nowhere else is this truer than at the Environmental Protection Agency. 
The EPA's escalation of sue and settle cases to change the law through 
Federal Court rulings threatens to shut down American businesses. By 
operating hand in hand with radical environmentalist groups that are 
willing participants in the scam, the EPA's use of sue and settle not 
only endangers the economy, but also our constitutional separation of 
powers.
  According to a 2011 GAO report, between 1995 and 2010, three large 
environmental activist groups like the Sierra Club received almost $6 
million in attorney fees alone. Under our amendment, no funds can be 
used to pay legal fees under any settlement regarding any case arising 
under the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Endangered 
Species Act, period. Litigants can still sue, but they will no longer 
be financially rewarded by the American taxpayer for their efforts.
  I am hopeful that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will 
support this amendment to reduce the secretive transfer of U.S. tax 
dollars to private self-interest groups. It is inexcusable to allow 
this legal collusion.
  By restricting Federal agencies from paying attorney fees, we will 
not only reduce Federal spending, but also reduce the incentive for 
these self-interest groups to continue suing the Federal Government and 
taking the American taxpayers' dollars.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment so that Congress can 
ensure taxpayers are protected from funding the legal efforts of 
special interest groups and reinforce our constitutional powers.

[[Page H4887]]

  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, the Equal Access to Justice Act is the 
law of the land. It allows for the Federal payment of legal fees--
within limits--to individuals, small businesses, and nonprofits where 
they are the prevailing parties in actions against Federal agencies 
unless the agency is able to show that the action was substantially 
justified or that special circumstances make the award unjust. This law 
helps deter government misconduct and encourages all parties--not just 
those with resources--to hire legal counsel to assert their rights.
  Now, I know my colleagues, including my colleagues on the other side 
of the aisle, will agree with me that the ability to challenge Federal 
actions is the most important tool for ensuring government 
accountability.
  The Clean Air Act, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and the 
Endangered Species Act are also the law of the land. These laws have 
contributed greatly to the protection and improvement of public health 
in this country.
  A study by the nonpartisan Environmental Law Institute found that the 
Equal Access to Justice Act has been cost effective, and it only 
applies to the meritorious litigation and that existing legal 
safeguards and independent discretion of Federal judges continue to 
ensure its prudent application.
  Here is a fact: the claim that large environmental groups are getting 
rich on attorney fees is simply not supported by available evidence. In 
2011, the GAO did a study. It was requested by House Republicans on 
cases brought against the EPA. They found that most suits were brought 
by trade associations and private companies and that attorney fees were 
awarded only about 8 percent of the time. Among environmental 
plaintiffs, the majority of cases were brought by local groups rather 
than national groups. That is just a fact. It is completely unfair to 
target these important environmental safeguards for removal from the 
protections of the Equal Access to Justice Act.
  But more importantly, this amendment would have a serious consequence 
on the public health. In order for our Nation's environmental 
safeguards to work properly and ensure the protection of public health, 
citizens--including those citizens with limited means--must have the 
ability to challenge Federal action. The Smith amendment is clearly 
designed to make it more difficult for citizens--every citizen--to 
ensure the accountability of the Federal Government.
  I urge my colleagues to defeat this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).
  Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  I rise in support of this amendment offered by my colleague from 
Georgia. The Constitution grants the power to make all laws which shall 
be necessary and proper to Congress, not the executive branch. Yet many 
executive branch agencies are using sue and settle techniques to 
circumvent the rulemaking process to enact overly broad and costly 
regulations, without any input or comment from the public.
  One of the worst offenders is the EPA, which has increasingly relied 
on outside special interest groups to bring lawsuits demanding expanded 
regulations. And the EPA is all too willing to settle immediately.
  My colleague's amendment would restrict the use of taxpayer dollars 
from paying the legal fees of these outside groups when suing the 
Federal Government under the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, or the 
Endangered Species Act.
  This amendment does not prohibit affected parties from bringing these 
lawsuits, but restricting agencies' ability to pay attorney fees will 
reduce the incentive of using lawsuits as a way to expand the power of 
the executive branch.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, once again, I have the right to close, so 
I will reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have 
remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Missouri has 2 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, as the young lady across the 
aisle made note of the GAO report of 2011, also in that same report, as 
I noted, is that that report recognized that environmentalist groups 
such as the Sierra Club received almost $6 million in settlement fees 
from just suing the government. Under no circumstances should the 
government be rewarding any group to sue the government on their 
behalf. They definitely don't do that to every individual citizen and 
to every small-business owner that is being targeted by the EPA where 
they are being targeted by other Federal agencies. This is about 
fairness, and this is making sure that self-interest groups are not 
profiting off of the Federal Government.

  I encourage the body to support the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I just want to state again that the GAO 
report clearly found that most suits were brought by trade associations 
and private companies and that attorney fees were only awarded about 8 
percent of the time, and among environmental plaintiffs, the majority 
of those cases were brought by local groups rather than national 
groups.
  So this amendment is clearly designed to make it much more difficult 
for citizens--my constituents--to ensure that there is accountability 
in the Federal Government so that they can have their day in court with 
being a plaintiff against the government when they feel it necessary.
  I urge my colleagues to defeat this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. 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 Missouri 
will be postponed.


            Amendment No. 89 Offered by Mr. Young of Alaska

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 89 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. 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 finalize, implement, or enforce the proposed rule 
     entitled ``Oil and Gas and Sulphur Operations on the Outer 
     Continental Shelf-Requirements for Exploratory Drilling on 
     the Arctic Outer Continental Shelf'' as published February 
     24, 2015 (80 Fed. Reg. 9916).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Alaska (Mr. Young) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alaska.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  July 13, 2016, on page H4887, the following appeared: from 
Alaska. (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: from Alaska. Mr. 
YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 

  (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, my amendment prevents funds from 
this act from being used to finalize, implement, or enforce the new 
Arctic regulations the Department of the Interior rushed to last week.
  In addition to the billions of dollars already spent--$7 billion--to 
develop these sales, these regulations would cost an additional $2 
billion for the oil and gas industry.
  This regulation is nothing more than a tactic to lock safe Arctic 
energy development up in red tape because exploration would become full 
of unnecessary operational burdens.
  The National Petroleum Council Arctic report found that Arctic 
resources

[[Page H4888]]

can be safely developed today using existing, field-proven technology. 
Locking up Arctic resources only hurts our Nation by preventing 
responsible energy development.
  I ask my colleagues to support the State of Alaska, stand up for the 
Alaskan Natives of the North Slope who support this production in 
energy exploration, and vote ``yes'' on my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2000

  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Byrne). The gentlewoman from Minnesota is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. This amendment would block the Bureau of Ocean Energy 
Management from finalizing regulations that deal with exploratory 
drilling on the Arctic Outer Continental Shelf that has conducted 
mobile oil offshore drilling units. Oil and gas exploration on the 
Arctic Outer Continental Shelf is expensive and requires industry to 
make significant investments. Blocking this rule creates uncertainty 
for industry and other stakeholders. Delaying or inhibiting 
implementation of this rule will likely defer, rather than encourage, 
future Arctic exploration and development.
  The amendment would also undermine efforts to protect Alaska Natives' 
health, livelihood, and cultural traditions. As we know, there are 
Alaska Natives that do have grave concerns about what is going on with 
oil drilling and exploration in Alaska.
  The impact of a catastrophic oil spill would have extremely high 
cultural and societal costs to these Native Alaskans. The amendment 
would derail efforts to set specialized safety requirements and 
environmental precautions to account for the extreme environmental 
conditions, geography, and remoteness, like to fix infrastructure in 
existing operations in the Arctic Outer Continental Shelf.
  The amendment stands in the way of efforts to reduce the risk of oil 
spill in an extreme sensitive environment where responding to any spill 
may be beyond current oil spill response capabilities. We need to 
protect our precious Arctic resources and ensure that they are managed 
responsibly.
  Therefore, I must oppose this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I can assure the young lady that 
the Natives of Alaska on the North Slope support this legislation. They 
want the development. They have talked about it. They have been really 
working close with the oil industry as partners. I think we ought to 
accept the fact that they are the most affected. If they want it, we 
ought to support it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I think this is something where people 
clearly in this Chamber know that the gentleman from Alaska and I are 
going to disagree on.
  I will state for the Record that I have spoken with many Native 
Alaskans who do oppose this, so they are not all of one mind throughout 
Alaska on this issue. They are concerned about the effect an oil spill 
would have on their coastal and societal costs.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young).
  The amendment was agreed to.


            Amendment No. 90 Offered by Mr. Young of Alaska

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 90 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. 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 implement the Final Comprehensive Conservation 
     Plan for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska for 
     which notice of availability was published in the Federal 
     Register on April 13, 2015 (80 Fed. 19678).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Alaska (Mr. Young) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alaska.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  July 13, 2016, on page H4888, the following appeared: from 
Alaska. (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: from Alaska. Mr. 
YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 

  (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, my amendment prevents funds from 
this act being used to implement a Department of the Interior 
management plan for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which 
designates the entirety as wilderness.
  This would include the 1002 area that was set aside by Congress for 
potential development in the future, an area that holds 10 billion 
barrels of oil at the minimum and probably 37 trillion cubic feet of 
natural gas.
  I am trying to do this because we already did this act. In the Alaska 
National Lands Act, we set that area aside. Now the Department that 
regulates it is trying to make it all wilderness with no drilling to 
take place.
  I ask for a ``yes'' vote.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Kilmer).
  Mr. KILMER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  I rise, respectfully, in opposition to this amendment offered by my 
friend and colleague from Alaska.
  This amendment would block the implementation of the Comprehensive 
Conservation Plan for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a plan that 
will already have been in place for nearly 2 years by the time this 
language will take effect and a plan that received broad support upon 
its implementation.
  At more than 19 million acres, the Arctic Refuge is one of the crown 
jewels of our Nation's public lands, and like Yellowstone and the Grand 
Canyon before it, this iconic landscape deserves to be protected for 
generations to come.
  Included in the CCP is a recommendation for expanded wilderness 
designations which nearly 1 million people from all 50 States--
including native, faith-based, business, and conservation groups--have 
submitted comments of support for.
  The Arctic Refuge's Coastal Plain is the biological heart of the 
refuge, which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service calls the ``center for 
wildlife activity.''
  The plan's current wilderness recommendation would ensure that these 
pristine habitats will remain intact for future generations. This is 
critical to supporting native wildlife and maintaining traditional and 
subsistence activities on the refuge.
  Since President Eisenhower established the Arctic National Wildlife 
Range, Members of both parties have stood up to protect this truly 
unique national treasure. Republican Senator William Roth introduced 
the first bill to designate the refuge's Coastal Plain as wilderness in 
1987.
  A bill to protect this place as wilderness has been introduced every 
Congress since. And this Congress, 128 Members from both sides of the 
aisle have pledged their support.
  I have the utmost respect for my friend and colleague Mr. Young. I 
urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, may I suggest to the gentleman 
that this was an act of Congress that set aside the 1002 area by the 
Senator from Washington State. That is crucially important because it 
is an area that has great potential 74 miles away from the existing 
pipeline. It also is an area that has the Village of Kaktovik that 
supports the drilling and development in 1002.
  I am just saying that no agency has a right to overcome a law of the 
Congress. I am not talking about the 19 million acres. I am talking 
about the small acreage, a parcel no bigger than the Dulles Airport, to 
allow that to be continued to be considered by the Congress of the 
United States, who set it aside at the insistence of Scoop Jackson from 
Washington State with the help of Senator Ted Stevens and myself, for 
potential drilling. It has to have an act of Congress, but you can't 
drill in a wilderness area.
  So I am saying no money shall be spent. No regulatory agency can turn

[[Page H4889]]

and make it an off-limits area to develop the oil if this Congress so 
decides.
  I urge a ``yes'' on my amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Huffman).
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman.
  My friend from Alaska is correct. The ultimate decision and the final 
disposition of this incredible place is up to the Congress of the 
United States. However, the question before us now is how should this 
area be managed until Congress finally resolves this issue?
  I am proud to have authored an amendment a few months back that 
showed that there is bipartisan support in the House for a final 
wilderness determination. I believe eventually that bipartisan support 
will be a majority of the Congress. But in the meantime, those of us 
that are working to protect this very important iconic place know that 
we are expressing the voice of the American people.
  Nearly 1 million people commented in support of the wilderness 
recommendation. These are people from all 50 States. It includes Native 
Americans. It includes Native Alaskans. It includes people from the 
faith community, the business community, and the environmental 
community. This is a uniquely important place with wildlife that, in 
many cases, are not found anywhere else and with a connection for all 
of us of because the migratory bird species that spend part of their 
lives in the Coastal Plain of the Arctic Refuge travel to almost all 50 
States in other parts of their life stage.
  We all have a stake in this. We need to do the right thing. I believe 
the administration is doing the right thing by managing this area as 
wilderness while we continue to work on an act of Congress that will 
settle this longstanding question.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, all I can say is that most people 
don't know what they are talking about. We follow the laws of the 
Congress. We should. I respectfully suggest that I am not suggesting 
the whole--and I am not supporting it right now--the Arctic Wildlife 
Range, I am talking about 100,000 acres of land that we set aside--the 
Congress. The Senate agreed to it. The conference agreed to it. And 
here we are trying to let a regulatory agency tell us how to manage it. 
That is inappropriate.
  I listened to another gentleman on this floor today talking about 
overregulation of the EPA. That is what is wrong with this Nation 
today, is regulatory law allowing the executive branch to run this 
Nation without the people's voice being heard. That is what is 
happening here.
  I respectfully urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on my amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I have had the opportunity to be up in 
this area, and this protected area encompasses a wide range of Arctic 
and sub-Arctic ecosystems. The native flora and fauna is magnificent. 
The refuge is incredible with its biological diversity.
  I understand that the gentleman from Alaska feels strongly about this 
issue in a way that I feel differently about and that he has been an 
advocate for his State for decades, but on this important issue, we 
just simply disagree.
  Lastly, I would be remiss if I didn't point out one more obvious 
truth. The President will not sign a bill loaded up with anti-
environmental riders just like this one. We only make our path for this 
bill harder by including it. I hope my colleagues would join me in 
opposing it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. 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 Alaska will 
be postponed.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Missouri 
(Mr. Cleaver) for the purpose of a colloquy.
  Mr. CLEAVER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the World War I 
Centennial Commission.
  The United States entered World War I in 1917. More than 4 million 
Americans served in the Great War, including 350,000 African Americans 
and the first woman ever to enlist in the United States Armed Forces.
  In order to properly commemorate and celebrate the brave service 
these Americans gave to us, the World War I Centennial Commission was 
established by this body in 2013. In addition to the memorial, the 
Commission is responsible for planning and executing educational and 
commemorative activities.
  I ask the Chair and ranking member to work with me as this bill 
progresses to find the necessary resources for the Commission to do its 
work. While it is true that there are no World War I veterans still 
among us, their sacrifice must not be forgotten.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I pledge to work with 
the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson).
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  I understand and share the gentleman's interest in the World War I 
Centennial Commission. The committee may be willing to consider funds 
for the Commission to carry out its mission, but we need to make sure 
that the process is open and transparent.
  Report language accompanying this bill encourages the Commission to 
submit a budget request in the future so that we might review it in 
detail. The Commission will serve as the lead organizer for the 
Nation's commemorative event so that America can tell the story of the 
Great War that profoundly shaped our history.
  I agree with the gentleman from Missouri that the work of the 
Commission is important and look forward to working with the gentleman 
on this issue.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2015


            Amendment No. 91 Offered by Mr. Young of Alaska

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 91 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chair, 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 by the Director of the United States Fish and 
     Wildlife Service--
       (1) to issue a final rule for the proposed regulations 
     listed under docket number FWS-R7-NWRS-2014-0005; or
       (2) to implement the final rule entitled ``Alaska; Hunting 
     and Trapping in National Preserves'' and dated (80 Fed. Reg. 
     64325 (October 23, 2015)).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Alaska (Mr. Young) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alaska.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  July 13, 2016, on page H4889, the following appeared: from 
Alaska. (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: from Alaska. Mr. 
YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 

  (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, my amendment prohibits the funds 
in this act from being used to issue the final rule by the United 
States Fish and Wildlife Service, which would seize authority away from 
the Alaskan Fish and Game of the State of Alaska to manage fish and 
wildlife for both nonsubsistence and subsistence uses on Federal 
wildlife refuges in Alaska. In addition, this amendment prohibits funds 
to be used on the existing National Park Service rule that interferes 
with State wildlife management authority on national preserve lands, 
which is guaranteed hunting under the Alaska National Lands Act in 
Alaska.
  The two rules in question violate the Alaska National Interest Lands 
Conservation Act, the ANILCA, passed by Congress and signed into law in 
1980, which protects the ability of the State

[[Page H4890]]

of Alaska to manage wildlife across the State on State, private, and 
Federal lands. This Chamber voted in favor of a similar amendment and 
this language in the sportsmen's package, H.R. 2604, back in February.
  These regulations are nothing more than an illegal overreach of the 
Federal Government on the State of Alaska. It is agreed in the 
Constitution, and it is in the law that they manage all fish and game 
on all lands in the State of Alaska.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Cardenas).
  Mr. CARDENAS. I appreciate the opportunity to speak.
  Mr. Chairman, I stand to strongly oppose this amendment.
  This amendment would block Federal rules aimed at protecting wolves, 
wolverines, black bears, grizzly bears, and lynx from some of the most 
egregious hunting and killing methods. These methods include shooting 
defenseless, swimming caribou from motorboats; using airplanes to scout 
and shoot grizzly bears; luring grizzlies with rotting meat and pet 
food to get a point-blank kill; killing wolf, black bear, and coyote 
mothers and their dependent pups and cubs at their dens; and the 
trapping of grizzly and black bears with steel-jawed leg-hold traps and 
wire snares. These methods are inhumane and contrary to our values here 
in this great country.
  We should support the scientists, rangers, and wildlife managers in 
the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service in their 
efforts to maintain healthy ecosystems.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and strike this poison pill rider 
from this bill. These are egregious things that we should not tolerate, 
and we should not codify them in law.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I am deeply disappointed in the 
comments that were just made because all he said was not true. The 
State does not den; the State does not snare; the State does not trap; 
the State does not kill wantonly. The State manages. To have the 
Federal Government manage the game when it is the law and when it is in 
the Constitution of the State of Alaska--an agreement made with this 
body--and to have an agency take that over and with the propaganda that 
has been espoused on this floor from the Humane Society is 
inappropriate of this body. It is a flat-out lie. That is what it is. 
It is not true.
  The State manages, and they have not used these practices, but they 
have a right and should have a right to manage the fish and game on the 
property which was guaranteed to us.
  I understand where this pressure is coming from. We in Alaska face 
this every day. No one understands that we have people in Alaska and 
that we have natives in Alaska who actually want the State to manage 
their fish and game or who would like to manage it by themselves, which 
I do support; but to have the Federal Government come in is wrong, and 
it is against our Constitution. I will stand by this amendment to stop 
moneys being spent by an agency that has overreached.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick).
  Mr. FITZPATRICK. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  I respect the concern of the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) and 
his advocacy for his State, but I oppose this proposal which, in this 
case, does not present an opportunity for a balanced approach to 
wildlife management. Let me clarify why the National Wildlife Refuge is 
proposing these rules.
  According to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, certain 
types of inhumane hunting, such as bear baiting and den hunting, has 
affected Federal refuge areas for wildlife. In fact, one refuge in the 
Kenai Peninsula had an emergency closing due to the extreme decrease in 
the number of brown bears, which was caused by these inhumane hunting 
practices.
  Rather than shutting down areas in which these hunting methods are 
causing the overkilling of native Alaskan predators and restricting 
access to all hunters, it seems reasonable to me to provide for a 
balanced approach that provides for a means of traditional, permit-
based hunting.
  Nothing in the rule of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service 
would limit traditional hunting tactics, but, rather, it would continue 
and protect existing hunting practices. Unfortunately, this amendment 
does not address the wildlife diversity and mechanisms in place to 
maintain it. Therefore, it impacts the National Wildlife Refuge's 
ability to maintain its parks in a responsible manner and provide 
native animals with a refuge.
  We as Members of Congress have a Federal responsibility to ensure 
that our National Wildlife Refuges are being used in the most 
responsible manner possible. The very agency Congress has vested with 
the responsibility to manage our wildlife thinks these killing tactics 
pose a threat to the necessary diversity of the wildlife, and I agree 
with them.
  I urge my colleagues to support the ability of the Fish and Wildlife 
Service to effectively manage our National Wildlife Refuges for future 
generations of Americans. I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the comments from the 
gentleman.
  I will say, though, that all of these instances that have been 
referred to have not happened under State management. I suggest, 
respectfully, that the Fish and Wildlife is no longer a manager of fish 
and wildlife. They have become people who prohibit activity on the 
refuges. That was not why these refuges were made. They were made by 
the people who hunt and fish, and now we are having other groups that 
say this is inhumane, which has nothing to do with it.
  I am a little bit shocked that we are reading the thing from the 
Humane Society, PETA, and all of these other groups. Those are not the 
true facts. I ask the gentleman to, please, look at the true facts.
  Management is crucial to the State of Alaska. As I mentioned before, 
we ought to really think about, maybe, management by the native 
corporations on their lands, too; but in having the Federal Government 
manage, it has done a miserable job of the management of game. Their 
idea of management is to just leave them walking around and to let 
nature take care of it. I happen to know a little bit about nature, and 
it doesn't take care of it. We are just talking about management, and 
the State has that right under its constitution; so I urge a ``yes'' 
vote on my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCollum. Mr. Chairman, this amendment circumvents the 
established rulemaking process, which solicits public input and uses 
the best available science to reach a decision. Alaska's aggressive 
predatory control practices and disregard for science-based management 
in the approach of the Service would negatively impact the stability of 
the ecosystems and wildlife throughout the region.
  Thirty-one biologists and scientists stated on March 28, 2016, in a 
letter to Interior Secretary Jewell and Service Director Ash:

       The most current and best available science is clear that 
     predator control measures that are intended to restore the 
     herd, such as moose and caribou, are doomed to failure 
     because the herds need to access nutrition. Their main 
     limiting factor is Alaska's intensive management scheme, 
     which is the wrong approach to conserving natural systems.

  I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young).
  The amendment was agreed to.


            Amendment No. 92 Offered by Mr. Young of Alaska

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 92 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

[[Page H4891]]

  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 remove Arctic Sales 255, 258, and 262 from the 
     2017-2022 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing 
     Proposed Program for which notice of availability was 
     published on March 18, 2016 (81 Fed. Reg. 14881).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Alaska (Mr. Young) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alaska.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  July 13, 2016, on page H4891, the following appeared: from 
Alaska. (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: from Alaska. Mr. 
YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 

  (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is very simple. It 
prevents funding from this act to be used to remove 3 Arctic Sales that 
have already taken place from the 2017-2022 Outer Continental Shelf Oil 
and Gas Leasing Proposed Program.
  The economic benefits that would be associated with offshore 
development in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas are tremendous. In those 
two areas alone, we have the potential to produce about 23.6 billion 
barrels of oil and 104 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Potentially 
creating 54,700 jobs nationwide will generate billions of dollars in 
revenue for the State and local governments. May I suggest, 
respectfully, that this money can be used in conservation efforts, in 
land and water conservation funds. You can't have that program without 
the development of oil; yet everybody I know on that side supports the 
program.
  The second thing is, if I can say one thing, we sit with our heads in 
the sand when, across the border, China and the other nations are 
developing. We must, in fact, be part players of this program. We need 
to do it wisely and to do it safely and to do it for the benefit of the 
American people.
  Now, if you don't believe in fossil fuels, I understand that, but 
there is no way that we are not going to be using fossil fuels for many 
years to come. If we are to do so, let's use that which is safe. We 
have already proven it can be done safely in the Arctic. It is not the 
frontier that people think it is. It is 150 feet deep. If we don't do 
this off our shores, it will be done by foreign countries.
  I am asking the Department of the Interior not to withdraw those 
sales. It means money to the Treasury; it means we have less of a 
dependence on foreign oil; and it means we will be actively involved. 
When other countries are involved, we will be there with our equipment, 
and we will be able to have an oil spill recovery if they spill the 
oil, because they will not. I know how the parties play in this. We 
will. I urge the adoption of my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would mandate that the 
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management include specific areas in the Alaska 
region of the Outer Continental Shelf in its 2017-2022 lease schedule. 
This amendment would undermine the Bureau's fundamental mission to 
manage the development of offshore resources in an environmentally and 
economically responsible manner.
  The 2017-2022 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed 
Program was proposed in March of this year, and the public comment only 
closed a few weeks ago. The Bureau is required by law to consider the 
environmental impacts of the leasing decision. This includes a 
comprehensive Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. It is 
inappropriate to circumvent this process.
  Lease sales should be informed by sound science and by using the best 
data available. This amendment would violate multiple environmental 
statutes, including NEPA, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the 
Endangered Species Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act. The 
amendment undermines the environmental protection that is required by 
law. Therefore, I must oppose the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, these leases were put up for lease 
in 2017-2022. We are not asking for any additional new leases. We are 
asking for the leases that remain in the sales. Then we address the 
environmental issue as the sales take place before we have development. 
I am suggesting, respectfully, if we don't have those areas open, the 3 
Arctic Sale areas, then the leases will not be issued in any other 
area.
  Oil is not where you want it to be--it is where it is. I am saying we 
can address all of the issues the gentlewoman is concerned with after 
the sales take place and we receive the money. If it can't be done 
safely, it can be stopped at that time. This happened with Shell.
  I am just saying not to let an agency or an administration get ahead 
of itself and say, ``Oh, we are going to take the leases back.'' That 
is the prerogative of an agency, yes; but the leases were put up to 
begin with, so we ought to take and accept that. Let's go through the 
process, and the process will follow through. Then we will decide on 
the environmental impact, on the culture. Then we will have the way to 
do it right and correctly.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, obviously, we disagree once again.
  My concern is that this amendment would mandate the Bureau of Ocean 
Energy Management to include specific areas in the 2017-2022 lease sale 
schedule and that the Bureau needs to uphold the law. It is required to 
follow the law and to consider the environmental impacts of leasing 
decisions. This amendment would also violate, as I pointed out, quite a 
few statutes: NEPA, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered 
Species Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act.
  Therefore, I must oppose the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2030

  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. 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 Alaska will 
be postponed.


            Amendment No. 93 Offered by Mr. Young of Alaska

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 93 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. 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 by the Department of the Interior to require changes 
     to an existing placer mining plan of operations with regard 
     to reclamation activities, including revegetation, or to 
     modify the bond requirements for the mining operation.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Alaska (Mr. Young) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alaska.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is very simple. 
This is an area called the Forty Mile Mining District area in the State 
of Alaska that has been mined since 1895.
  There was an attempt by the BLM to go in and stop this mining. These 
are not large mines. These are mom-and-pop operations, placer 
operations. They put down ridiculous regulations and reclamation now, 
and they want them to reclaim the land back to the original state 
before it was ever mined, not of the disturbance of the mining they 
were doing. It is amazing to me that they would even think about doing 
this.
  I am talking about people who have been there for 20 years, most of 
them retired. They are really, if I have to say anything, the mom-and-
pops of Alaska; they are the spirit of Alaska.
  All of a sudden, they have a big agency coming in and saying: You 
have to

[[Page H4892]]

have a reclamation area, and this is the way that we want it done.
  Yet, they don't recognize what has been done in the past and how it 
has worked. What they are proposing is wrong, and it costs a 
considerable amount of money to these small mom-and-pop miners.
  One of our big plaques in the State of Alaska is the gold pan. Yet, 
we have this agency coming in for 140 acres. That is all they are 
talking about. For some reason, they got an idea that we want to put 
them out of business.
  I am just saying, no, they should not impose these regulations. 
Follow the State mining law, and the reclamation that takes place now 
works. Let them continue to do that, and we can reclaim the land. They 
are agreeable to that. They just can't do what they are asking them to 
do because they can't afford to do it. It is that simple.
  This is a simple amendment to try and protect mom-and-pop operations 
in the State of Alaska like you would do in your State for any other 
operation where the Federal Government is coming in and trying to take 
it away.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, most of the 186 active mining operations 
on the BLM--these are Federal managed lands in Alaska--are placer 
mining operations.
  Between 4 and 800 miles of BLM Federal managed streams have historic 
or active placer mining impacts, and there is a legacy of historic 
claims with reduced ecosystem function.
  Now, BLM continues various outreach activities, including public 
meetings and interactions with individual miners, and is working with 
industry to incorporate best practice management and to use new 
science-based reclamation techniques to accelerate stream recovery.
  I hear what the gentleman is saying about State lands and State 
recovery. And what the State of Alaska chooses to do with recovery in 
its own State boundaries is one thing, but these are Federal lands. In 
the course of reclamation activities, it may be necessary to increase 
an annual cost to miners to recover these streams and restore the 
ecosystem function.
  The amendment prohibits assessing the cost of reclaiming these areas 
to placer miners who are profiting from Federal mineral extraction on 
federally managed lands, BLM lands. So the taxpayers all across this 
country should not be shouldering the burden of these restoring costs. 
The responsible party should. So that is why I strongly oppose this 
amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest one thing to the 
gentlewoman; we are only talking about 49 families. This is small. I am 
not talking about all the other placer mining. This is, in fact, the 
Forty Mile Miners. I mean, they have been there forever.
  Like I say, you can go there and it is like looking into a museum of 
1859. And they are patented claims. It is their land. A lot of it is 
State land.
  They are claiming it because it is placer mining. The BLM is claiming 
they have the authority to impose a reclamation system that does not 
work.
  Did they consult? No.
  I am just saying, keep in mind that we are not talking about 
corporations. We are not talking about large industry. We are talking 
about, very frankly, if you go up there--and I wish you would--you will 
find out they are a pretty good group of older Alaskans, some hippies. 
We still have a few of those left. And they are not making any money.
  This is an occupation, but if they have to do what the BLM is 
suggesting they do--by the way, there are fish in that stream now, and 
it was mined in 1895. What they are asking, it will break them. They 
can't do it, and you will say good.
  Well, that is taking people--this is a huge area, the total area. 
That, I am not arguing. I am just talking about this little Forty Mile 
group. So give them a break. Let them go out and make enough money to 
buy Saturday night party time.
  I urge the passage of my amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Alaska has convinced 
me of one thing: I need to go back to Alaska, and I need to spend some 
time with you there.
  I still oppose this amendment. The American taxpayer should not be 
accepting the burden of restoration costs to make sure that these 
waterways are reclaimed to how they should be.
  I continue to oppose this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young).
  The amendment was agreed to.


     Amendments En Bloc No. 2 Offered by Mr. Calvert of California

  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 820, I offer 
amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 2 consisting of amendment Nos. 108, 109, 110, 
112, 115, 117, 121, 124, 125, and 126 printed in House Report 114-683, 
offered by Mr. Calvert of California:

         Amendment No. 108 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer of Oregon

       Page 16, line 4, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 38, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.


       Amendment No. 109 Offered by Mr. Clyburn of South Carolina

       Page 16, lines 4 and 24, after each dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 38, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.


          Amendment No. 110 Offered by Mr. Cohen of Tennessee

       Page 16, lines 4 and 23, after each dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 38, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.


          Amendment No. 112 Offered by Mr. Kildee of Michigan

       Page 72, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 73, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $3,000,000)''.


          Amendment No. 115 Offered by Mr. Kildee of Michigan

       Page 81, line 18, insert ``or if a Federal or State 
     emergency declaration has been issued due to a threat to 
     public health from heightened exposure to lead in a municipal 
     drinking water supply before the date of enactment of this 
     Act: Provided further, That in a State in which such an 
     emergency declaration has been issued, the State may use more 
     than 20 percent of the funds made available under this title 
     to the State for Drinking Water State Revolving Fund 
     capitalization grants to provide additional subsidy to 
     eligible recipients'' before the semicolon at the end.


           Amendment No. 117 Offered by Ms. Meng of New York

       Page 120, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $300,000) (increased by $300,000)''.


           Amendment No. 121 Offered by Mr. Engel of New York

       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 by the Department of the Interior, the Environmental 
     Protection Agency, or any other Federal agency to lease or 
     purchase new light duty vehicles for any executive fleet, or 
     for an agency's fleet inventory, except in accordance with 
     Presidential Memorandum--Federal Fleet Performance, dated May 
     24, 2011.


         Amendment No. 124 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas

       At the end of bill, before the short title, add the 
     following new section:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act for 
     the ``DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR--National Park Service--national 
     recreation and preservation'' may be used in contravention of 
     section 320101 of title 54, United States Code.


         Amendment No. 125 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used may be used to eliminate the Urban Wildlife Refuge 
     Partnership.


         Amendment No. 126 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas

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


                       limitation on use of funds

       Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to limit outreach programs administered by the 
     Smithsonian Institution.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Calvert) and the gentlewoman from Maine (Ms. 
Pingree) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.

[[Page H4893]]

  

  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, the majority and the minority have agreed 
to these amendments en bloc. They are noncontroversial amendments that 
affect a variety of issues. Additionally, the sponsors of the 
amendments have agreed to consideration of these amendments en bloc.
  I urge adoption of the amendments.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from Maine, 
the ranking member, and the chairman of the subcommittee for their 
kindness and their support of the Jackson Lee amendments.
  Let me indicate that in the sum total of my amendments, amendments 
Nos. 124, 125, and 126, my amendments promote support for national 
historic areas in our Nation, promote partnership strategies in 
preserving our urban life refuges, and promote outreach programs by the 
Smithsonian Institution on the fantastic historical and artistic 
knowledge of our Smithsonian houses, which facilitate an appreciation 
for America all over the world.
  In particular, my amendment No. 124 is an amendment that expresses 
support for the national historic areas and for the continuation of a 
national policy of preserving for public use historic sites, buildings, 
and other objects of national significance.
  My amendment No. 125 is an amendment that would prohibit the use of 
funds to eliminate the urban wildlife refuge partnership. Additionally, 
there is an amendment that would prohibit the use of funds to limit 
outreach administered by the Smithsonian.
  The idea behind these three amendments is to, again, recognize the 
great history of this Nation, even as young as this country is. In 
particular, in my congressional district, we have Freedmen's Town that 
had Camp Logan. It was a place of freed African American slaves, which 
grew into an amazing community. In addition, the Allen Brothers, who 
founded Houston, are buried in that same neighborhood.
  In addition to that, we have something called the Juneteenth Trail. 
That is the trail the slaves traveled from Galveston up to Houston. The 
trail has an enormous amount of history, and that is part of the 
history of celebrating Juneteenth. To preserve that history is very 
important.
  In the second amendment, I want to make sure that we maintain a 
program that helps and introduces urban youth to the wonders of 
wildlife and historic preservation.
  Finally, I think it is important that we recognize the historic 
importance of the Smithsonian and continue to emphasize its outreach 
capacity to ensure that it reaches Americans of all levels to speak 
about the story of this great Nation.
  My amendments, again, ask these simple questions: Is our history 
worthy of knowing, studying, and preserving?
  It is.
  Is it important to work with our State and local governments to help 
them preserve their history?
  My amendments answer that question by supporting policies that will 
work with State and local governments that will reach out to urban 
youth so they can understand the wildlife preservation through the 
urban wildlife refuge programs, and then, of course, the Smithsonian 
that provides an eye to the history of this Nation.
  I ask my colleagues to support Jackson Lee amendment Nos. 124, 125, 
and 126 in the en bloc amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Sessions and Ranking Member Slaughter for 
making in order Jackson Lee Amendments Number 124, along with my other 
Amendments Number 125 and Number 126 to H.R. 5538--``Department of the 
Interior and the Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 
2017.''
  I also commend Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their 
leadership in shepherding this measure to the Rules Committee.
  Mr. Chair, in sum, my Amendment promotes support for National 
Historic Areas in our nation.
  Indeed, among other agencies, this measure funds the U.S. Forest 
Service, the National Park System, and the Smithsonian Institution, 
which operates our national museums including the National Zoo.
  Most Americans do not know that this measure also funds a very 
special agency, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and its 
adjunct, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
  Mr. Chair, the Jackson Lee Amendments are simple because they send a 
very important message from the Congress of the United States: that we 
value tradition, that we think about the impact of history and 
tradition on future generations to come and that if we recognize and 
know our history, we are able to work together as an American family in 
the spirit of respect, unity and growth.
  Specifically, Jackson Lee Amendment Number 124 encourages us to 
preserve history, whereby the National Historic Preservation Fund and 
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation are charged to redouble 
their efforts to assist state and local governments and community 
groups in identifying and working to preserve nationally significant 
sites, structures, and artifacts, for example those relating to 
communities founded by newly emancipated slaves, such as Freedmen's 
Town in home District of Houston, Texas.
  Indeed, just west of downtown Houston lies the Fourth Ward.
  It is the city's oldest African American community, but before it was 
the Fourth Ward, this community was known by its original name, 
Freedmen's Town, given by freed slaves who settled it shortly after 
receiving the news of their emancipation on Juneteenth.
  Freedmen's Town prospered during the turn of the century.
  Economic, community, and social development were at a peak until 
local government became threatened by the prosperity of this area and 
its residents.
  In the 1920's, Freedmen's Town was the ``Harlem of the Southwest.''
  The area was filled with many restaurants, jazz spots, and night 
clubs.
  As the years passed and with the coming of integration, many of 
Freedmen's Town residents began to move towards Texas Southern 
University, in the Third Ward, and other areas of the city.
  Freedmen's Town has a rich and colorful past and is still home to 
many significant historical landmarks and features.
  It was famous for its hand laid brick streets, constructed by 
Houston's Rev. Jeremiah Smith and his congregation over half a century 
ago.
  Houston's first cemetery, Founder's Cemetery at Valentine and West 
Dallas, contains the graves of military men who fought in the Civil 
War, as well as the historical remains of John and Augustus Allen, the 
founders of Houston.
  Behind Founder's Cemetery lies Congregation Beth Israel, the oldest 
Jewish cemetery in Houston, which is beautifully maintained to this 
day.
  Among other historical churches in the area, Antioch Missionary 
Baptist Church built in 1866 continues to be a major focal point of 
Freedmen's Town, though it has been relocated from its original site on 
``Baptist Hill'' where the Music Hall and Coliseum now stand.
  Rev. John Jack Yates, the first Black pastor of Antioch, was a 
dynamic and influential leader known for his deep commitment to the 
education of Black youngsters.
  He often used his personal finances to send Freedmen's Town children 
to school.
  Today, Jack Yates High School in the Third Ward stands in his honor.
  Although Freedmen's Town is a nationally registered historical site, 
and the largest intact freed slave settlement left in the entire 
nation, its official designation protects only 40 of the 80 blocks or 
more of the remaining Freedmen's Town area.
  To preserve what remains of Freedmen's Town will require the combined 
efforts of community groups working with local, state, and federal 
government to reach a consensus of projects worthy of preservation.
  One such project for Freedmen's Town is the ``Bricks Street 
Project,'' which is intended to preserve the original brick pavers of 
Freedmen's Town along Andrews Street and Wilson Street.
  These streets were found to contain brick pavers patterns which may 
be unique to the Freedmen's Town area, and are consistent with brick 
patterns seen on architectural features located in the Historic 
District.
  Mr. Chair, hearts break when irreplaceable structures are destroyed 
or damaged beyond repair, instead of preserved and protected as they 
deserve.
  A plaque pointing out ``on this site a great building once stood'' 
simply cannot tell the story in whole or in full.
  Equally tragic is the loss of traditions: a way of living or crafting 
wood or farming, of celebrating holidays or worshiping or feasting on 
``Juneteenth'' cuisine.
  The preservation of artifacts as well as traditions is important to 
telling the story of the people who settled a community.
  Thus, I urge support for Jackson Lee Amendment Number 124.
  Mr. Chair, I would also like to thank Chairman Sessions and Ranking 
Member Slaugher fror making in order Jackson Lee Amendment Number 125 
to H.R. 5538--``Department of the Interior and the Environment

[[Page H4894]]

and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2017.''
  I also comment Chairman Calvert  and Ranking Member McCollum for 
their leadership in shepherding this measure to the Rules Committee.
  Mr. Chair, in sum, my Amendment promotes partnership strategies in 
preserving our urban wildlife refuges.
  Jackson Lee Amendment Number 125 prohibits the utilization of funds 
to eliminate Urban Wildlife and Refugee Partnerships.
  According to some estimates, 80 percent of the U.S. population 
currently resides in urban communities, and the challenge before us is 
ensuring our natural resources are conserved and valued by the American 
people and that our youth are beneficiaries of Urban Wildlife and 
Refugee partnerships.
  Thus, Jackson Lee Amendment Number 125 works to facilitate the 
nurturing and education of Americans, especially our youth on the 
imperative of exposure to urban wildlife and refugee facilities across 
our nation.
  Picture this: nature meets skyline near Houston's Buffalo Bayou, one 
of many sites where Texas works with Houston Wilderness to create 
shared conservation messages and strategies.
  Indeed, I commend the work of the Houston Urban Wildlife Refuge 
Partnership, in Texas.
  Additionally, the Texas Mid-Coast Refuge Complex will work with 
Houston Wilderness, an alliance of business, environmental and 
government interests, to create a coordinated conservation presence in 
the metro area.
  Moreover, young people deserve exposure to the educational 
opportunities and excitement these urban wildlife and refugee parks 
have to offer, where their minds are developed and enriched; indeed, 
where they get to interact with and see wildlife they have read about 
in their school books.
  Urban wildlife and refugee parks spark creativity in a healthy dose 
for the imagination of our young people so that they have an 
appreciation of nature and all the beautiful inhabitants it offers us.
  From Houston, to Rhode Island to Baltimore, to Chicago and everywhere 
in between, young people have the opportunity to spearhead replanting 
projects along various rivers; learn about birding and be partners and 
stakeholders in their communities' parks and zoos while also sharpening 
their minds.
  For all these reasons, I urge support for Jackson Lee Amendment 
Number 125.
  Mr. Chair, I would also like to thank Chairman Sessions and Ranking 
Member Slaughter for making in order Jackson Lee Amendment Number 126 
to H.R. 5538--``Department of the Interior and the Environment and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2017.''
  I also commend Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their 
leadership in shepherding this measure to the Rules Committee.
  Mr. Chair, in sum, my Amendment promotes outreach programs by the 
Smithsonian Institution on the fantastic historical and artistic 
knowledge our Smithsonian houses and facilitates an appreciation for 
America and the world over.
  Specifically, Jackson Lee Amendment Number 126 prohibits funds to be 
utilized to limit outreach programs administered by the Smithsonian 
Institution.
  As I mentioned earlier, the Smithsonian Institution operates as our 
national museum and attracts not only Americans and American youth but 
also dignitaries from across the globe, from Africa to Asia to Europe 
and everywhere in-between.
  Indeed, our historical Smithsonian Institution has attracted 
intellectuals, kings, dignitaries and youth from across the country and 
others who have come from afar to witness in person the diversity of 
the art housed in our Smithsonian Institution, the world's largest 
museum and research complex which includes 19 museums and galleries and 
the National Zoological Park.
  No doubt, these Museums have enriched our lives: the African American 
History and Culture Museum, African Art Museum, the Air and Space 
Museum, the Air and Space Museum Udvar-Hazy Center, American Art 
Museum, the American History Museum, the American Indian Museum, 
Anacostia Community Museum, the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Freer 
Gallery of Art, Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, the National 
Zoo, the Natural History Museum, the Portrait Gallery, Postal Museum 
and the Renwick Gallery.
  By promoting and protecting the buildings, landscape, special places 
and qualities that enrich and captivate the exceptional American 
imagination, attracting visitors from across the globe, we preserve our 
history for future generations to come and educate the general public 
about American history.
  For all these reasons, I urge support for Jackson Lee Amendment 
Number 126.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member and the chairman 
of the committee and subcommittee for their work on this very important 
issue.
  This en bloc amendment includes two amendments that I offered that 
would provide specific relief to my hometown. Many of you have heard me 
on the floor of this House talk about the incredible challenge that my 
hometown of Flint, Michigan, faces.
  Through no fault of its own, during a time when a State-appointed 
emergency manager was literally running every aspect of city 
government, a terrible decision, a thoughtless and really not science-
based decision was made to use river water to replace water from the 
Great Lakes as the drinking water source. That decision caused a series 
of events that led to lead leaching into the water and, quite 
literally, poisoning a city of 100,000 people. The impact of this event 
will be long felt in my hometown.
  We all have an obligation. Even though the principal responsibility 
lies with the State, we all have an obligation to contribute to the 
efforts that this city will painfully go through in order to recover. 
The amendments within this en bloc amendment that I offered will help.
  The committee has already done great work to provide some flexibility 
to States in administering the clean drinking water revolving loan 
fund, the state revolving loan fund, which in this case would provide 
the State of Michigan with tools to assist the City of Flint in making 
the kinds of changes to its water system to prevent this from ever 
happening again and correct the problem in the first place.
  There is another amendment that would actually allow the city some 
help in transitioning to a permanent water source derived from Lake 
Huron and away from dependence on either the Detroit water system or 
this river water, which was the source of the problem.
  I will just say this: It will take a lot more to fix this problem and 
a lot of commitment from the State and the Federal Government, but it 
means a lot to the people back home.
  I just want to express my gratitude to the ranking member and to 
Chairman Calvert for their work on this. It will help my hometown of 
Flint, but it will also potentially be of value to other communities 
facing water emergencies.
  I urge my colleagues to support this en bloc amendment.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to support the en bloc 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. MENG. Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Calvert for supporting this 
amendment as well as my friend, Ranking Member McCollum. Thank you to 
you both.
  Mr. Chair, this amendment reduces the Smithsonian Institution account 
on page 120, line 23, of the bill by $300,000, and then increases it by 
the same amount. The purpose of the amendment is to ensure that the 
Smithsonian Asian Pacific American Center receives a $300,000 increase 
over last year's enacted funding amount, consistent with the 
President's request in his fiscal year 2017 budget.
  The Congressional Budget Office scored this amendment as budget 
neutral, and more than enough money exists in the $515,000 increase to 
the Smithsonian's `Administration' account, which funds the Smithsonian 
Asian Pacific American Center, to accomplish the goal of my amendment.
  Frankly speaking, I do not care where the Committee, or the Board of 
Regents, wish to reallocate funds from, I only wish to seek assurance 
that the Smithsonian Asian Pacific American Center will receive the 
$300,000 increase it so justly deserves. Thank you again, Chairman 
Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum, for agreeing to this funding level 
moving forward.
  According to the Smithsonian's budget justification to Congress, 
these additional funds will be used to provide for the salaries and 
benefits of one associate program director, one curator for Asian 
Pacific studies, and one education coordinator.
  With the addition of three additional staff, the Smithsonian Asian 
Pacific American Center will be able to continue to serve as the 
leading voice on the Asian Pacific American experience, as well as host 
events in cities across the country.
  Mr. Chair, I believe the Smithsonian Asian Pacific American Center 
deserves our support, and I thank everyone in this Chamber this evening 
for agreeing with me.

[[Page H4895]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

                              {time}  2045


                 Amendment No. 94 Offered by Mr. Zeldin

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 94 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. ZELDIN. 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 declare a national monument under section 320301 
     of title 54, United States Code, in the exclusive economic 
     zone of the United States established by Proclamation 
     Numbered 5030, dated March 10, 1983.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Zeldin) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to bar 
funding for the creation of any national marine monuments in the EEZ 
through Presidential proclamation. I do this on behalf of commercial 
fishermen on Long Island and throughout the Nation who, like so many 
other hardworking Americans, are increasingly under assault from the 
executive overreach of this administration.
  This amendment uses the power of the purse to ensure the President 
does not abuse the Antiquities Act to lock out commercial fishermen 
from portions of the EEZ that contain essential fisheries. Any efforts 
to create a marine-protected area must be done through the transparent 
process laid out by Magnuson-Stevens, not through executive fiat that 
threatens to put thousands of hardworking men and women out of 
business.
  The Antiquities Act has been an effective tool in the past to 
preserve historic sites like the Statue of Liberty, but the overly 
broad interpretation of this law held by the current administration is 
threatening to shut down thousands of square miles of ocean from 
fishing through a Presidential proclamation.
  In the northwest Atlantic, ocean fishermen from my district and 
throughout this region work in some of the most productive fishing 
areas in the world. This area is currently under consideration for a 
marine monument designation with little public input and zero 
transparency. The concerns regarding the marine monument designations 
reach nationwide, where the administration's closed and secretive 
process have left fishermen and regional fishery managers extremely 
concerned.
  Recent marine monument designations proclaimed by the Obama 
administration have been the largest in U.S. history, locking out all 
fishing in perpetuity, a severe departure from the original intent of 
the Antiquities Act to preserve historical sites and archaeological 
treasures.
  Mr. Chairman, protecting the seafood economy, coastal communities, 
and the hardworking men and women who provide for their families 
through commercial fishing is a top priority for my constituents on the 
east end of Long Island.
  I would like to thank Chairman Calvert and Chairman Bishop for their 
support of this amendment to rein in executive overreach on behalf of 
America's fishermen. I urge all my colleagues to support this critical 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Maine is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Massachusetts (Ms. Tsongas).
  Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, since Theodore Roosevelt's designation of 
our first national monument, Devil's Tower in Wyoming, 16 Presidents 
from both parties have used the Antiquities Act to protect more than 
160 of America's best known and loved landscapes. Only three Presidents 
have not.
  Many national monuments created through the Antiquities Act have 
since become some of our greatest national parks, like Zion, Bryce 
Canyon, Death Valley, Joshua Tree, and Glacier Bay to name a few. All 
of these parks were first national monuments that Congress decided 
warranted national park status.
  The Antiquities Act has also been used on a bipartisan basis to 
preserve Federal marine areas as marine national monuments, with both 
President George W. Bush and President Obama using the Antiquities Act 
to protect some of the most unique and vulnerable areas of the Pacific 
Ocean.
  To be clear, the Antiquities Act may only be used on existing Federal 
lands and waters, areas which belong to all Americans and are typically 
designated only after an extensive locally driven stakeholder outreach 
process. Instead of honoring this long bipartisan history of the 
Antiquities Act that has saved so much for our country, this amendment 
would foreclose any opportunity for local communities to seek to 
protect their regions' most valued marine resources located in Federal 
waters.
  We have a generational responsibility to ensure that historic and 
cultural resources and important conservation areas found on our 
Nation's public lands and waters are available to future generations. I 
urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and to help protect our 
Nation's most treasured public resources through the Antiquities Act.
  Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Kilmer), also a member of the subcommittee.
  Mr. KILMER. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, the Antiquities Act has protected some of our most 
extraordinary landscapes. In my neck of the woods, it was central to 
the creation of Olympic National Park. It is a big deal for our oceans, 
too. President George W. Bush and President Obama both used the act to 
create marine national monuments and to help vulnerable ecosystems in 
our waters.
  Like our forests, the ocean is an essential resource that matters to 
livelihoods and to the health of our planet, and we need to be sure 
they are around for future generations, including my daughters. But 
this amendment would deny any President, regardless of party, the 
ability to use the Antiquities Act to create marine national monuments.
  The Zeldin amendment would put more than 4.5 million square miles out 
of reach of protection and would curb our Nation's ability to show the 
world that we care about our waters. We have seen the benefits of 
protecting sensitive areas that are at risk. It helps drive tourism 
while protecting fish populations that are essential to fisheries and 
coastal communities.
  The Nation's leading aquariums support protection of unique and 
vulnerable ocean areas, as do hundreds of thousands of people, hundreds 
of scientists, educators, businessowners, boaters, surfers, beachgoers, 
and members of faith-based organizations, together with conservation 
organizations representing millions of people.
  The Antiquities Act was created 110 years ago. Rather than engaging 
in an attack on this law, I urge my colleagues to join me and the 
American people in celebrating our shared history and its 110th 
anniversary. Vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Chairman, if the President was to designate the Plum 
Island Lighthouse tonight under the Antiquities Act, I would certainly 
welcome that, as in all the past precedent of important use and 
historical use of the Antiquities Act for good reason.
  I introduced this amendment on behalf of all those commercial 
fishermen, those hardworking commercial fishermen all along the 
northwest Atlantic concerned that, if this marine monument is enacted 
by this President, they will be put out of business.
  I look forward to working with all of my colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle, especially from this region, who are concerned both with the 
important desire for conservation, the important work of protecting and 
utilizing the Antiquities Act productively, but also ensuring that we 
are not putting our commercial fishermen out of business.

[[Page H4896]]

  Mr. Chairman, again, I thank Chairman Calvert and Chairman Bishop. I 
would ask all of my colleagues to please support this important 
amendment, which is very important for my region, not just Long Island, 
but the entire northwest Atlantic.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I certainly appreciate my colleague from New 
York suggesting that he is very much in favor of the balance between 
conservation and supporting our commercial fishermen. Being from the 
State of Maine, we certainly look at both of those things. I will look 
forward to working with him, but I do think this amendment is an attack 
on our national monument Antiquities Act policies, and it should be 
recognized as that.
  I do understand his concern about the inclusion of groups and the 
importance of a public input process. In New England, we take that very 
seriously. I agree with him that there is a vital need in the monument 
designation process for local voices to be heard, but the way to ensure 
that that occurs is not by an amendment that would stop monument 
designations in their tracks, and it is certainly not by stopping 
monument designation powers in the entire exclusive economic zone, the 
EEZ area.
  Today we should be talking about the importance of public input in 
the monument process, about the importance of an open and transparent 
process that uses common sense. Instead, we are debating an amendment 
that sends the wrong message about this important conservation tool for 
our oceans.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this attempt to stop local 
coordination, collaboration, and information sharing. I do hope that 
the gentleman from New York and I and the other people who represent 
coastal communities can find a way to balance conservation and our 
fishing industries and work together on that.
  For now, I oppose the Zeldin amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Zeldin).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. PINGREE. 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 New York 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 95 Offered by Mr. Beyer

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 95 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. BEYER. 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:


  limitation on use of funds to implement or enforce specific sections

       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to implement or enforce section 114, 119, or 445.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Beyer) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, this amendment strikes three riders that 
undercut sound implementation of the Endangered Species Act as it 
pertains to the gray wolf, the greater sage-grouse, and the lesser 
prairie chicken.
  Despite what many of my colleagues assert, the gray wolves are not 
recovered. Attempts by the Fish and Wildlife Service to remove 
Endangered Species Act protections for wolves have failed time and 
again, and they have failed because the Endangered Species Act requires 
listing and delisting decisions be based on sound science.
  The scientific experts have shown, and courts have confirmed, that 
the best available science does not justify the removal of all ESA 
protections for gray wolves at this time. This is true whether you are 
talking about proposals to delist wolves in the western Great Lakes, 
Wyoming, or nationwide.
  In fact, the only instances in which wolves have been delisted is 
through unprecedented and unfortunate congressional action in 2011 to 
remove protections from wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains. These 
wolves are now continually persecuted by hunters and ranchers despite 
the positive impacts they have had on the ecosystem and the minimal 
toll they take on livestock.
  Gray wolves are incredible animals. Their reintroduction to the 
Western United States has revitalized Yellowstone, and wolf-related 
tourism around Yellowstone generates more than $35 million annually for 
local economies. And, yet, gray wolves occupy only 5 percent of their 
historic range.
  With respect to the lesser prairie chicken, the Fish and Wildlife 
Service has gone to great lengths to accommodate development interests 
and, at the same time, protect the bird. Populations of the bird are 
declining rapidly, and 80 percent of the short grass prairie it calls 
home has been plowed, paved, or otherwise destroyed.
  The Obama administration is undertaking an unprecedented effort to 
conserve the bird and its habitat, and, thereby, avoid the need for 
Endangered Species Act protections.
  Federal agencies have worked closely with the States throughout the 
process of developing science-based strategies to conserve sage-grouse 
and their habitat. Claims that the States have been frozen out of the 
process just don't reflect realities. In fact, the 10 resource 
management plans released by the Interior Department are all based on 
plans developed by the States, not one-size-fits-all plans, but 
individual plans to suit each State. Because of these plans, the Fish 
and Wildlife Service determined that listing the greater sage-grouse 
under the Endangered Species Act was not warranted.
  The ESA has been the catalyst for the conservation of many species 
and landscapes across the country. I urge my colleagues to vote 
``yes.''
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Utah (Mr. Bishop), the chairman of the Committee on Natural Resources.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, I don't know quite how many cliches 
to use here, but where a scalpel could have been helpful, this is a 
meat ax that not only has missed the fingers, it has cut off the entire 
hand.
  In 2012, the Fish and Wildlife Service did declare the gray wolf was 
recovered, and the Endangered Species Act demands that that goes back 
to State for enforcement. A court vacated that not on the basis of the 
science, but on a technicality. So the Fish and Wildlife Service, what 
it wishes to do is done in the bill. This amendment would force them to 
do what they don't want to do. Fish and Wildlife Service doesn't get it 
right that often. For heaven's sake, let them do what they want to do 
this time.
  In 2014, the prairie chicken was listed, but they did not look at the 
State requirements, so it was vacated by a district court. So, once 
again, the underlying bill tells them what they wish to do. In fact, 
the Department of Justice has said they don't have any intent of 
appealing that decision. This allows them to do what they do. The 
amendment would require the Department of Justice to do what they don't 
want to do.
  The sage-grouse last year was not listed even though it was then put 
in plans that would act as if it were listed, but the issue is when it 
was first started, Secretary Salazar told the States to actually come 
up with plans. Every State that has a sage-grouse population has a 
plan. The basic bill allows those State plans to go into effect. This 
amendment would prohibit the State plans from going into effect. So, in 
essence, this amendment tells the Fish and Wildlife Service to do what 
it doesn't want to do, the Justice Department to do what it doesn't 
want to do, and the States can't do what they do want to do.
  In essence, we are doing the thing backwards, and we are harming 
people in the process. This is an amendment that simply sounds good on 
paper, but it misses the mark, and it hurts people.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

[[Page H4897]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia has 2\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon 
(Mr. DeFazio), my colleague and cosponsor of this amendment.

                              {time}  2100

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, of course, I have tremendous respect for 
the chairman of the committee, but it wasn't quite an accurate 
statement.
  Courts have found that what Fish and Wildlife said is: If you want to 
have delisting and manage the wolf, you must adopt an acceptable 
management plan. Courts have found that neither Wyoming nor Minnesota 
have adopted adequate management plans. In fact, we have seen basically 
management to the point of extirpation. Even in States that have 
theoretically adopted plans, like Idaho, they are attempting to reduce 
the population to unsustainable levels.
  There is a fabulous ``Dear Colleague'' from Mr. Ribble showing the 
biggest, fiercest, ugliest looking wolf I have ever seen attacking a 
small school child. Of course, there have been no wolf attacks in the 
lower 48 in the recorded history of the United States, but that is what 
we are protecting against here tonight.
  They talk about predation on cattle. If we had better management of 
cattle, better husbandry--it is, basically, disease and weather are the 
biggest cause of loss of cattle. Then the number two cause is other 
predators. That would be coyotes. And guess what? Wolves kill coyotes. 
And wolves' preferred prey is not cattle.
  So what is this insane obsession with killing wolves? I don't get it. 
I mean, were you frightened by a wolf as a small child. I don't get it. 
This is an incredible, iconic top species which actually helps regulate 
the ecosystem. Look at Yellowstone since we had wolves reintroduced 
there and how much more healthy it is.
  I just don't get this irrational behavior. I would urge my colleagues 
to vote for this amendment and don't substitute political science and 
stupidity for science.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Ribble).
  Mr. RIBBLE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I would try to bring some clarity about the amendment, 
and I stand in opposition to this amendment.
  We have heard a lot of hyperbole here this evening, but I want to try 
to set the record straight.
  We cannot have it both ways. We can either have an Endangered Species 
Act and we can have the Fish and Wildlife Service and their scientists 
manage it, or we can get rid of it and just have the court do it.
  So it appears that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, 
when things don't go the way they like by the Fish and Wildlife 
Service, they are fully supportive of the court system. When things 
don't go right in the court system, it appears, Mr. Chairman, that they 
are fully supportive of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
  What I would prefer is that we protect the Endangered Species Act and 
the agency that was directed to manage it and to manage these rare 
populations or endangered species like the gray wolf.
  In the 1990s--and I am from Wisconsin--there were only a handful of 
mating pairs of gray wolves in northern Wisconsin. Throughout the Great 
Lakes region today, there are 3,700 wolves in this area. It is an 
economically and ecologically unsustainable number.
  The Fish and Wildlife Service rightly decided that the population had 
recovered and that their program to protect this species had been so 
completely successful that it was time to delist and turn the power 
back to the States to manage, which in fact they were doing, until a 
court decided that the Fish and Wildlife Service and the experts there 
protecting the Endangered Species Act just didn't get it right.
  Well, we cannot have it both ways, Mr. Chair, and it is time that 
this Congress tells the courts what the laws are and how we want these 
things managed. What we are doing here in this bill and in the 
underlying language is protecting both the Endangered Species Act and 
the Fish and Wildlife Service scientists who are giving the proper 
jurisdiction to manage endangered species, including the gray wolf.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Maine 
(Ms. Pingree).
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I am very happy to support this amendment, 
and I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding time and 
for his commitment to this issue and the preservation of the Endangered 
Species Act.
  There are many of us in Congress concerned about the continual 
assault that is being waged against the ESA. On an appropriations bill, 
and particularly the one before us today, we see attempts to reduce the 
scope of the Endangered Species Act and to continue to weaken its 
protections.
  We must continue to work with the Fish and Wildlife Service to make 
sure they are hearing from all stakeholders and taking their concerns 
seriously. But that does not mean we get rid of the ESA.
  We have so many strong examples of how the Endangered Species Act 
works and worked over the past 40 years. One of my favorites that my 
colleagues often hear me speak of is the success of the bald eagle and 
the fact that it now thrives in Maine, where it was once endangered. 
Where they were only once 30 nesting pairs in Maine, now there are over 
630 nesting pairs of bald eagles in Maine.
  There are so money other success stories, from the peregrine falcon 
to the brown pelican to the sea otter. All of these success stories 
were based on sound science and local input through the Fish and 
Wildlife Service.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentlewoman from Wyoming (Mrs. Lummis).
  Mrs. LUMMIS. You are darn right there are success stories with the 
ESA. That is because the agency that was designed to implement the laws 
decided the species were recovered. They delisted them, and they are 
doing fine. That is why there are so many eagles in this country.
  That is not what happened with the gray wolf. The scientists at the 
agency decided that they had recovered. They delisted them, by rule. 
The courts got involved in D.C.--not in the State where the wolves are, 
but in D.C.--and said, ``No, we disagree with all the sound science,'' 
the sound science of the agency, and they took it over. That is why we 
are here.
  Congress makes the laws. The executive branch implements the laws. 
The courts interpret the laws. The agency implemented the law. Using 
sound science, they found that those wolves should be delisted. And 
they delisted them by rule. And then D.C. environmental groups went to 
a D.C. court and said: We don't like the decision. And now, all of a 
sudden, they are back.
  Mr. Chairman, this is the way to respond, by law.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, 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 Virginia 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 96 Offered by Mr. Beyer

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 96 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. BEYER. 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 in contravention of--
       (1) Executive Order 13653; or
       (2) Executive Order 13693.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Beyer) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.

[[Page H4898]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, I firmly believe that addressing the causes and 
consequences of climate change is perhaps the most pressing issue of 
our time.
  Each week, I share the latest scientific facts with my constituents 
about climate change--its impact on coral reefs, on disease migration, 
community displacement, species extinction, sea level rise, cloud 
movement, and so much more.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, there is no shortage of material to draw 
upon. Our best scientists are warning us that, unless carbon emissions 
were dramatically cut, we face severe consequences ecologically and 
economically, not to mention global instability.
  We need to be doing more in this body to address the causes and 
consequences of climate change. Instead, we have an appropriations bill 
laden with riders aimed at undermining climate action.
  We have section 122, which prevents the Bureau of Land Management 
from cutting emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas; section 
417, prohibiting regulation of carbon dioxide methane as part of Clean 
Air Act title V permits; section 418, prohibiting establishment of a 
greenhouse reporting program for manure management; section 436, 
stripping the executive of its ability to incorporate the social cost 
of carbon into rulemakings and guidance; and, section 439, prohibiting 
regulation of oil and gas sector methane emissions under section 111 of 
the Clean Air Act.
  Another provision of the bill requires the EPA to make the false 
assumption that burning biomass is carbon neutral. In reality, in 2012, 
EPA's scientific advisory board directly challenged the claim that all 
forest biomass is carbon neutral, explaining that while some type may 
indeed be carbon neutral, it is not appropriate to assume that all 
types of forest biomass are carbon neutral.
  Numerous studies have underscored that using some types, particularly 
slow-growing trees, can actually increase atmospheric carbon for many 
decades. To know what types of biomass are truly low carbon, scientists 
need to assess them, and EPA deserves to have its scientific judgment 
uncorrupted by Congress.
  With this amendment, I seek to render inert the anticlimate action 
riders of this bill. Executive Order 13653, titled ``Preparing the 
United States for the Impacts of Climate Change,'' requires Federal 
agencies to integrate considerations of the challenges posed by climate 
change effects into their programs, policies, rules, and operations to 
ensure that they continue to be effective, even as the climate changes.
  Executive Order 13693, titled ``Planning for Federal Sustainability 
in the Next Decade,'' requires Federal agencies to carry out a range of 
actions to improve Federal sustainability. These include tracking and 
reducing greenhouse gas emissions, climate resiliency measures, energy 
conservation and renewable energy targets, green building goals, and 
other positive steps. Federal agency actions have major impacts on our 
contributions to global warming.
  For that reason, I offer an amendment to ensure that no funds are 
spent on activities that are not in compliance with the President's 
2013 executive order on climate change adaptation and the 2015 
executive order on sustainability.
  It is the right thing to do to run an effective and efficient 
government. It is the right to do to return the highest value to the 
American taxpayer.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, the gentleman wants to ensure that funds are 
being expended on climate and sustainability executive orders issued by 
the President.
  Simply put, the President did not consult Congress on these executive 
orders. We would not be doing our job if we allowed this President or 
any President to unilaterally make policy decisions without allowing 
Congress to weigh in with appropriate policy debates.
  In the meantime, we must use our congressional power of the purse to 
rein in executive branch overreach, which is exactly what we are going 
to do.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I urge everyone to vote ``no'' on this 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, 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 Virginia 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 97 Offered by Mr. Beyer

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 97 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. BEYER. 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 authorize, permit, or conduct geological or 
     geophysical activities (as those terms are used in the final 
     programmatic environmental impact statement of the Bureau of 
     Ocean Energy Management entitled ``Atlantic OCS Proposed 
     Geological and Geophysical Activities, Mid-Atlantic and South 
     Atlantic Planning Areas'' and completed February 2014) in 
     support of oil, gas, or methane hydrate exploration and 
     development in any area located in the North Atlantic, Mid-
     Atlantic, South Atlantic, or Straits of Florida Outer 
     Continental Shelf Planning Area.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Beyer) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, my bipartisan amendment would essentially 
prohibit geological or geophysical activities in support of oil and gas 
exploration and development in the Atlantic in fiscal year 2017. Most 
importantly, this includes seismic airgun blasting.
  In March of this year, the Department of the Interior removed the 
Atlantic Ocean from offshore oil and gas drilling until 2022. However, 
the administration is still considering permits to conduct seismic 
airgun blasting for subsea oil and gas deposits. Not only is this 
unnecessary, because drilling is not permitted, but this exploratory 
process would cause undue harm to marine resources.
  Seismic airgun pulses are loud, repetitive, explosive sounds. The 
produced sound can travel over enormous distances, due to its low 
pressure and high amplitude. Because sound travels so efficiently 
underwater, the noise from a blast can be heard up to 2,500 miles from 
the source, roughly the distance from Washington, D.C., to Las Vegas.
  What these loud, repetitive, explosive sounds ultimately do is harm a 
range of aquatic species and the communities that rely upon them.
  Numerous studies have shown that noise from seismic airgun testing 
negatively impacts fish. Examples include 40 to 80 percent reduced 
catches in the Atlantic of cod, haddock, rockfish, herring, sand eel, 
and blue whiting. Sea turtles and invertebrates have also been found to 
demonstrate alarm and avoidance responses when exposed to seismic 
blasts.
  The critically endangered North Atlantic right whale species, of 
which less than 500 remain, use sound to find food, locate mates, and 
keep track of their young. The area proposed for blasting includes the 
only known right whale calving grounds in the world. Seismic airgun 
blasting could displace right whales from their habitats and tip the 
species toward extinction.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H4899]]

  


                              {time}  2115

  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, the administration, as already mentioned, 
already removed the Atlantic leases from consideration in the 5-year 
lease plan from 2017 to 2022. This language is completely unnecessary, 
and I urge all the Members to oppose this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North 
Carolina (Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of 
the bipartisan amendment to prohibit seismic testing in the Atlantic, 
which I have cosponsored, along with colleagues from New Jersey, 
Maryland, Virginia, and South Carolina.
  After taking into account the overwhelming opposition to offshore 
drilling in the Atlantic, including my home State of North Carolina, 
the Obama administration wisely removed the prospect of drilling from 
the 5-year Oil and Gas Leasing Program for the Atlantic Outer 
Continental Shelf.
  Now that there are no foreseeable plans to drill among the dynamic 
ecosystems and pristine beaches of the Atlantic Coast, we should move 
immediately to prevent seismic testing and other geological and 
geophysical activities. Not only are these activities unnecessary in 
light of the administration's decision, they also pose a significant 
environmental threat.
  Seismic testing is hugely disruptive to marine ecosystems. Its 
negative impacts include displacing fish over a large geographic area, 
reducing catch rates for commercial fishermen, and impacting the 
reproduction, foraging, communication, and other vital behaviors of 
marine mammals, including the North Atlantic right whale, one of the 
most endangered species on the planet.
  Further, the data generated from the seismic testing is proprietary 
and, therefore, unavailable to the public or to policymakers who might 
rely on it to inform public policy, planning, or debate regarding the 
economic and environmental impact of offshore energy exploration.
  Instead of allowing oil and gas companies to conduct an unnecessary 
and ecologically damaging activity, just miles from our Nation's 
coastline, we should be investing our time and money in advancing 
energy efficiency, renewable fuels, alternative energy technologies, 
including offshore wind development to reduce dependence on fossil 
fuels.
  I thank my colleague from Virginia for taking the leadership on this 
amendment. I urge its adoption.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BEYER. How much time is left, Mr. Chairman?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia has 1 minute remaining.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to talk just for 1 minute about 
the community impacts. Along the Atlantic Coast nearly 1.4 million jobs 
and over $95 billion in gross domestic product rely on healthy ocean 
ecosystems. In my State of Virginia that is 91,000 jobs and nearly $5 
billion in GDP.
  The Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic Fishery Management Councils have 
formally updated their policy position to express opposition and 
serious reservation to seismic airgun blasting.
  Our chair kindly says this isn't necessary because the Obama 
administration has taken the drilling off the table until 2022, but it 
has not taken seismic airgun off the table, and that research will go 
on.
  I urge my colleagues to support our amendment to put a moratorium on 
airgun blasting. Oil and gas development should not come at the expense 
of coastal communities and the marine species on which they rely.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Duncan).
  Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, seismic testing has been 
done all over the globe for decades, not a single verifiable instance 
of a marine mammal being hurt or killed due to seismic activity.
  In fact, I am on the Natural Resources Committee. We got Abigail 
Hopper's own testimony in the committee saying that there hadn't been a 
verifiable instance.
  Go to BOEM's Web site. Their Chief Biologist has a written statement 
there. Not a single verifiable instance of a marine mammal being hurt 
or killed due to seismic.
  If we want to find out what resources are available in this country 
for future energy independence, let's allow the seismic to happen off 
the coast of South Carolina, off the coast of Georgia, off the coast of 
North Carolina, to see if there are resources that may be harvestable 
to help with American energy independence going forward.
  Stopping seismic is just ludicrous because there is not a single 
verifiable instance. Go do the research yourself on the BOEM Web site. 
Look at the Chief Biologist, listen to Abigail Hopper, the Director's 
own testimony in Natural Resources, and you will hear it for yourself.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I am in opposition to this amendment. I 
urge everyone to vote ``no.''
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, 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 Virginia 
will be postponed.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 114-683 on 
which further proceedings were postponed in the following order:
  Amendment No. 76 by Mr. Palmer of Alabama.
  Amendment No. 78 by Mr. Gosar of Arizona.
  Amendment No. 79 by Mr. Perry of Pennsylvania.
  Amendment No. 80 by Mr. Perry of Pennsylvania.
  Amendment No. 84 by Mr. Ratcliffe of Texas.
  Amendment No. 85 by Mr. Smith of Missouri.
  Amendment No. 88 by Mr. Smith of Missouri.
  Amendment No. 90 by Mr. Young of Alaska.
  Amendment No. 92 by Mr. Young of Alaska.
  Amendment No. 94 by Mr. Zeldin of New York.
  Amendment No. 95 by Mr. Beyer of Virginia.
  Amendment No. 96 by Mr. Beyer of Virginia.
  Amendment No. 97 by Mr. Beyer of Virginia.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                 Amendment No. 76 Offered by Mr. Palmer

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 195, 
noes 223, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 453]

                               AYES--195

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Buck
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett
     Gibbs

[[Page H4900]]


     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Hice, Jody B.
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pompeo
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Trott
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walker
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zinke

                               NOES--223

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capps
     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
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Graham
     Graves (LA)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jolly
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     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
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Miller (MI)
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Posey
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Woodall
     Yarmuth
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Costa
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Granger
     Hastings
     Himes
     Issa
     Marino
     Messer
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Ruppersberger
     Sewell (AL)
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining.

                              {time}  2141

  Messrs. HINOJOSA, KINZINGER of Illinois, and GRAYSON changed their 
vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. FINCHER and McHENRY changed their vote from ``no'' to 
``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair, during rollcall Vote No. 453 on H.R. 5538, I 
mistakenly recorded my vote as ``yes'' when I should have voted ``no.''
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chair, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been 
present, I would have voted: ``No'' on rollcall No. 453.


                 Amendment No. 78 Offered by Mr. Gosar

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 219, 
noes 203, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 454]

                               AYES--219

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     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
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zinke

                               NOES--203

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries

[[Page H4901]]


     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     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
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Blackburn
     Hastings
     Himes
     Marino
     Mullin
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Ruppersberger
     Sewell (AL)
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2144

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment No. 79 Offered by Mr. Perry

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 161, 
noes 262, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 455]

                               AYES--161

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Davidson
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Hice, Jody B.
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Marchant
     Massie
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Messer
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Olson
     Palmer
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stutzman
     Thornberry
     Tipton
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin

                               NOES--262

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Barton
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bucshon
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chaffetz
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole
     Comstock
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emmer (MN)
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Graham
     Graves (LA)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Hunter
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jolly
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Knight
     Kuster
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Love
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     McSally
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mica
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     Nugent
     Nunes
     O'Rourke
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pitts
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Price, Tom
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Rush
     Russell
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Trott
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Webster (FL)
     Welch
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Brady (TX)
     Hastings
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Marino
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Ruppersberger
     Sewell (AL)
     Takai
     Tiberi


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2147

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment No. 80 Offered by Mr. Perry

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 188, 
noes 239, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 456]

                               AYES--188

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buck
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx

[[Page H4902]]


     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Messer
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stewart
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Upton
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--239

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Cole
     Comstock
     Connolly
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jolly
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Kuster
     LaHood
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     McSally
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mica
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     Nugent
     Nunes
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Stivers
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Webster (FL)
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Crenshaw
     Hastings
     Marino
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2150

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


               Amendment No. 84 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 Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 231, 
noes 197, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 457]

                               AYES--231

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     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
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     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
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                               NOES--197

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     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
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jolly
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     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

[[Page H4903]]


     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Hastings
     Marino
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2153

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


           Amendment No. 85 Offered by Mr. Smith of Missouri

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 170, 
noes 257, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 458]

                               AYES--170

     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Barletta
     Barr
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (IN)
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Carter (GA)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hardy
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Jolly
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nunes
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                               NOES--257

     Abraham
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Babin
     Barton
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boustany
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks (AL)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter (TX)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Harper
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Hensarling
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Hurd (TX)
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (MS)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     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
     Marchant
     Matsui
     McCaul
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Miller (FL)
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neugebauer
     Nolan
     Norcross
     Nugent
     O'Rourke
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Palmer
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Ratcliffe
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Welch
     Williams
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Hastings
     Marino
     Murphy (PA)
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2157

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


           Amendment No. 88 Offered by Mr. Smith of Missouri

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 226, 
noes 202, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 459]

                               AYES--226

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson

[[Page H4904]]


     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                               NOES--202

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jolly
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Lance
     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
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Hastings
     Marino
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2200

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


            Amendment No. 90 Offered by Mr. Young of Alaska

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Alaska 
(Mr. Young) 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 237, 
noes 191, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 460]

                               AYES--237

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     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 (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Russell
     Salmon
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Vela
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zinke

                               NOES--191

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brooks (AL)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clawson (FL)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     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
     Kirkpatrick
     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
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce

[[Page H4905]]


     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Hastings
     Marino
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2203

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


            Amendment No. 92 Offered by Mr. Young of Alaska

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 242, 
noes 185, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 461]

                               AYES--242

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     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
     Chaffetz
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     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 (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Veasey
     Vela
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                               NOES--185

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clawson (FL)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     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
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Hastings
     Marino
     Pascrell
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2207

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment No. 94 Offered by Mr. Zeldin

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Zeldin) 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 225, 
noes 202, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 462]

                               AYES--225

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     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
     Chaffetz
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     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
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Massie

[[Page H4906]]


     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                               NOES--202

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clawson (FL)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     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
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Hastings
     Marino
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Takai
     Waters, Maxine


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2210

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment No. 95 Offered by Mr. Beyer

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 193, 
noes 235, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 463]

                               AYES--193

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Lance
     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
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--235

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     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
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     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
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Rush
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder

[[Page H4907]]


     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Hastings
     Marino
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2213

  Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois changed his vote from ``no'' to 
``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment No. 96 Offered by Mr. Beyer

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 194, 
noes 234, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 464]

                               AYES--194

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jolly
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     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
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--234

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     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
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     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
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Hastings
     Marino
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2218

  Messrs. COHEN and RUSH changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment No. 97 Offered by Mr. Beyer

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 192, 
noes 236, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 465]

                               AYES--192

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bilirakis
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clawson (FL)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jolly
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard

[[Page H4908]]


     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--236

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     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
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Lipinski
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Hastings
     Marino
     Pearce
     Poe (TX)
     Takai

                              {time}  2222

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment No. 98 Offered by Mr. Beyer

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Woodall). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 98 printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. BEYER. 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 implement or enforce section 120, 425, 426, or 
     427.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Beyer) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, this amendment simply strips the dirty water 
riders in this bill. These four poison pill riders do not need to be in 
the bill. Each in its own right is a good example of a bad rider, and 
together they represent an assault on clean water, an attempt to 
forcibly supplant Agency expertise with ideology.
  The first dirty water rider, section 120, undermines the Interior 
Department's Stream Protection Rule which updates regulations which 
would allow coal mining companies to pollute and often extinguish 
altogether our mountain streams. We need this rule, and it is 
sufficiently flexible to accommodate regional variability. It is 
stringent enough to protect the people of Appalachia from the negative 
health and environmental impacts of mountaintop removal mining.
  The second dirty water rider, section 425, prohibits the EPA from 
updating the definition of fill material under the Clean Water Act. It 
was never congressional intent to allow mining refuse and similar 
material--some of it hazardous--to qualify as fill material and thereby 
bypass a more thorough environmental review and meet Federal pollution 
standards.
  Downstream water users have every right to be concerned that the 
section 404 process fails to protect them from the discharge of 
hazardous substances. To freeze those definitions in time, as section 
425 does, ties the hands of implementing agencies despite evolving 
scientific understanding and current regulatory insights. Current and 
future administrations must have the discretion to implement key terms 
and clarify them when needed.
  The third dirty water rider, section 426, requires that certain 
dredge and fill activities be completely exempted from the permitting 
process. This is in direct contravention to the text of the Clean Water 
Act and essentially bars the executive from being able to implement the 
environmental safeguards contemplated in the act.
  The fourth rider, section 427, blocks the EPA and the Army Corps of 
Engineers' Clean Water Rule, which restores critical pollution 
standards to our Nation's small streams and wetlands. At stake is the 
protection of almost 60 percent of U.S. streams. Headwaters and 
nonperennial streams supply drinking water to more than 117 million 
Americans.
  American businesses need certainty. They need to know when the 
Federal Government has authority and when it doesn't. Without updated 
guidance, businesses will often not know when they need an Army Corps 
permit. This uncertainty will continue in the light of the recent 
Supreme Court decision and underscores the need for the Clean Water 
Rule to clarify the limits of Federal authority.
  These riders are a far cry from sensible adjustments to the Clean 
Water Act. On the contrary, they are just the latest in a seemingly 
endless effort to undo clean water protections and regulatory clarity. 
All four of these riders are not only unnecessary, they pose a 
significant threat to water quality, public health, and fish and 
wildlife populations.
  Just as important is poison pill riders like these that prevent us 
from doing our jobs and pass appropriations bills that have any chance 
of passing the Senate, any chance of being signed by our President. I 
urge my colleagues to oppose these riders and support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, first, I want to point out that we have had 
separate and stand-alone debates on each of the provisions that the 
gentleman is trying to address, so obviously we have already had this 
debate.
  I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Jenkins).
  Mr. JENKINS of West Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to 
this amendment. Over the last few days, we have heard from our 
colleagues across the aisle that it is the market that is responsible 
for the downturn in coal, not this administration's regulations. But if 
you issue regulation upon regulation that completely overhauls the 
entire industry sector, is that really just the market at work?
  Instead of acknowledging that it is the onerous regulations that play 
a big part in the problems impacting the coal industry, this 
administration has blamed coal's troubles on the market; and, 
incredibly, this has been what our friends on the opposite side of the 
aisle seem to agree with.

[[Page H4909]]

  


                              {time}  2230

  They are minimizing the devastating impacts of regulations like 
Office of Surface Mining's proposed stream protection rule.
  So let me tell you about the real-world consequences: lost jobs, lost 
revenues, lost taxes, lost resources. The stream protection rule would 
reduce total recoverable coal by 65 percent. That means a decrease of 
$3 billion in coal taxes. Our towns and counties rely on the revenue to 
pay for schools, police, emergency services, and so much more.
  A big drop in coal production means a big drop in good-paying jobs. 
Over 100,000 jobs are at risk because of this rule. Coal puts food on 
the table, pays the bills, and supports our families.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 
seconds.
  Mr. JENKINS of West Virginia. Without the good jobs coal provides, 
families are having to make tough decisions, decisions that will impact 
these individuals' lives: How will they get their bills paid? How will 
they make their car payment or their house payment?
  It is time we stand up for these hardworking miners, their families, 
and American energy. Therefore, I urge opposition to this amendment.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, I heartily agree with my friend from West 
Virginia that it is time we stand up for coal miners and their 
families. It is time we stand up for their health. I don't know West 
Virginia's health statistics, but I do know those from southwest 
Virginia. They, unfortunately, have the highest negative health 
consequences of any counties in Virginia.
  The New York Times did a story a few years ago about the 20 counties 
in America where the death rate was going up. Seven were in the 
coalfields of southwest Virginia. The incidence of sickness, birth 
defects, cancer, and all kinds of illnesses are much higher when you 
look at the streams that have been buried by coal refuse.
  Let's look at this. In this so-called war on coal, no administration 
has put as much money into research on trying to bring coal back--coal 
gasification and carbon capture sequestration--trying to make coal a 
vital part of our economy again, without the health consequences and 
without environmental consequences. This is what we are trying to do.
  We cherish these people also. Let's take care of them in a strong way 
rather than subjecting them to environmental conditions and lifestyles 
that destroy their lives.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, as I mentioned earlier, we already had a 
number of debates about each of the provisions that the gentleman is 
trying to strike; therefore, this amendment is totally unnecessary. 
Nevertheless, the committee included each of these provisions for sound 
reasons, and each have their own merit. Broadly speaking, these policy 
provisions are included in the bill to put the brakes on flawed 
policies that this administration is trying to implement.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, I would just agree with the distinguished 
chairman of this committee that, yes, we have had debates. It is 
important that we continue the debates, and ultimately, wisdom will 
emerge. It is this back-and-forth, hopefully, that gets us to the very 
best policies and the very best laws.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BEYER. 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 Virginia 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 99 Offered by Mrs. Capps

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 99 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mrs. CAPPS. 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 process any application under the Outer 
     Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.) for a 
     permit to drill or a permit to modify, that would authorize 
     use of hydraulic fracturing or acid well stimulation 
     treatment in the Pacific Outer Continental Shelf.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentlewoman 
from California (Mrs. Capps) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, despite technological improvements, we know 
that extracting, transporting, and burning oil and gas is a dirty and 
dangerous business. There is simply no disputing that.
  Our reliance on these outdated fuel sources is placing people and our 
environment at risk. This is especially true for offshore drilling and 
the activities used to extract as much oil and gas as possible from 
these wells, methods such as hydraulic fracturing, called fracking, and 
acid well stimulation.
  Offshore fracking has been occurring for over 20 years off 
California's coast, and yet we know very little about the impacts on 
our oceans. That is why, last year, I introduced H.R. 1951, the 
Offshore Fracking Transparency and Review Act, which would require an 
environmental impact statement to be produced for fracking and acid 
well stimulation. We simply must know more about these activities 
before they should continue.
  While my legislation has not been afforded a hearing, the Bureau of 
Ocean Energy Management, BOEM, and the Bureau of Safety and 
Environmental Enforcement, BSEE, completed a programmatic assessment 
providing the first attempt to examine offshore well stimulation 
treatments, which resulted in a legal settlement with stakeholders in 
my congressional district earlier this year.
  This assessment confirmed that the potential for negative impacts on 
the environment and wildlife from offshore fracking and acid well 
stimulation, as well as the many unknowns as to the extent of the 
impacts, are well confirmed. Despite this, they decided that a more 
thorough analysis of potential impacts would not be undertaken.
  Regrettably, this has resulted in a missed opportunity to fully 
examine the risks posed by these treatments through a full 
environmental impact statement, as my legislation would require. 
Additionally, there is a severe lack of transparency as to what types 
of chemicals are being used for tracking and well stimulation 
activities and how they would be polluting our waters.
  So I join my constituents in expressing significant concerns over the 
impacts that these activities may have on our local environment, marine 
life, and public health.
  Given the many questions surrounding the impacts of offshore fracking 
activities, my amendment would prohibit the use of funds to process any 
application for a permit to drill or permit to modify that includes 
hydraulic fracking and acid well stimulation in the Pacific Outer 
Continental Shelf. This would provide a pause in activities to allow us 
to study both the need to extend the life of these wells as well as the 
safety and long-term impacts of these activities.
  My amendment provides a measured approach to a very uncertain 
practice that could have long-term and severe consequences to our 
oceans and public health. I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. First, I want to say I have enjoyed serving with the 
gentlewoman from California for a number of years. We have shared many 
a plane

[[Page H4910]]

ride back and forth here to Washington, D.C., but we disagree on this 
issue.
  In May, the Department of the Interior issued a finding of no 
significant impact with respect to these operations. This followed a 
review of 23 oil and gas platforms currently operating off the shore of 
California. The review drew upon the best available science and 
reaffirms these operations are operating as safely as they should.
  The amendment is nothing more than another attempt to restrict 
offshore development for oil and gas. I oppose the amendment and 
encourage my colleagues to vote ``no.''
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, also to my colleague with whom I have 
enjoyed serving and with whom we share a particular affinity for a 
certain portion of a coastline along my district which I know he and I 
both appreciate, I want to close by reiterating that oil and gas 
extraction, transportation, and combustion is inherently risky and 
dirty. And this we do know. There is no denying it.
  But what we don't know equally concerns me. We have very little 
knowledge of the long-term impacts of offshore fracking and well 
stimulations on our oceans and our marine life as well as our public 
health, yet these activities continue to occur off our coast.

                              {time}  2240

  Mr. Chairman, my amendment simply provides a pause in the use of 
fracking and acid well stimulation on the Pacific Outer Continental 
Shelf so that we have the chance to evaluate the need for and potential 
impacts of these practices.
  Let's make sure we fully understand the potential damage we are doing 
to our sensitive coastal and ocean environments, the species that live 
in them, and our public health.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, in closing, I would like to say that BSEE 
has done an enormous amount of study and assessment. They continue to 
do so as they look at the operations of oil and gas industry in 
California, certainly off the coast of California.
  Many people don't realize how large a producer the State of 
California is in the oil and gas industry. It has a long history in the 
State of California, one of the largest oil companies in the country, 
Chevron, still one of the few that operates out of the State of 
California, and we are certainly very proud of that.
  It has not been a perfect history, but the science has improved. The 
production practices have improved, and it is certainly an important 
part of our economy, and we want to make sure that they continue to 
operate safely. We are going to make sure that these agencies do the 
necessary regulatory work that they need to do.
  So I am opposed to this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mrs. CAPPS. 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 California 
will be postponed.


               Amendment No. 100 Offered by Mr. Grijalva

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 100 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. 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 new section:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to terminate--
       (1) the Law Enforcement and Investigations unit of the 
     Forest Service; or
       (2) the Office of Law Enforcement and Security of the 
     Bureau of Land Management.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, this amendment will ensure that none of 
the funds made available by this legislation are used to abolish the 
Bureau of Land Management or the U.S. Forest Service law enforcement 
units.
  BLM and the Forest Service law enforcement units are highly 
specialized, highly trained professionals responsible for enforcing a 
range of Federal laws across our public lands. These responsibilities 
include enforcing grazing regulations, monitoring mine safety, 
protecting archaeological resources, and enforcing fire restrictions.
  A vote for this amendment will simply send the message that Congress 
supports these important responsibilities and does not condone any 
effort to undermine or eliminate this important Federal authority and 
the officers in those law enforcement units.
  Today, more than ever, Federal law enforcement officers charged with 
protecting our public lands deserve our respect and support. Tragically 
marked by the illegal occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife 
Refuge by armed militants earlier this year--an occupation, I remind 
you, that House Republicans refused to officially condemn--there is a 
growing hostility toward Federal land management and is increasingly 
exposing Federal law enforcement officers to violence, threats of 
violence, intimidation, and disrespect.
  Whether it is individuals like Cliven Bundy who believe they are 
above the law and refuse to pay below-market, federally subsidized 
grazing fees, violent seditionists plotting to bomb a Federal facility, 
or treasure hunters determined to deface and loot precious cultural 
resources, law enforcement officers at Federal land management agencies 
enforce critical laws like the Endangered Species Act, the Lacey Act, 
the Native Americans Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, and they 
deserve our support.
  But despite these important functions, House Republicans aim to strip 
Federal land management agencies of their law enforcement authority, 
going so far as to introduce legislation, H.R. 4571, to completely 
dissolve BLM and Forest Service law enforcement authority.
  To do so would be disrespectful and outright dangerous. Instead of 
pouring gasoline on the fire and contributing to the climate that leads 
to violent armed occupations, we should stand up for the integrity of 
the Federal law enforcement officers, and not cast them away with 
scorn, neglect or disrespect.
  With this amendment, we have an opportunity to send a clear message 
that Congress supports Federal law enforcement officers and the rule of 
law across our public lands.
  Please support this amendment to ensure that none of the funds made 
available by the bill can be used to abolish BLM or Forest Service law 
enforcement units. I urge my colleagues to support federal law 
enforcement officers by voting in favor of this simple, commonsense 
and, indeed, reassuring amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, the bill provides funds for law enforcement 
functions of the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. Even 
if these agencies wanted to, they could not eliminate their law 
enforcement offices and responsibility. Neither could they provide more 
or less funding for them without the approval of the Appropriations 
Committee, and this committee has no desire to end the law enforcement 
function of either the Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management.
  This amendment has no purpose and, therefore, it is not needed. It is 
nothing more than a nuisance amendment, in my opinion. I would urge my 
colleagues to oppose the amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 4571, does exactly that, strips the 
authority. And Congress can and has the authority to strip from law 
enforcement units and Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management 
their authority and their ability to enforce the laws that they have 
been responsible under their jurisdiction to enforce.

[[Page H4911]]

  So this amendment, as I said earlier, is a reassurance that the 
intentions are both good intentions, to retain these services, but 
that, by approving this amendment, we effectively negate and hold 
harmless and impotent the present legislation that is out there to, 
indeed, get rid of these units.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, as I said earlier, there is no need for 
this amendment, and I would oppose this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will 
be postponed.


                Amendment No. 101 Offered by Mr. Higgins

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 101 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. HIGGINS. 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:


                  compliance with great lakes compact

       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used by a State in contravention of the interstate compact 
     regarding water resources in the Great Lakes--St. Lawrence 
     River Basin consented to and approved by Congress in Public 
     Law 110-342.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Higgins) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Chairman, at the outset, I would like to thank the 
chairman and the ranking member for their work on this appropriations 
bill. While not perfect, the bill funds the Great Lakes Restoration 
Initiative at $300 million so that critically important work to clean 
up the Great Lakes can continue.
  My amendment would prohibit funds in this act from being used by 
States in violation of the Great Lakes Compact, an agreement among the 
eight Great Lakes States outlining how this precious and nonrenewable 
resource is to be managed.
  The compact prohibits water from being pumped to areas beyond the 
drainage basin, and sets strict criteria for any diversion request.
  To that end, a municipal government outside the basin recently had 
its application approved to divert up to 8.2 million gallons per day 
from Lake Michigan, most of which will be returned after being treated.
  This diversion request was only approved after conditions were met 
lowering the volume of water to be withdrawn as well as reducing the 
service territory it would be provided to.

                              {time}  2250

  Going forward, it will be important to ensure that the approval of 
this request does not set a precedent that will threaten to deplete 
this resource by encouraging further diversion requests that do not 
uphold the strict water management standards outlined in the compact. 
As freshwater supplies in other parts of the country and the world 
dwindle, the desire to divert water by tanker or the construction of 
pipelines could become a greater threat to the Great Lakes.
  The Great Lakes are a nonrenewable source. Less than 1 percent of the 
water is renewed annually through rainfall and snow melt. The onslaught 
of climate change will likely cause water levels to decline in the 
future. Irresponsibly diverting water from the basin could threaten the 
fragile ecosystem, putting fish and wildlife at risk by degrading water 
quality and damaging habitats.
  This amendment is supported by the Alliance for the Great Lakes, the 
National Wildlife Foundation, and Citizens Campaign for the 
Environment.

              [From Citizens Campaign for the Environment]

     Memorandum of Support: Compliance With the Great Lakes Compact


                    Amendment to H.R. 5538--Higgins

     Background
       While seemingly inexhaustible, the Great Lakes are truly a 
     gift of the glaciers, as rainfall and snowmelt only naturally 
     replenish about one percent of the water annually. Once water 
     removal from the Great Lakes for any reason extends beyond 
     one percent annually, lake levels will decrease. The existing 
     strains on this fragile ecosystem, such as pollution, 
     invasive species, and climate change, will only be 
     exacerbated if the sheer quantity of water is jeopardized by 
     Great Lakes water export.
       The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources 
     Compact has been law in New York and the United States since 
     2008. The Compact is a valuable interstate agreement that 
     builds on century-old interstate and international 
     protections for the Great Lakes. The Compact specifies how 
     each Great Lakes state will act to protect Great Lakes water 
     quantity. The Compact prohibits water diversions out of the 
     basin, with limited exceptions.
     Justification
       A municipal government that is considered a community in a 
     straddling county of the Great Lakes Basin recently had its 
     diversion application approved after strict conditions 
     regarding the volume of water and service territory were met, 
     among others. Going forward, it will be important to ensure 
     that the approval of this request does not set a precedent 
     that will threaten to deplete this resource by encouraging 
     further diversion requests that do not uphold the strict 
     water management standards outlined in the Compact.
       Congress can help ensure compliance with the Great Lakes 
     Compact by prohibiting federal funds from being used by 
     states to break the strict guidelines laid out in the 
     Compact. Predicted to be more valuable than oil, our abundant 
     fresh water resources are the envy of many who suffer from 
     already strained, polluted, or disappearing water resources. 
     Congress must protect the integrity of the Compact if we are 
     to protect Great Lakes water quantity for future generations.
                                  ____



                                 Alliance for the Great Lakes,

                                                    July 12, 2016.
     Hon. Brian Higgins,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman Higgins: On behalf of the Alliance for the 
     Great Lakes, I thank you for offering an amendment to H.R. 
     5536, the Interior and Environment Appropriations bill, 
     regarding compliance with the Great Lakes Compact. The 
     Alliance for the Great Lakes is pleased to support this 
     amendment.
       The Alliance for the Great Lakes appreciates that you 
     recognize the importance of the Great Lakes to our region, 
     our communities, and our way of life. The Great Lakes provide 
     economic engines for our communities and recreational 
     opportunities for families. They hold almost 20 percent of 
     the world's surface fresh water and supply drinking water to 
     more than 30 million people. In order to protect this amazing 
     resource, the Great Lakes Compact was adopted in 2008. It 
     provides significant protections to Great Lakes water because 
     it prohibits diversions of Great Lakes water, with limited 
     exceptions, and requires each state to enact water management 
     programs for in-basin water use. Your amendment is a good 
     reminder of how important the Great Lakes Compact is to 
     protecting this precious natural resource.
       Recently the Compact Council approved with conditions the 
     first diversion request under the exception standards of the 
     Great Lakes Compact. This diversion will serve the City of 
     Waukesha, Wisconsin. Given this development, the Alliance for 
     the Great Lakes supports your amendment that seeks to uphold 
     the spirit and intent of the Great Lakes Compact. The 
     Alliance for the Great Lakes and our partners will work to 
     ensure that this diversion approval with conditions is 
     enforced and sets a high bar for any future diversion 
     requests.
       Thank you for your continued leadership on Great Lakes 
     issues.
           Sincerely,
     Molly M. Flanagan.
                                  ____

                                                    July 12, 2016.
     Hon. Brian Higgins,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative Higgins: On behalf of the National 
     Wildlife Federation (NWF) and our 248,000 members and 
     supporters in New York, we thank you for offering an 
     amendment to H.R. 5536, The Interior and Environment 
     Appropriations bill, regarding the Great Lakes Compact 
     (Compact) and wish to express our support for this effort.
       As you well know, our Great Lakes are a wonder of the 
     world. They hold almost 20 percent of the world's surface 
     fresh water, supply drinking water to more than 30 million 
     people, and are the foundation of our economy and way of 
     life. The Great Lakes are vast, but fragile, and are 
     susceptible to water withdrawals and diversions. As a result, 
     the Compact was negotiated and adopted in 2008 to help 
     protect and sustain our Great Lakes. The Compact provides 
     significant protections to Great Lakes water because it 
     prohibits diversions of Great Lakes water, with limited 
     exceptions, and promotes the wise use of in-basin water 
     resources.

[[Page H4912]]

       Given the recent approval with conditions of the first 
     diversion request under the Compact by the City of Waukesha, 
     Wisconsin, NWF supports your amendment that seeks to uphold 
     the spirit and intent of the Compact. It is important to 
     ensure that this diversion approval with conditions is 
     enforced and sets the right precedent. Therefore, we share 
     your efforts to reinforce the strength of the Compact and 
     protect the largest surface freshwater system in our country.
       We thank you for your continued leadership and look forward 
     to working with you on this issue.
           Sincerely,

                                                   Marc Smith,

                                Policy Director, National Wildlife
                         Federation's Great Lakes Regional Center.

  Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Chairman, by prohibiting the use of funds by States 
in violation of the compact, Congress can send a clear message that it 
takes seriously its responsibility to protect the largest surface 
freshwater system in our Nation.
  Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HIGGINS. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I have no problem with the amendment and 
am willing to accept the amendment.
  Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting Chair. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Higgins).
  The amendment was agreed to.


               Amendment No. 102 Offered by Mr. Lowenthal

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 102 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. 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 in contravention of Secretarial Order 3289, issued by 
     the Secretary of the Interior on September 14, 2009, and 
     addressing the impacts of climate change on America's water, 
     land, and other natural and cultural resources.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Lowenthal) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would ensure that the 
Department of the Interior continues to address the impacts of climate 
change on our public lands, on our waters, and cultural resources by 
maintaining a 2009 Secretarial order on climate change.
  Across the country, our public lands and wildlife are often on the 
front lines of climate change.
  Every week, we learn more from scientists about the impacts of rising 
levels of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere. Ocean acidification, 
droughts, increased frequency of wildfires, heat waves, extreme weather 
events, diminished air quality, habitat loss, species migrations, and 
more changes than even these to our environment are occurring because 
of climate change.
  The Department of the Interior is in a unique position when it comes 
to climate change because it is responsible for where fossil fuels are 
extracted, how fossil fuels are extracted, and the amount of fossil 
fuels extracted from our public lands and our waters.
  Of course, fossil fuels, when burned, contribute a significant amount 
of climate-changing pollution to the atmosphere. In addition, the 
Department of the Interior is also responsible for managing much of our 
public lands and waters that are impacted by that damaged climate.
  Therefore, the Department of the Interior should play a significant 
role in both promoting the transition to a low-carbon economy and 
mitigating the effects of climate change on our public lands and 
waters.
  That is why I am so glad the Department is finalizing a rulemaking 
for renewable energy development on public lands, paving the way for 
massive clean energy development.
  The Department of the Interior also recognizes that climate change is 
drastically changing the landscape and the wildlife it is working to 
preserve, and so the Department has taken a series of commonsense steps 
to protect our national resources from the impacts of climate change.
  These steps include coordinating responses across multiple bureaus of 
the Department; communicating the science of climate change impact; 
establishing regional hubs to study existing climate change impacts and 
management strategies; engaging the public through education; 
developing a network of local, State, and national partners to devise 
strategies for responding to climate impacts; and understanding and 
limiting the Department's own pollution footprint.
  The complexity of a changing climate require multidisciplinary teams 
covering large swaths of the landscape who strive to understand what is 
going on, respond appropriately, and adapt long-term management 
strategies so that the public lands, waters, and resources continue to 
be accessible to the public and resilient to the impacts of climate 
change. My amendment supports these commonsense measures to help our 
public lands and resources become more resilient to the impacts of 
climate change so that future generations will continue to benefit from 
our rich natural and cultural resources. My amendment also ensures that 
these Department of the Interior actions continue into the next 
administration.
  Therefore, I urge my colleagues to support the Department of the 
Interior's efforts by voting ``yes'' on my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, my friend wants to ensure that funds are 
being expended on efforts to address climate change. I understand that. 
Simply put, though, we are not here to write blank checks. Some 
programs may have merit; many certainly do not.
  We would not be doing our jobs if we allow the Secretary of the 
Interior to just unilaterally make policy decisions without allowing 
Congress to weigh in with appropriate policy debates, and certainly, we 
are not going to allow a future Secretary to be bound by a prior 
Secretary's fiat without congressional input.
  In the meantime, we must use congressional power of the purse to rein 
in the executive branch overreach. I would think that whoever is in 
power, we cannot allow an executive to continue to use executive orders 
in violation of the separation of powers.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, I remind my colleagues that these 
Secretarial actions that I am asking to continue have been going on 
since September of 2009 with approval and with oversight and reports 
back to this Congress. These are rational, logical steps that the 
Secretary has put into place.
  I ask my colleague, what would you oppose? We should not communicate 
responses across multiple bureaus? We don't need to understand the 
science of climate change impacts? We don't need regional hubs to study 
this, which are ongoing?
  All we are saying is let's continue this course of action. We need to 
develop resiliency. We know these impacts. The science is overwhelming. 
This is an ongoing activity. To deny this now means to stop what is 
already ongoing, and that would be a shame at this time.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to continue the actions of the 
Department of the Interior to really coordinate and understand climate 
change impacts.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, just call me old-fashioned. I just think 
that the folks that are elected to office should have some authority 
around this town.
  Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to vote 
``no.''
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Lowenthal).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.

[[Page H4913]]

  

  Mr. LOWENTHAL. 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 California 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 103 Offered by Mr. Pocan

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 103 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. POCAN. 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 in contravention of Executive Order 13693.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. POCAN. Mr. Chairman, I believe climate change represents one of 
the greatest threats to our economic livelihood, our national security, 
and the health of the planet.
  To help combat this growing threat, on February, 19, 2015, the 
President issued a historic executive order which requires that the 
Federal Government commit to key sustainability goals. This executive 
order builds off of ongoing low-cost efforts throughout the 
administration to reduce emissions, save energy, and achieve key 
sustainability goals.

                              {time}  2300

  The efforts bolstered by this executive order have already helped 
Federal agencies save $1.8 billion in cumulative energy costs. Surely 
we can all agree that the Federal Government, as the country's largest 
consumer of energy, should be a leader in cutting energy costs and 
saving taxpayer dollars, which is exactly what this executive order 
enables us to do.
  Specifically, the executive order directs Federal agencies to ensure 
25 percent of their total energy consumption is from clean energy 
sources by 2025 and reduces energy use at Federal buildings by 2\1/2\ 
percent per year between 2015 and 2025. These are worthy realistic 
goals to strive for because the consequences of not acting are dire.
  Unmitigated global warming will reduce our global gross domestic 
product by almost a quarter in the next 80 years. As a professor at 
Stanford University said, we are basically throwing away money by not 
addressing climate change.
  And to be clear, Mr. Chairman, this isn't something that only 
environmental groups are concerned about. Citigroup issued a report 
that found that minimizing temperature rises could reduce the global 
gross domestic product loss by $50 trillion.
  While climate change will have catastrophic long-term consequences, 
the effects of our warming planet are already being felt in our own 
backyards. Given the nature of this threat and the modest, yet worthy, 
goal this executive order sets to help combat the economic security and 
health risk climate change poses to us, I hope we can push through 
these commonsense measures.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, my friend wants to ensure that funds are 
being expended on an executive order issued by the President. Simply 
put, the President did not consult Congress on these executive orders. 
Again, call me old-fashioned, but around here you should be able to 
pass a law in the House of Representatives, the United States Senate, 
have it signed, and not do things unilaterally.
  Obviously, we were not consulted. From the perspective of the 
majority, we have a problem with this executive order. We would not be 
doing our jobs if we allowed the President to unilaterally make policy 
decisions without Congress having the ability to weigh in with these 
appropriate policy debates.
  In the meantime, we must use our congressional power of the purse to 
rein in the executive branch overreach.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POCAN. Mr. Chairman, I think the gentleman may have a little 
confusion and not be as concerned about funds that are expended, but 
really funds that are saved--the $1.8 billion in cumulative energy 
costs and the billions of dollars we will save by addressing climate 
change. I know in 2015, in the gentleman's home State of California, 
they had the worst water shortage in 1,200 years, which has been 
intensified 15 to 20 percent by global warming. In my home State of 
Wisconsin, farmers are facing more pests and widespread disease from 
higher humidity and warmer winter temperatures.
  I would argue that this isn't about spending funds. This is about 
saving taxpayer funds, which is what I thought people on the other side 
of the aisle also would want to do. I hope that the gentleman might 
change his mind and support this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, obviously, being from California, we have 
our own versions of what is going on with the drought, and certainly 
the science that I look at is different than the gentleman's look at 
the science that he is at; but that is what policy debates are all 
about. We should debate that here in the Congress, we should debate 
that in the Senate, and it shouldn't be decisions that are unilaterally 
made by any President of the United States. That is why we have a 
democracy here, not a king.
  I oppose this amendment, and I encourage all of the Members here to 
oppose this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. POCAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. POCAN. 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 Wisconsin 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 104 Offered by Mr. Polis

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 104 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. POLIS. 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. 441.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used in contravention of section 102(a)(1) of Public Law 
     94-579 (43 U.S.C. 1701(a)(1)).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment, along with my 
colleague, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva), the ranking 
member of the Natural Resources Committee.
  The amendment is very simple. It offers a choice for those in 
Congress to make. It is a choice for Members to vote on whether we want 
to keep our public lands public or not.
  Very simply, my amendment says that none of the funds available 
through this bill can be used in violation of the law with regard to 
keeping our public lands public. This amendment would not undo anything 
or undermine any current congressional or administrative land exchanges 
that are done legally.
  The amendment would, however, prohibit the use of funds in this bill 
to pursue any extra-legal ways to turn Federal land over to private 
owners through various things like a commission, or others that have 
been espoused.
  The district I have the honor of representing in Colorado is over 60 
percent public lands. Public lands are not only beautiful and majestic, 
but they are the fundamental drivers of our mountain area economies in 
counties like Grand and Eagle and Summit Counties.
  Public lands are good for our body, mind, and soul. A U.S. Army 
veteran of

[[Page H4914]]

the Kosovo and Iraq war who lives in Colorado recently said: ``I fought 
to protect all that makes our Nation great, and that includes the 
public lands that belong to every American.''
  Not only are our public lands good for our souls, but they are also 
one of our largest economic drivers in our State and throughout the 
Rocky Mountain region and, indeed, across the country. Over $646 
billion is generated economically through our public lands, and 
visiting our public lands supports over 6 million jobs. From small 
businesses to ski resorts, from gas stations to diners, our economy 
thrives largely in part because of the public lands in areas like the 
one I have the honor of representing.
  A recent poll across six Western States revealed that 96 percent of 
Americans support protecting public lands for future generations. 
Clearly, it is a top priority for our families. People want to see our 
public lands stay public and they want to see the maintenance for 
access of outdoor areas on our public lands as a critical focus of the 
Federal Government.
  States simply don't have the resources to take on the 
responsibilities for maintaining and keeping our Federal lands safe. 
Selling these lands outright to private owners would undoubtedly lead 
to loss of access, loss of jobs, devastate our economy, and hurt the 
quality of life in districts like mine.
  If you talk to the people on the ground who use these lands, whether 
it is sportsmen and recreational shooters, hikers, bikers, campers, 
hunters, or motorized activists, they don't want our land, the land 
they use, taken away from them. Obviously, those concerned with 
environmental well-being, water quality, and public health also 
strongly support our public lands.
  With this amendment, I offer a clear choice to my colleagues. Support 
the protection of public lands and let's cast a vote to do that. I ask 
my colleagues to support the amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I agree with the gentleman that current 
law regarding public lands must be followed. There is nothing in this 
bill that contradicts that. We are not going to be getting rid of 
public lands in this bill. As such, there is no purpose or relevance 
for this, so I would oppose this. I think this is trying to get people 
all excited that we are going to be getting rid of public lands in this 
bill, which is not true.
  I encourage my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I, again, thank the gentleman that there is 
not any sale of public lands in this bill. I would point out that there 
are Members in this body--in fact, the chair of the authorizing 
committee in this general area--who speak regularly about privatizing 
our public lands, so there is a real threat. This is not simply 
something that comes out of nowhere. I think the peace of mind that we 
would get by including this kind of language in an appropriations bill 
would make it very clear that Congress supports the opinion of the 
American people, supports the economy in districts like mine, and wants 
to keep our public lands public.
  I ask my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2310

  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, there is no need for this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chair, 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 Colorado 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 105 Offered by Ms. Speier

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 105 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Chair, 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 finalize, implement, administer, or enforce the 
     proposed rule entitled ``Special Regulations, Areas of the 
     National Park Service, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, 
     Dog Management'' published by the National Park Service in 
     the Federal Register on February 24, 2016 (81 Fed. Reg. 9139 
     et seq.; Regulation Identifier No. 1024-AE16).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Speier) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer this bipartisan amendment 
to the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act 
to ensure my constituents and those who visit the Golden Gate National 
Recreation Area will be able to enjoy the park as it is intended to be 
enjoyed.
  The Golden Gate National Recreation Area is in the bay area and was 
envisioned to have multiple complementary uses. This is enshrined in 
its mission statement ``to preserve and enhance the natural, historic, 
and scenic resources of the lands north and south of the Golden Gate 
for the education, recreation, and inspiration of people today and in 
the future.'' However, the National Park Service is moving forward on a 
severely restrictive rule on an activity that many bay area residents 
presently enjoy in the GGNRA, and that is dog walking.
  Dog walking off leash has been allowed in certain areas of the GGNRA 
for 40 years, but under a new proposed rule this amendment addresses, 
it would dramatically restrict access. While the NPS wants to treat all 
parks the same, the GGNRA has enjoyed off-leash walking for decades 
with little or no problems. As one of our Nation's few urban parks, it 
requires dog rules that fit the unique place in our community.
  I have heard from literally thousands of San Francisco and San Mateo 
County residents who oppose the rule. Dog owners certainly must act 
responsibly. As a dog owner myself, I understand that I must make sure 
my dog is well trained and safe for all visitors to the GGNRA. I don't 
think all of the GGNRA should be open to off-leash dogs, only 
designated off-leash areas that won't impact our native wildlife and 
flora and fauna.
  I love my dog, Buddy, a beautiful yellow Lab. I love walking him, and 
he certainly enjoys the fresh air and being off leash and free to roam. 
So this amendment is for Buddy and for all the ``Buddies'' in the bay 
area that enjoy the GGNRA. Buddy has been there for me, and, tonight, I 
am here for him and for all of his four-legged buddies.
  Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. SPEIER. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CALVERT. If you come by my office, the gentlewoman can meet our 
dog, Callie, whom we refer to as the ``barker of the House.'' As a 
fellow dog lover, I have no problem with the gentlewoman's amendment 
and would happily support it.
  Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Chairman, in reclaiming my time, I will accept that 
on behalf of the 200,000 dogs in San Francisco and the many more in San 
Mateo County, and I thank the gentleman for his support.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 106 Offered by Ms. Tsongas

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 106 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chair, 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 in this Act may 
     be used in contravention of section 302(a) of Public Law 94-
     579 (43 U.S.C. 1732(a)).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentlewoman

[[Page H4915]]

from Massachusetts (Ms. Tsongas) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Massachusetts.
  Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, many of our Nation's public lands, those 
lands which belong to all Americans, are managed under a multiple use 
mandate. This means that they are managed to support a wide variety of 
uses, including hunting, fishing, hiking, and other recreation 
activities, alongside responsible energy development, the preservation 
of historic and cultural resources, the conservation of some of our 
Nation's most iconic landscapes, and wildlife habitat protection.
  The resource management plans that were recently finalized by the 
Bureau of Land Management to protect the greater sage-grouse and the 
broader sagebrush sea landscape strike the appropriate balance between 
the many uses of our public lands. The plans, which were developed in 
close consultation with the States and which reflect an unprecedented 
collaboration among stakeholders, allow for the responsible resource 
development, recreation, and preservation of the habitat which the 
greater sage-grouse requires to survive and thrive.
  Without these plans, it is highly likely that the greater sage-grouse 
would need to be listed under the Endangered Species Act. However, 
language in the underlying bill blocks funds from being used to 
implement the resource management plans, upsetting the carefully 
crafted balance that is required under the multiple use mandate. This 
harmful provision could also put the many other species that depend on 
this landscape at risk, including elk, mule deer, and pronghorn 
antelope; and it would deprive hunters and other outdoor enthusiasts of 
opportunities to use their public lands and enjoy the benefits of 
renewable wildlife resources.
  This is why hunters and sportsmen across the West support the sage-
grouse conservation plans and strongly oppose any effort to block the 
plans from moving forward, including groups such as the Theodore 
Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, the Backcountry Hunters and 
Anglers, the Archery Trade Association, and the Dallas Safari Club, 
just to name a few. My amendment would allow the BLM management plans 
to go into effect if failing to implement the plan would impact the 
multiple use mandate and, thereby, deprive outdoor enthusiasts of their 
ability to use these Federal lands.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, which protects 
opportunities for sportsmen and sportswomen and other outdoor 
enthusiasts, who depend on our public lands.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, of course the Federal lands are managed 
according to current law, and current law requires that they be managed 
for sustained yield and multiple use. There is nothing in this bill 
that contradicts that--nothing. There is no purpose for this amendment, 
so I urge my colleagues to oppose it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act 
requires the Bureau of Land Management to manage the public lands it 
administers according to two principles, as we both agree: multiple use 
of the landscape and sustained yield of renewable resources.
  Multiple use and sustained yield mean balance. Opportunities to hunt, 
fish, and watch wildlife are just as important and have just as much 
legitimacy under the laws as activities like grazing, mining, logging, 
and drilling. Unfortunately, the balance has swung too far toward the 
second set of activities, resulting in significant damage to wildlife 
habitat and diminished uses and yields for people who wish to enjoy the 
outdoors.
  Updating and implementing resource management plans is critical to 
maintaining balance and complying with the law. In this case, it not 
only guarantees that those who wish to enjoy the great outdoors can do 
so, but, in complying with the multiple use mandate, it does all that 
is necessary to prevent the greater sage-grouse from being listed under 
the Endangered Species Act.
  This very balanced plan recognizes the needs and interests of all 
parties who seek to use these lands so as not only to protect the great 
sage-grouse, but to make sure our sports enthusiasts also have access 
to it. The failure to implement this plan could put all of those uses 
in danger.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Tsongas).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chair, 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 
Massachusetts will be postponed.


               Amendment No. 111 Offered by Mr. Chaffetz

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 111 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Chair, 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 12, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $1,500,000)''.
       Page 30, line 3, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $1,500,000)''.
       Page 73, line 3, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(decreased by $1,750,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah.

                              {time}  2320

  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Chairman, in a bipartisan effort with Ann 
Kirkpatrick, we are offering this amendment. It is an amendment on 
behalf of Native American schoolchildren dangerously rutted in flood-
prone dirt roads that cause Native American kids to miss school, on an 
average, 10 days a year. I have one of the pictures here of a whole 
series. You can take the whole seasons here and you can see what these 
bus routes are like.
  When it rains, when it snows--and it does in parts of Utah and 
Arizona--you look at the Navajo Nation and you are going to find that 
kids are missing 10 days a year on average because of roads like this.
  Now, the funding for the BIA to take care of these roads has not 
changed since 1988. We are asking for a modest shift of less than $2 
million to deal with this situation.
  I have a county in my district, a county that is larger than the 
State of New Jersey, and yet, the population there is less than 15,000 
people. That is a tremendous tax burden for them to try to maintain 
such massive roads. It is hard to imagine sometimes on the East Coast 
how massive some of these areas are, but they need a little maintenance 
money for these roads and for these schoolchildren.
  So I have joined with Ann Kirkpatrick in offering this amendment. I 
would encourage Members to vote for it. It is less than $2 million. It 
will make a huge difference on the Navajo Nation, in particular, where 
we desperately need to make sure that kids can get to school in a 
consistent manner. We have dealt with the funding for nearly 30 years 
at the same level. It is time to make that adjustment. I would 
encourage Members to vote in favor of this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I share the gentleman's legitimate concern 
for the condition of BIA roads, but reluctantly must oppose this 
amendment because it takes even more money from an already starved EPA.
  EPA's main operating account is already cut by $92 million in the 
bill. Amendments have cut an additional $116 million. Again, while I 
share the concern that the gentleman has, the fact is that the bill 
already provides $30 million for BIA road maintenance. This is $3.2 
million more than the budget request.

[[Page H4916]]

  So although road maintenance is critically important, I cannot 
support the offset. I oppose the amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Calvert), the chairman of the committee.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I certainly appreciate the gentleman's 
amendment. I have experience firsthand with Mrs. Kirkpatrick, as a 
matter of fact, and with Ms. McCollum. We were at the Navajo 
reservation about a year ago, and my back is still hurting from the 
road that we were on. It was quite an experience.
  So they need help. I think this is a very modest amount of money. I 
appreciate the support that our colleagues give to Indian Country. They 
certainly deserve it.
  I would encourage adoption of this amendment.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), the distinguished ranking member.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. 
Chaffetz), we agree that these roads need to be fixed. In fact, 
Chairman Simpson and I, just sitting on the bus, we did 500 steps. I 
had one brand of tracking equipment, and he had another. I won't 
mention the names here.
  We are not opposed to fixing these roads, but we just wanted to take 
an opportunity on this amendment to point out how much has already been 
cut from the Environmental Protection Agency. They have had $164 
million cut. There have been other cuts that have come through. At the 
same time, Members come to the floor and complain that they haven't 
done the delisting, and they haven't been out there, and they haven't 
checked this out, and they haven't done this, and they haven't done 
that. Well, we need to give them the tools in the toolbox.
  We know that this amendment is going to pass. We hope that the 
schoolchildren arrive to school safely. As a teacher, I want them there 
every day to be educated, but we really need to figure out a way to 
fund some of these other projects besides already taking out an already 
pared-down Environmental Protection Agency.
  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Chairman, I would simply say that I think you would 
find the mutual bipartisan approach to achieve the goal. I don't think 
anybody is in opposition to this.
  The reality is, in nearly 30 years, the funding level hasn't changed. 
It is very modest. It is less than $2 million.
  I hope people find it in their heart to let this pass. It makes a 
world of difference to people. We can debate about where to pull those 
funds. I have offered this amendment in a bipartisan way from this 
fund. It is the way it is structured, and I do hope it passes.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, again, I fully respect the gentleman's 
concern. Although he says this is a modest offset, that may be true, 
but we have one modest offset on top of another modest offset on top of 
another modest offset. Before you know it, the EPA is just starving and 
cannot do its mission.
  I oppose the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 113 Offered by Mr. Grayson

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 113 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. GRAYSON. 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 73, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $468,000)(increased by $468,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Grayson) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is nearly identical to an 
amendment that passed by voice vote last year. I hope we will agree on 
its passage again this year.
  Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GRAYSON. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman from Florida wants to cut 
it short, I will accept the amendment right now.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
  The amendment was agreed to.


               Amendment No. 114 Offered by Mr. Norcross

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 114 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. NORCROSS. 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 74, line 25, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $15,282,000) (increased by $15,282,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Norcross) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. NORCROSS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would designate an 
additional $50 million within the Superfund accounts specifically for 
the enforcement division.
  This amendment does not take money from other programs. Rather, it 
designates a portion of already allocated monies for enforcement. It is 
revenue neutral and would equal the amount the EPA said it needs to 
hold accountable those companies which have polluted the lakes, 
streams, and even the homes of my constituents and our constituents.
  As I mentioned yesterday, there are still well over 1,000 active 
Superfund sites across this great Nation. In my district alone and home 
to the author of the Superfund bill, there are over 13 sites that are 
still contaminated today.
  I want to tell you about just three of those sites, in particular, 
named for the company responsible for dumping lead and arsenic into the 
ground, streams, and the lakes. It is called the Sherwin-Williams 
Sites. These sites include Sherwin-Williams/Hilliard's Creek Site 
located in both Gibbsboro and Voorhees, the Route 561 Dump Site in 
Gibbsboro, and the United States Avenue Burn Site, which is in 
Gibbsboro.
  Early in the 1930s, Sherwin-Williams purchased a former paint and 
varnish manufacturing plant in Gibbsboro and expanded their operation 
throughout that facility. For 20 years, the company allowed these 
chemicals from their synthetic varnish to be disposed of in that area. 
The contamination happened not only at the manufacturing plant, but in 
two separate disposal sites, dump sites that they created. Just one of 
the Sherwin-Williams disposal methods included pumping sludge into 
holes in the ground around the property.
  These chemicals from the varnish seeped into the groundwater, 
contaminating not only that property, but properties and streams around 
the entire area.

                              {time}  2330

  The facility was closed in 1977, and Sherwin-Williams tried to pass 
the bag by selling the property to a developer in 1981. The soil in the 
groundwater beneath these sites is contaminated with chemicals, 
including lead and arsenic, which have devastating effects on both 
human health and children's development. After the devastating events 
in Flint, Michigan, I know we understand so many of the horrific 
effects of lead exposure, but I think it bears repeating what my 
constituents and Americans across the country are facing.
  Lead exposure can have serious long-term health consequences in 
adults and children. Even at low levels lead in children can cause IQ 
deficiencies, learning disabilities, impaired hearing, many of those 
things that we have heard about over the past few months. It also leads 
to problems in pregnant women and also harms fetuses. According to EPA, 
long-term exposure to high levels of arsenic can lead to skin lesions 
and a variety of cancers, including skin, bladder, and lung cancer.
  We must hold companies like Sherwin-Williams accountable for the 
havoc that they have caused in both

[[Page H4917]]

Gibbsboro and Voorhees. For almost 40 years, this ground has laid 
there. For the author of the Superfund bill, Jim Florio, this was one 
of the driving forces for writing this, and yet 40 years later it stays 
there, still not being addressed by the company that caused it. I urge 
my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Chaffetz). The gentleman from California is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, Jim Florio was a good friend of mine, a 
great guy.
  As I mentioned during the debate on the gentleman's previous 
Superfund amendment, I certainly appreciate the gentleman's support for 
robust funding for the Superfund program, particularly the cleanup 
program. I agree, we need to make progress to address the backlog of 
1,300 sites, as the gentleman mentioned, on the national priorities 
list, and the bill proposes to do so with the $40.1 million increase 
for cleanup work.
  However, the gentleman's amendment proposes to increase EPA's 
enforcement budget by $15.2 million, offset by other reductions within 
the Superfund account. Presumably, those reductions would come at the 
expense of the cleanup program. So I reluctantly oppose the amendment 
and urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' Certainly, I sympathize with 
what the gentleman is trying to do, but we just don't agree to the 
offset. I urge opposition to the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NORCROSS. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that. Jim Florio's vision, 
unfortunately, caused by this site, just being one of many in New 
Jersey and in this site, but the fact of the matter is we have to hold 
accountable those companies that are still active, that are still 
making profits today while the cause that they had in these two 
particular sites still go unaddressed. Forty years, the company is 
still making money, still not being held accountable. This is one way 
we can start holding them accountable.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Again, I oppose the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Norcross).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. NORCROSS. 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 New Jersey 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 116 Offered by Mr. Polis

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 116 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. POLIS. 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 91, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 95, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 96, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment along with my 
colleagues Mr. Peter King of New York and Mr. Raul Ruiz of California. 
The amendment is small, but its impact is large and very important to 
our three districts and many others across the country that have rural 
towns with volunteer fire departments.
  All this amendment does is increase funding for the Volunteer Fire 
Assistance grant program from $13 million to $15 million. VFA funds are 
awarded to volunteer fire departments that protect small communities of 
less than 10,000 people and help them prepare to respond to wildfires.
  Sadly, I have a perfect example of this need in my district right 
now. The small town of Nederland in Boulder County, Colorado, is 
battling the Cold Springs forest fire, with the fire crews largely made 
up of volunteers, initially. As just one example, Charlie Schmidtmann, 
who is a captain with the Nederland Fire Protection District, and 
Bretlyn Schmidtmann, who is an ER nurse, a paramedic, and volunteer 
firefighter already lost their home to the Cold Springs fire, even as 
they continue to work to save neighbors' homes. It is this sort of 
heroic work that we need to support through the funding that they need 
so they have the tools that they need to fight fires swiftly and 
effectively.
  For some reason, we still don't treat fires the way we treat other 
natural disasters. Wildfires are underfunded when it comes to 
mitigation, prevention, and suppression. Fires often occur in rural 
communities with smaller populations.
  The Volunteer Fire Assistance program is critical to moving the 
needle on wildfire management, preventing large wildfires from getting 
out of hand while they are still small. Though this grant program is 
small, its impact is incredible. The Volunteer Fire Assistance program 
provides matching funds to volunteer fire departments protecting 
communities with 10,000 or fewer residents.
  Volunteer fire departments provide nearly 80 percent of the initial 
attack on wildfires across the United States, but, unfortunately, these 
volunteer fire departments frequently lack significant financial 
resources. $2 million may not sound like a lot in this town, but it 
makes an enormous difference for our volunteer fire departments across 
the country.
  In recent years, the threat of wildland fires has increased steadily 
across the country. The 10-year average cost to the Federal Government 
of suppressing wildland fires continues to go up; but instead of 
funding communities that might be able to suppress the fires in the 
initial phase, we have been underfunding that very program that can 
save taxpayer money by preventing large forest fires.
  I ask for your support for this amendment, which has been endorsed by 
the National Association of State Foresters and International 
Association of Fire Chiefs, in adding $2 million to this program.
  Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. POLIS. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CALVERT. This is a good amendment. We are willing to accept the 
amendment.
  Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentleman for accepting this important 
amendment on behalf of the many small towns and volunteer fire 
departments across the United States.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 119 Offered by Mr. Gosar

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 119 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. GOSAR. 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 the Act may 
     be used to implement, administer, or enforce the modification 
     to boating restrictions contained in the news release issued 
     by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service entitled 
     ``Minor Modification to Boating Restrictions at Havasu 
     Wildlife Refuge'' and dated May 20, 2015.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Gosar) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer a commonsense, 
bipartisan amendment. The Gosar-Sinema-Cook-Kirkpatrick-Amodei-Buck-
Cramer-Duncan-Franks-Jones-McClintock-Schweikert-Zinke-Salmon-Heck 
amendment will assist with keeping Lake Havasu open for all users.

[[Page H4918]]

  On May 20, 2015, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued new 
motorized boating restrictions that arbitrarily expanded a no-wake zone 
on Lake Havasu, a renowned fishing and boating destination on the 
Colorado River popular with visitors from Arizona, California, Nevada, 
and around the world. These arbitrary wake restrictions effectively 
prohibited tubing, waterskiing, and wakeboarding in an area utilized by 
recreational enthusiasts for decades. This action was taken behind 
closed doors with no advance notice and without opportunity for public 
comment.
  These new mandates were announced and implemented just 2 days before 
Memorial Day weekend, an economically vital weekend, as tourists spend 
more than $200 million annually in the area and support 4,000 full-time 
jobs. Further, 75 percent of tourists are interested in waterskiing and 
recreational boating activities while visiting Havasu.
  The Service has attempted to justify the May 2015 ``temporary 
restrictions'' by stating that they are necessary to address safety 
concerns. The Arizona Game and Fish Department recently submitted 
formal comments refuting this claim, stating there were only four 
incidents in the last 3 years in the area--three groundings and one 
swamping.
  The Department went on to state: ``The temporary restriction imposed 
in May 2015 . . . includes a safe, traditional, very popular 
waterskiing and wakeboarding flat-area . . . [The Service] does not 
adequately justify this additional restriction and that the impacts to 
the recreational area would be significant . . . The reported events do 
not support the existence of a safety concern.''

                              {time}  2340

  On April 12, 2016, the Service announced a draft recreational boating 
compatibility determination and the agency's intent to pursue even more 
boating restrictions on Lake Havasu. Due to significant opposition, 
which included more 1,000 concerned citizens showing up at a public 
meeting, the Service suspended the agency's pursuit of the April 12 
proposed restrictions.
  While this action was welcomed, the Service still has not reopened 
the area closed on May 20, 2015, that started this very controversy. 
These temporary restrictions have now been in effect more than a year.
  In addition to being arbitrary, unwise, and unsafe, the action by the 
Fish and Wildlife Service was also unlawful. The agency violated the 
law by not going through the regular NEPA process and soliciting public 
comment from stakeholders.
  Such irresponsible action by Federal bureaucrats should alarm not 
only the visitors to Lake Havasu, but Americans who value the rule of 
law and a government accountable to the people it serves.
  This bipartisan amendment is endorsed by more than 20 local and 
national organizations, including Americans for Limited Government, the 
Arizona Game and Fish Department, Concerned Citizens for America 
Arizona Chapter, the Lake Havasu Area Chamber of Commerce, the Yuma 
County Chamber of Commerce, New Mexico Federal Lands Council, and many, 
many more.
  My amendment is about government accountability. It simply prohibits 
a press release from closing an area on Lake Havasu that has been 
utilized by recreational enthusiasts for decades. The Service should 
solicit public comments and go through the normal scoping process 
before making major changes that impact users on Lake Havasu.
  I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. I thank the chairman 
and the ranking member for their time and for their goodwill on this 
bill.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, just so I 
can make a comment and share a concern.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Minnesota 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. I am from a water State. I am from Minnesota. And I 
know that sometimes boating becomes an issue where it hasn't been an 
issue before because of popularity and the number of people coming to 
an area.
  So sometimes our State DNR or sometimes, in our State, it is actually 
municipalities that oversee some of the waterways, or we have a park 
board that oversees it. Sometimes we have to go back and we have to 
reexamine what is going on because of the way that something has just 
caught on with people coming. And the more people that are in an area 
in water, whether it is swimming, boating, sailing, fishing, sometimes 
it becomes that, all of a sudden, this resource where there was plenty 
of room and opportunity for everybody to do what they wanted to do, now 
we finding people are on top of each other. And then you add the fact 
that this is a body of water--and I have pictures up here--where you 
also have wildlife habitat.
  So I hear clearly what you are saying, that it doesn't appear that 
the people in the area who have recreated in this wildlife refuge felt 
they were given much advanced notice or much input on in this.
  Here is the concern that I have about us taking a vote here on this. 
I think you raise legitimate concerns. I think we need to make sure 
that it is addressed. But I don't want to start having every refuge 
start being managed by Members of Congress.
  I think you show that you have a lot of people in support of what you 
are doing. It is bipartisan in nature. The way that it appears that the 
Fish and Wildlife Service handled it wasn't in an open process where 
people either understood what they were doing or could comment on what 
they are doing. But when we come to the floor here and legislate this, 
I think it sets kind of a bad precedent.
  So the question I have to the gentleman: Do you really feel you need 
to pass an amendment to legislate this? I am willing to work with you 
on this. Is there a way that we can get the achieved goal and objective 
that you are seeking and making sure visitors' safety and recreational 
use is preserved but preserved in a way that is safe and enjoyable for 
everyone? A part of this is that there is multiple use with more people 
coming in a confined area.
  I understand your frustration. That is why you are here on the floor. 
But I am wondering if there is a better way you can accomplish the 
goal.
  I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. GOSAR. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  The issue is very interesting, because we actually issued a FOIA 
request for emails. This was done egregiously by two people 
complaining.
  If you look at the map, what ends up happening by closing this area 
where families and young kids learn how to water-ski, it forces them 
into the main channel of the Lake Havasu area, where boats go 50 to 70 
to 75 miles an hour. People are going to get hurt.
  So my point is if the Fish and Wildlife Service doesn't want us to 
continue to do this, then do their job right. Follow the law. That is 
the key here.
  The Acting CHAIR. Members are reminded to address their remarks to 
the Chair.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Reclaiming my time, and this is why I think it becomes 
a little cumbersome. When you have people swimming and fishing and 
water-skiing all in the same area, there is more and more pressure on 
it. So I just rose in opposition to have a discussion to understand 
this issue better.
  With that, I withdraw my opposition to this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the dialogue back and forth. Once 
again, let's follow the rule of law. If the agency doesn't want to have 
incidents like this and have their hands slapped publicly, then do 
their job and do it right and do it well. This is about safety, but it 
is in the reverse fashion.
  With that, I appreciate the work of the gentlewoman and the chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
  The amendment was agreed to.


            Amendment No. 120 Offered by Mr. Weber of Texas

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 120 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. WEBER of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

[[Page H4919]]

  The text of the amendment is as follows:

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


                       limitation on use of funds

       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used in contravention of section 321(a) of the Clean Air 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 7621(a)).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Weber) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. WEBER of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer a very simple and 
commonsense amendment to H.R. 5538, the Department of the Interior and 
EPA appropriations bill.
  This amendment passed by a voice vote last year, and I hope all 
Members can support it again today--or should I say tonight.
  America's job creators have faced an onslaught of regulations from 
the EPA, Mr. Chairman, even as Congress has consistently reduced the 
Agency's budget year after year. The EPA has proposed lower national 
ozone standards, regulations on new and existing power plants, 
regulations on waters of the United States, just to name a few.
  All of these regulations are based on questionable scientific data 
and will lead to higher energy prices for hardworking families and 
small businesses and, without a doubt, will negatively impact American 
jobs.
  The Agency has cited its authority under the Clean Air Act as the 
basis for many of its regulatory actions. However, when it comes to 
evaluating how its regulations impact American jobs, the Agency has 
failed to follow the law.
  Section 321(a) of the Clean Air Act clearly states: ``The 
Administrator shall conduct continuing evaluations of potential loss of 
shifts of employment . . . including, where appropriate, investigating 
threatened plant closures or reductions in employment allegedly 
resulting from such administration or enforcement.''
  Mr. Chairman, the EPA is even now involved in ongoing litigation for 
its failure to comply with this provision, and Congress has repeatedly 
heard testimony reinforcing EPA's failure to comply with section 
321(a).
  In response to questions for the record during her Senate 
confirmation hearing, Administrator McCarthy said that the ``EPA has 
not interpreted section 321(a) to require EPA to conduct employment 
investigations in taking regulatory actions.''

                              {time}  1150

  Mr. Chairman, Congress put this provision into the Clean Air Act for 
a reason: to provide a necessary check on the regulatory powers of 
unelected bureaucrats at the EPA. In response to the EPA's refusal to 
follow the law, Congress must act to ensure that the true impact of 
regulations on jobs are disclosed to inform the public and Members of 
Congress.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I was trying to figure out exactly what 
this amendment does. So, under the Clean Air Act, the EPA is required 
to evaluate potential loss or shifts of employment as a result of air 
pollution regulation. No one is disputing that requirement.
  So this would tell the EPA that they are not allowed to spend any 
funds in the course of not doing any analysis. It is just illogical to 
prohibit the agency from spending money not to do something, but it is 
also pointless.
  The employment impact analyses are already required under the Clean 
Air Act. The agency regularly undertakes them as part of rulemaking.
  Mr. Chairman, why I look baffled is this amendment is impractical, 
and it is unnecessary. So it appears to me it is just another attempt 
to come to the floor and undermine the EPA's efforts to make sure that 
they are able to do their job.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WEBER of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's 
comments. She actually raised a good argument for the amendment. I 
mean, we are telling the EPA that they need to do their job. No money 
can be spent in contravention of section 321(a). They can't go after a 
company, for example, if they haven't done the job analysis, and that 
is exactly what this amendment says.
  So I simply want to reiterate what I said. The law says the 
administrator shall conduct continuing evaluations of potential loss of 
shifts employment. I don't understand what the administrator does not 
understand about ``shall.''
  So it is a commonsense amendment. It actually reins in the EPA and 
keeps them from destroying more jobs as they seem wont--have the 
habit--to do.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Weber).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 122 Offered by Mr. Gallego

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 122 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. GALLEGO. 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 issue a grazing permit or lease in contravention 
     of section 4110.1 or 4130.1-1(b) of title 43, Code of Federal 
     Regulations.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Gallego) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment that will 
reaffirm Congress' support for the enforcement of grazing fees on 
public lands.
  Grazing on public lands is a privilege, not a right. Ranchers who use 
these lands should abide by the law and pay their fair share. My 
amendment simply confirms that grazing permits or leases should not be 
issued to anyone who does not comply with BLM regulations.
  Mr. Chairman, revenues from grazing fees go toward the management, 
maintenance, and improvement of public range land. The mass majority of 
ranchers are upstanding, responsible Americans. They understand the 
importance of these efforts and pay their fees on time.
  But some ranchers are outright refusing to pay their grazing fees. 
That is completely unacceptable.
  To be clear, my amendment does not penalize people for forgetting to 
repair a fence or neglecting to make a payment once or twice. Instead, 
this amendment will ensure that egregious violations of grazing 
regulations are not financed by the American taxpayer.
  One particular rancher, who is well known to the media, continues to 
be more than $1 million in arrears. He has ignored the executive and 
judicial branches of our government, expanding his herds further on to 
Federal lands.
  While continuing to violate the law, he put the lives of local and 
Federal officials at stake during a dangerous standoff, for which he 
was indicted by a grand jury on charges including assaulting and 
threatening Federal officers. We are only now beginning to see the full 
extent of the damage he has caused to public lands as a result of this 
confrontation and his unauthorized grazing.
  Mr. Chairman, my friends on the other side of the aisle talk a lot 
about upholding the law, yet they responded with silence, or even 
support, when this particular rancher and others brazenly broke our 
laws and put the lives of BLM officers at risk in an armed standoff.
  Mr. Chairman, I can't help but notice a double standard in 
Republicans' support for ranchers who refuse to pay their fair share 
and Republican criticism of Americans who refuse to accept injustice in 
their communities.
  This amendment offers my Republican friends the opportunity to stand 
up against those who have broken our laws with impunity. It sends a 
clear signal that egregious violations of grazing regulations will not 
be financed by the American taxpayer, and

[[Page H4920]]

it projects a clear message of support to the BLM officers who 
demonstrated discretion and restraint in the handling of the ranchers' 
protests.
  Mr. Chairman, let's pass this amendment and uphold the basic 
principle that our laws should be applied fairly to everyone who lives 
in this country and uses its public lands.
  Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GALLEGO. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CALVERT. I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I certainly agree 
with the gentleman that permit holders should meet all their existing 
requirements in order to renew their permits, and I would accept this 
amendment.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gallego).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will 
be postponed.


                Amendment No. 123 Offered by Mr. Grayson

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 123 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chair, 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 enter into a contract with any offeror or any of 
     its principals if the offeror certifies, as required by 
     Federal Acquisition Regulation, that the offeror or any of 
     its principals--
       (1) within a three-year period preceding this offer has 
     been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against it 
     for: commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection 
     with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public 
     (Federal, State, or local) contract or subcontract; violation 
     of Federal or State antitrust statutes relating to the 
     submission of offers; or commission of embezzlement, theft, 
     forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, 
     making false statements, tax evasion, violating Federal 
     criminal tax laws, or receiving stolen property;
       (2) are presently indicted for, or otherwise criminally or 
     civilly charged by a governmental entity with, commission of 
     any of the offenses enumerated above in paragraph (1); or
       (3) within a three-year period preceding this offer, has 
     been notified of any delinquent Federal taxes in an amount 
     that exceeds $3,000 for which the liability remains 
     unsatisfied.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Grayson) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is identical to other 
amendments that have been inserted by voice vote into every 
appropriations bill considered under an open rule under the 113th and 
114th Congresses and, in the last few weeks, under a structural rule. 
If it is accepted, I will not ask for a recorded vote.
  Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GRAYSON. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I like the gentleman's amendment. Criminals 
shouldn't get contracts. I accept the amendment.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 130 Offered by Mr. Polis

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 130 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. POLIS. 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 by the Bureau of Land Management to study or test the 
     feasibility of, or implement, any sterilization program for 
     wild horse and burro management with surgical sterilization.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, wild free-roaming horses and burros are a 
living symbol of the historic and pioneer spirit of the West, like in 
my home State of Colorado.

                              {time}  0000

  My amendment will help to prevent the Bureau of Land Management from 
destroying this iconic symbol using funds allocated in this bill to be 
used for surgical sterilization of horses.
  What distinguishes America's wild horses from their domestic 
counterparts is their natural behaviors and their complex social 
organizations. Surgical sterilization will take the wild out of wild 
horses by removing the horse's ability to utilize the reproductive 
organs that drive their natural behavior and changing their hormonal 
structure. It turns them into little more than pasture horses, 
destroying their complex social organizations and inalterably changing 
the free-roaming behaviors that Congress sought to protect when we 
passed the Wild and Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971.
  The way surgical sterilization of our horses is conducted under the 
guise of population control is simply cruel. A 2013 National Academy of 
Sciences study report identifies many strategies for fertility control 
and supports the use of PZP, or immunocontraception, which has been 
underutilized.
  Rather than using taxpayer funds and do expensive roundups and 
expensive operations, we have effective dart-delivered birth control 
that is a fraction of the cost and is more humane and preserves the 
wild character of the herds. The National Academy of Sciences notes 
that sterilization is the least recommended of the approaches. There is 
not good data, it is untested in wild horses, and the risks associated 
are simply unnecessary.
  BLM noted that fertility control is viable if used appropriately. It 
is important to maintain the population size of these herds. Of course, 
we can agree that some form of fertility control is needed.
  Sterilization affects both male and female wild horses. In both cases 
experts have flat out said they are bad ideas. Ovariectomies, tubal 
ligations, and laser ablation are planned techniques to be used on wild 
horse mares. Two of the three techniques have never been performed on 
horses, let alone wild mares and fillies.
  The National Academy of Sciences, once again, stated clearly that 
castrating stallions will cause loss of testosterone and consequential 
reduction in or complete loss of male type of behaviors necessary for 
maintenance of social organization, band integrity, and expression of a 
natural behavior repertoire. Scientists believe this mass sterilization 
program could essentially lead to the end of wild horses and burros in 
the West.
  Luckily, BLM does have a better and cheaper tool. The PZP birth 
control vaccine is an example. It is deliverable by a remote dart. It 
is relatively cheap--$25 a dose. The surgical interventions cost far 
more.
  Numerous studies have demonstrated the cost effectiveness and 
efficacy of this vaccine in managing wild horse populations. But 
instead of expanding its use, the BLM has incorrectly reduced it over 
the last several years. Contraception alternatives have been available 
since the 1980s. But BLM, unfortunately, continues to ignore this 
approach despite the National Academy of Sciences report indicating 
these vaccines are the most promising fertility control methods to help 
limit the population growth for wild horses and burros.
  Examples of successful use of PZP has been noted in the McCullough 
Peak herds in Wyoming and Assateague herds in Virginia and Maryland.
  Look, these kinds of procedures destroy the wild nature of horses. 
They are a waste of taxpayer money, and they are inhumane. The National 
Academy of Sciences advised against the surgical removal of ovaries, 
warning

[[Page H4921]]

the possibility that ovariectomies may be followed by prolonged 
bleeding or infection makes it inadvisable for field application.
  The final point I want to make is that this proposal by BLM has 
raised overwhelming opposition by the general public for whom our wild 
horses and burros are very popular. Over 20,000 citizens submitted 
comments in opposition to this plan. The public wants its wild horses 
protected, and, of course, we need to control the population, but we 
should not surgically mutilate our wild horses.
  I would like to ask for the ranking member and chairman to work with 
me to make sure the BLM spends our taxpayer money more wisely and 
protects the iconic symbol of the American West.
  Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. POLIS. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman yielding to me. 
I do so for the purpose of speaking to this problem we have.
  I certainly thank my colleague from Colorado for his willingness to 
work with the subcommittee in agreeing to withdraw the amendment later 
in this discussion. I fully understand his concerns regarding the 
Bureau of Land Management's research program for wild horses and 
burros.
  I value wild horses and burros. They are certainly, as you mentioned, 
an iconic part of our history in the West. But we have a problem, and I 
think we can agree to that. Right now we are spending $80 million a 
year.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I reserve the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, 
obviously not to speak in opposition, but to speak for the purpose of 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, right now we are spending $80 million a 
year in this appropriation bill. It will double to $160 million in 4 
years to store horses that we are presently doing. Also, as the 
gentleman is aware, we are concerned not just about the health of the 
herds--some of these herds are in very poor health--but also about the 
health of the range. Some areas are way overutilized.
  So we need to work with the gentleman to find out a way to deal with 
this problem because we just can't continue to ignore this issue. It is 
a growing problem.
  I was just over in Death Valley. We have in some cases irreversible 
environmental damage that is being done by wild burros in Death Valley. 
So I look forward to working with the gentleman to resolve this 
problem.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his commitment to 
work with us protecting wild horses.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Colorado?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.
  The Chair understands that amendment No. 131 will not be offered.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Calvert) having assumed the chair, Mr. Chaffetz, 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. 5538) 
making appropriations for the Department of the Interior, environment, 
and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2017, and 
for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________