[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 25204-25215]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                     EXPORT ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 1999

  The Committee resumed its sitting.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Menendez).


Amendment Offered by Mr. Menendez to the Amendment No. 10, as Modified, 
                          offered by Mr. Terry

  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment to the amendment, as 
modified.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Menendez to Amendment No. 10, as 
     modified, offered by Mr. Terry: Strike lines 1 through 18 and 
     insert the following:

     ``SEC. 5. REVIEW OF CLAIMS PROCESSING FOR OPIC.

       ``The General Accounting Office is requested to provide a 
     report not later than 6 months after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act to the Committee on International 
     Relations of the House of Representatives and the Committee 
     on Foreign Relations of the Senate, which reviews the claims 
     activity of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. The 
     report shall include--
       ``(1) an analysis of claims paid, settled and denied by 
     OPIC;
       ``(2) the number of claims determinations made by OPIC 
     which are challenged in arbitration;
       ``(3) the number of OPIC's claims denials which are 
     reversed in arbitration;
       ``(4) the number of claims which are withdrawn; and
       ``(5) recommendations for ways in which the interests of 
     OPIC insureds and the public could be better served by OPIC's 
     claims procedures.''

  Mr. MENENDEZ (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
New Jersey?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, what we hope to do through this amendment 
is to try to reach the gentleman's concern, but at the same time, 
create the operational capacity for OPIC to do what it does so well. 
What we offer here is a review of claims processing for OPIC. Having 
the General Accounting Office providing a report not later than 6 
months after the day of the enactment of this law to both the Committee 
on International Relations and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 
to review the claims activity of OPIC which includes an analysis of the 
claims paid, settled, and denied; the number of claims determination 
made by OPIC which are challenged in arbitration; the number of OPIC's 
claim denials which are reversed in arbitration; the number of claims 
which are withdrawn; and recommendations for ways in which the 
interests of OPIC's insured and the public could be better served by 
OPIC's claims procedures.
  To the extent that OPIC has a great record and it can be improved 
upon, this gives us the wherewithal to do it without creating the 
constraint that the gentleman's amendment would.
  Mr. Chairman, OPIC's standard contracts presently allow OPIC a 
reasonable time to make a decision after receipt of a completed 
application, one that establishes the insured's right to be compensated 
in the amount claimed.
  Now, when we have this political risk insurance, the fact of the 
matter is it raises complex issues: issues of fact, contract 
interpretation, foreign law, international law and accounting. They 
cannot be resolved over the phone as we might do if we had an 
automobile accident or a homeowner's claim and try to deal with our 
insurance company. They are extremely complex.
  Therefore, the time frame that the gentleman wants, while his goal is 
worthy, ultimately really hamstrings OPIC in a way that is detrimental 
to that small businessperson, as well as to the taxpayers, by the 
enforcement of a mechanism that makes them pay interest by the time 
that the time frame is exhausted, and that time frame is rather short, 
150 days, total. That is a very short time frame.
  OPIC's decisions on claims become public. They are relied upon as a 
way and as a means and as a guide to looking at OPIC contracts and are 
cited in broader discussions of international investment law. Reaching 
the right bottom line result is simply not enough. OPIC's rationale has 
to be properly articulated, because if not, others will seek to pursue 
those future actions if we do not articulate the right set of reasons, 
and that can be more costly to us.
  So any interactive process takes time. If OPIC has to reach final 
decisions within a fixed deadline, more claims will be denied and in 
that process of denial will start a series of circumstances that we are 
going to hurt the investor, we are going to impinge upon the agency, we 
are going to start charging interest after that 150 days; and that 
ultimately is going to create a problem for us in terms of the 
taxpayers of this country.
  I think, while the gentleman's intention is well-meaning, his effort 
as to how he achieves that is both problematic for the agency, 
problematic for the entities to be insured, problematic for the 
taxpayers. So I urge the adoption of my amendment to the Terry 
amendment.

                              {time}  1530

  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to be clear on what this amendment 
does. It is, in essence, a substitute amendment to mine. It statutorily 
incorporates the status quo. It basically says that OPIC has 6 months 
next to never to resolve claims.
  That is no improvement. There are examples where OPIC has drug their 
feet on claims for a variety of different reasons, but the fact that 
they have taken substantial time to resolve claims is unrefuted.
  The issue then is if they are going to act like a private insurance 
company, they have to treat claims with good faith. If we review 
insurance laws of every State, we will see provisions that outline how 
insurance companies have to act in good faith. One of those provisions 
in every State is that they have to handle claims expeditiously. If 
they do not, the remedy is usually pre-judgment interest.
  This is what my amendment does, is simply put into the system some 
accountability. That accountability is if they are going to drag their 
feet on claims, on valid claims, then after 150 days they should have 
to pay interest on the amount of that claim.
  The world does not operate in a vacuum. If Indonesia takes over a 
power plant and kicks out the U.S. citizen that built that and 
threatens to jail them if they return, that is expropriation. OPIC 
knows when that happens. Now, the applicant has to document those 
activities, and will take the time to properly put their case together 
before they submit that.
  It is reasonable, then, because OPIC, if they are diligent at all, 
should already know what is going on, for them to be able to review 
that within a certain short period of time. If additional information 
is necessary, as is outlined in mine, and that request is reasonable, 
then they should be afforded an extra 60 days, for a total of 150 days.
  My amendment is reasonable. The substitute amendment offered by the

[[Page 25205]]

gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) guts mine entirely, and 
basically, as I said, incorporates the status quo.
  A couple of points raised; one, that OPIC resolves 94 percent of the 
claims. I am sure under the current leadership that that will not 
change. What may change, though, is another category of the timeliness 
of those resolutions.
  That is what we are requesting, is simply that OPIC have a set time 
frame to resolve those claims. I am sure they will act expeditiously 
under the current leadership.
  The fact that they want to go after, for example, Indonesia for 
reimbursement, they should not hold up a claim until they get some 
commitments for reimbursement. In the private sector, that is bad 
faith. Surely they should have the right.
  This amendment in no way quashes or harms or prevents their 
opportunity to go after a country that has expropriated an asset at 
all. All this simply does is say, for the victim of that expropriation, 
that they have to handle that claim in a timely manner.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge the defeat of the substitute amendment, and 
again request passage of my amendment.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number 
of words.
  Mr. Chairman, so far today we have not had any evidence on the floor 
of this Chamber that the people associated with OPIC are operating in 
bad faith. I have not heard that. My experience and the record before 
me, at least to this point, indicates that people are trying to do 
their best under difficult circumstances.
  What our colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey, pointed out is 
that when we are operating in an area that is chaotic, in an area where 
we have multiple interests that we are trying to advance as a 
government, where the parties involved have entered into a contractual 
obligation under which they get the risk insurance, that we have a 
framework that is established.
  This is a decision that is going to guide what the agency does in 
this case and in others that may be in fact similar. They are relied 
upon in areas of international law and in terms of people entering into 
other agreements with us to promote the objectives of this program.
  The people who manage OPIC have every reason to do so in an 
expeditious and thoughtful manner. They are in the business of 
promoting the interests of American business in risky environments. 
That is why they are there. They have done a stellar job since 1971 of 
doing that.
  They are caught in a situation in many cases where they are trying to 
find out what the true facts are and then lay the groundwork; not just 
to put the money back into the hands of maybe the person who has the 
risk insurance or the corporation, but then they also have to lay the 
foundation to get the money back.
  The recovery rate, as the gentleman from New Jersey pointed out, is 
in excess of 90 percent. Ninety-three percent I believe is the number 
he recited. That is because a thoughtful and careful job is done. Many 
times it is an interactive process. Where we have some of the smaller 
businesses that are involved, maybe they do not have as much activity 
overseas, they do not have as much presence, it takes time for them to 
assemble their material, and this goes back and forth between OPIC and 
the insured.
  Think for a moment what is going to happen if in fact we are going to 
change the contracts and the operation, where all of a sudden we are 
going to have an arbitrary time limit that kicks in and interest is 
going to be paid.
  Two things are going to happen. One, I agree with the gentleman from 
New Jersey, the inclination, because they have to run as a business, 
they have to be accountable, the inclination is going to be to reject 
and deny more claims. That is common sense in terms of how the business 
operates.
  To the extent that that does not occur and we end up paying out a lot 
of money, that means there are going to be fewer loans that are going 
to be granted, or it is going to be that maybe for the first time it 
will actually require that we are invading some of these reserves and 
it is not going to be surplusing money.
  I would strongly suggest that the amendment that has been offered by 
the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) is undermining the notion of 
this being an entrepreneurial insurance-oriented approach that gives 
maximum flexibility to the agency to try and balance the interests to 
the taxpayer and to the client, according to the contracts that they 
enter into.
  I suggest that it is inappropriate for us to engage in 
micromanagement on this floor with arbitrary time limits that are going 
to get in the way of laying the foundation. Ultimately, we want to be 
successful. We want the Indonesian government to cough up money to 
cover this, and to be able to keep the taxpayer whole and get money 
back to an aggrieved party.
  I strongly urge that we adopt the amendment of the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and reject the underlying amendment.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, the point that the gentleman made is an 
important one. When we deny claims, when OPIC is forced by this new set 
of circumstances to deny claims, what happens to the claimant, the 
American company that the gentleman is concerned about? Now their only 
course is to litigate, which is more costly, more time-consuming, than 
to work with OPIC in trying to reach a conclusion.
  The bottom line, Mr. Chairman, is that, number one, the denial of 
claims because of the time constraints causes a set of circumstances 
that is even worse for the claimant, and the claimant happens to be an 
American entity.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). The time of the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) has expired.
  (By unanimous consent, Mr. Blumenauer was allowed to proceed for 2 
additional minutes.)
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, secondly, if the gentleman's amendment 
would give flexibility to the company to engage with OPIC and extend 
the time frame that the gentleman suggested, then it might be more 
reasonable, because OPIC would not be forced to make a determination, 
the company would not be forced to pursue its interests in a limited 
time frame in which it might not make its best case, and everybody 
would be better served.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
  Mr. TERRY. To answer the gentleman's question, Mr. Chairman, on 
specifically what happens next, the issue is yes, then they can go to 
arbitration.
  There are specific examples in existence where OPIC has not resolved 
the claim in a timely manner. It has drug on for months. If OPIC would 
have either accepted or denied their claim, let us say in a denial, 
probably in the time frame that OPIC has sat on the claim they could 
have had a determination from the arbitration board in the 
international arena.
  In fact, in the incident in Indonesia when they expropriated the 
power company, there was already an arbitration of whether or not they 
had seized those assets. In an international arbitration court of 
three, it was a three-zero decision that the country had acted in a way 
to expropriate.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I think it is extremely significant that the gentleman 
from Alabama (Mr. Callahan) supports the original Terry amendment, as 
modified, or not as modified by the amendment of the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Menendez), but the language of the Terry amendment with the 
change of the two words that appear at the desk.
  I think that is extremely significant, because the gentleman from 
Alabama

[[Page 25206]]

has been a supporter of OPIC for years. He is very conservative, he is 
very cautious. He watches the taxpayers' dollars. For him to come out 
in favor of this amendment to me is quite compelling.
  But I would like to contrast the Menendez amendment. Really, that 
should be supplemental to that of the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. 
Terry). He simply says, let us have a time frame. Granted, the language 
is not the most artful. It could obviously be cleaned up in conference. 
But it simply says we should reach a point with all the litigation and 
all the arbitration that goes on that after a certain point, the person 
who gets paid his judgment or award is entitled to interest from a 
certain date on.
  There is nothing like prejudgment interest that moves the litigants 
to get through. It is a tremendous incentive, especially when we are 
talking about what could be tens of millions of dollars that are at 
stake. And why not so? If a person's factory is expropriated, that 
person loses everything. They lose the investment, and many times they 
still have to pay the bank interest on the investment that he or she 
made overseas. So the American manufacturer is still paying the bank 
interest.
  What does this say? This says the purpose of this insurance is to 
make the American manufacturer whole. That is the purpose of insurance. 
That is what the Terry amendment does.
  The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) has a great amendment, 
if it were on its own. It calls for a study. Around this place, if we 
do not know what to do, we call for a study. This calls for a study 
which says within 6 months we want an analysis of all the outstanding 
claims and all things going on with reference thereto, et cetera, et 
cetera.
  I would suggest that my good friend, the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Menendez) really withdraw his amendment, perfecting amendment to 
that the amendment of the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry), and 
reintroduce it as a stand-alone, and I would be the first one to jump 
up and say, this is really exciting.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MANZULLO. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois for 
yielding.
  Frankly, the gentleman raised some of the points I wanted to when the 
gentleman yielded, and I had an opportunity to tell what the process 
was and how. When OPIC does not act in a timely manner, they also shut 
the door to those other remedies that are available. When they sit on a 
claim, and they have, and I am sorry that we do not get the 
opportunity, like in a court of law, to call witnesses to produce 
evidence, but if we can get some hearings on the way OPIC has acted on 
a certain amount of claims, especially the Indonesian claims, we will 
see that, for whatever reason, and I am not saying that they are bad 
faith reasons, but without question, they have admitted that they have 
had all the facts of what happened in Indonesia for months, and in a 
meeting last week, when they said that they would have a decision 
months ago, and when asked why they have not, they said, yes, we have 
all of the facts, but the lawyers have not made their decisions yet.
  Well, when I was in the private practice of law, that would be 
frequently the answer of the insurance companies that were ultimately 
responsible: We know all of the facts, we have done the investigation, 
we just have not made our decision yet. This simply says, you have all 
the facts. Make your decision. Quit using excuses to delay it.
  If that is an admirable policy, then what we need to do is to put 
some teeth into it. I think just a simple private sector remedy of 
prejudgment interest is probably the easiest solution. The gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo) is exactly right, it is a simple solution 
that incentivizes both parties to move in a timely manner. That is the 
whole purpose of this amendment.

                              {time}  1545

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentlemen from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) to 
the amendment, as modified, offered by the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. 
Terry).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 327, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Menendez) to the amendment, as modified, offered by the gentleman 
from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Terry

  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 11 offered by Mr. Terry:
       Page 6, add the following after line 25, and redesignate 
     succeeding sections, and references thereto, accordingly:

     SEC 5. RESTRICTION ON CONTACTS RELATING TO OPIC CLAIMS 
                   SETTLEMENTS.

       (a) Publication of Federal Agency Interventions.--Section 
     237(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 
     2197(i)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1) after ``(i); and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) No other department or agency of the United States, 
     or officer or employee thereof, may intervene in any pending 
     settlement determination on any claim arising as a result of 
     insurance, reinsurance, or guaranty operations under this 
     title or under predecessor guaranty authority unless such 
     intervention is published in the Federal Register.
       ``(3) The Corporation shall report to the Congress on any 
     intervention, by any other department or agency of the United 
     States, or officer or employee thereof, regarding the timing 
     or settlement of any claim arising as a result of insurance, 
     reinsurance, or guaranty operations under this title or under 
     predecessor guaranty authority. The report shall be submitted 
     within 30 days after the intervention is made.''.

  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment addresses a serious concern 
that I have regarding OPIC. We have alluded to some of it here in our 
discussions on the last amendment. It is that basic business decisions 
at OPIC have, I fear, become politicized. When an American business 
comes to its government and purchases a political risk insurance 
policy, it is doing so because in certain countries it cannot rely on a 
transparent political process or the sanctity of those contracts.
  Based on the comments that I have heard directly from OPIC officials, 
I have reason to believe that officials from cabinet agencies are 
intervening in the business operations of OPIC because of other foreign 
policy goals. That is, it is turning the purpose of OPIC on its head. 
The fact that American companies have suffered as a result of 
capriciousness abroad is bad enough; but when they turn to their own 
government for help contractually, they should not expect even more 
political capriciousness.
  My amendment seeks to get to the bottom by requiring any intervention 
by a Federal agency on a pending claim at OPIC to be disclosed. It is 
as simple as that: disclose it. Let us recognize that OPIC is a 
governmental agency. Its head is appointed by the President, confirmed 
by the Senate. So it does have to have relations with the State 
Department and the Treasury. So if there are foreign policy 
considerations that are holding up a claim or influencing the 
resolution of a claim, which I think is wrong, considering the 
insurance contract should be different than that, but at least 
recognizing the government relationship, the least that they should do 
is disclose that intervention.
  Now, by intervention I mean simply take the common everyday usage of 
that word. I mean any formal or informal communication by an official 
of another agency at OPIC that seeks to affect or could reasonably be 
expected to have an impact on OPIC's decision on the merits of the 
case.
  There is concern about whether a simple call of inquiry, a Treasury 
head calling up and saying, George, how are the claims in Indonesia 
coming, that is a simple inquiry. That is not intervention. If they say 
we have some real foreign policy issues there, we cannot

[[Page 25207]]

upset the government of Indonesia right now, so how are those claims 
coming, I think the true intent might have been to intervene in the 
process.
  I expect an amendment that will change the definition of 
``intervention,'' and we will have a continuing debate on that, but I 
think we owe it to those who are purchasing these contracts that if 
their claim is being influenced that they at least know it. I urge 
support for this amendment.


 Amendment Offered by Mr. Menendez to Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. 
                                 Terry

  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment to the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Menendez to Amendment No. 11 
     offered by Mr. Terry:
       Page 1, line 9, insert the following after ``intervene''; 
     ``with the intent to impede or delay''.
       Page 1, line 16, insert the following after 
     ``intervention,'': ``with the intent to impede to delay a 
     settlement determination''.

  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I understand the gentleman's concern 
about the possible intervention of other Federal agencies on pending 
settlement determinations and clearly claims should be considered on 
their own merits, without necessary delays, unrelated to the actual 
claims process, but I am offering this amendment to clarify the 
gentleman's language. My amendment would change the language in 
paragraph 2 to read that no other department or agency of the United 
States or any officer thereof or any employee thereof may intervene 
with the intent to impede or delay in any pending settlement 
determination, and it makes the same change in paragraph 3. Now, what 
is the reason for the clarification?
  The proposed amendment by our colleague would prevent OPIC's board 
members from carrying out their statutory functions. OPIC is governed 
by a board of directors that, in fact, seven of whom are officers of 
department or agencies of the United States Government. These are the 
board of directors. Seven of them are, in fact, officers of departments 
or agencies of the United States Government.
  This amendment would prevent the board from exercising its 
responsibilities by, quote, ``interfering with the ability of its 
private sector members to participate in discussions regarding claim 
settlements.'' So they, in essence, would not be able to engage.
  Secondly, the proposed amendment would hurt OPIC's ability to protect 
the taxpayer by interfering with OPIC's ability to coordinate its 
claims salvage efforts with other parts of the United States 
Government. Now, what does that mean? We had a debate earlier, when 
OPIC has a claim and it is willing to pay the claim, it stands in the 
shoes of the company that it paid the claim on behalf of to try to get 
the money from some overseas entity or government. If we cannot 
coordinate with the agencies of the Federal Government to put OPIC in 
the best possible sort of circumstances, to protect itself as the 
claimant and to protect the taxpayers thereof, we are hurting OPIC; we 
are hurting the taxpayers. That does not make sense.
  OPIC's history of successful salvage is due, in part, to its strong 
coordination with our embassies abroad; and those salvage efforts not 
only protect the U.S. taxpayer by resulting in a recovery of close to 
95 percent of amounts paid or settled on claims over OPIC's history but 
it also benefits the insured investor whose uninsured interests, 
uninsured interests, those not covered by OPIC, are also attempted to 
be covered by OPIC in the salvage effort.
  The broad prohibition on intervention that the gentleman would offer 
in his amendment would inhibit OPIC's ability to obtain relevant 
information from U.S. embassies in that country and other United States 
Government sources of information, and it is that very information that 
is at the core of successfully accomplishing a recovery of the claim.
  The threat of violation of this provision would have a serious impact 
on the willingness of United States Government information sources to 
provide relevant information to OPIC with respect to claims. Cutting 
off OPIC's ability to obtain this kind of information would do a 
disservice, both to the taxpayers and OPIC's insureds, by restricting 
OPIC's fact-finding efforts to non-U.S. Government sources of 
information, when we have all of those U.S. government sources of 
information that can help us achieve a 100 percent claim and cost 
nothing to the taxpayers.
  So my amendment tries to accomplish what the gentleman wants by 
saying if there is an intent to impede or delay, then that cannot be 
done and those employees and agencies and officers cannot do that; but 
otherwise we create a huge opening in which no governmental agency, no 
embassy abroad, and even the directors of the board of trustees of OPIC 
who we want to be questioning the director about their payments and 
their liabilities will not be able to do so in this regard.
  We would want no corporation in America, we would want no public 
entity in the country, to be told that we do not want the people 
overseeing that entity to have the ability to question on the very 
liabilities they might have as an agency and on behalf of the taxpayers 
of the country. So I urge adoption of my amendment to the Terry 
amendment. I think it accomplishes the gentlemen's goal and at the time 
preserves the sanctity of OPIC's ability to protect itself, the 
taxpayers, and the claimant.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the original Terry amendment and 
in opposition to the Menendez amendment. I think Mr. Menendez is 
talking about two different things. The Terry amendment does not 
prevent anybody or any organization, or any department, from getting 
involved in the adjudication of this claim. What it simply says is that 
there should be an open record. This is an open meetings act for the 
process of adjudication by OPIC. That is all it says.
  The plain language says, ``No other department or agency of the 
United States, or officer or employee thereof, may intervene in any 
pending settlement,'' et cetera, ``unless such intervention is 
published in the Federal Register.'' That is all the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Terry) is asking for. He wants to know what, if any, 
other departments, are trying to influence, I do not use that word in a 
meanspirited way but are trying to have a role in making a 
determination, that simply should be a matter of the public record. 
That is all he is asking.
  The amendment of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) on the 
other hand says that by adding the words ``with the intent to impede or 
delay,'' if his language is added to the Terry amendment that turns the 
Terry amendment into something entirely different. That is not the 
purpose of the Terry amendment.
  The gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) simply says this: we have a 
claim that is before OPIC. The public has a right to know which 
government agencies are claiming an interest in it, and the people have 
a right to know what those government agencies are saying.
  So I would ask that the Menendez amendment be defeated, that the 
original Terry amendment be adopted.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MANZULLO. I yield to the gentleman from Oregon.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, can the gentleman envision 
circumstances where there would be valid information available to the 
CIA or the State Department that could help in accurately settling the 
claim, that we would not want published in the Federal record for 
everybody to see? Can the gentleman envision any circumstances where 
that would happen?
  Mr. MANZULLO. I would say in answer to that that the CIA has its own 
statute that would protect the distribution of that material. That 
could happen in appropriation cases. There is no question about that.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Or the State Department or Treasury?
  Mr. MANZULLO. Sure. Obviously overriding the openness of this 
material would be any national security interests. Those statutes 
already exist on the books.

[[Page 25208]]


  Mr. BLUMENAUER. If there are, in fact, national interests that would 
prevent it being in the public benefit to have this widely 
disseminated, would OPIC be able to use such information under the 
operation of this amendment? If so, who would determine what goes in 
the Federal record and what does not?
  Mr. MANZULLO. Who would determine the language of the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) that says with the intent to impede or delay? 
I mean, that is a subjective process.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I can understand where the intent we both agree is 
not to impede or delay.
  Mr. MANZULLO. That is correct.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. The intent is to protect American interests, sources 
of information.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Well, sure.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. That would not fall under the scope of the Menendez 
amendment.
  Mr. MANZULLO. I would submit that there are existing statutes on the 
books today that would give enough protection to the State Department, 
to the CIA, or any other security agency, for making open documents 
that are already classified.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MANZULLO. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. I appreciate my friend's comments, but the fact of the 
matter is that what we would have, there are maybe some agencies 
covered by other statutory provisions in the intelligence community 
that might offer OPIC information which might be able not to appear in 
the register, but there are a series of agencies which we might not 
consider quote/unquote ``intelligence information,'' but which 
information would be harmful to the interests of the United States that 
are not covered by any such provision and that would have to be issued 
in the Register. If not, it would be a violation of law if this 
amendment were passed. So I think that there is a serious concern 
between that and what the gentleman seeks to do.
  He wants to know if there is some undue influence in the 
determination of a payment of a claim, and I think that that is fitting 
and proper; but we have to limit that to make sure that it is undue 
influence and not just open the whole book for the whole world to see 
what we are doing out there to try to determine how we process our way 
to achieving a claim.

                              {time}  1600

  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield for a response?
  Mr. MANZULLO. Yes, I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, first of all, what needs to be recorded is 
that one of our government agencies has requested OPIC to make a 
decision based on politics. The details of that are not necessarily 
needed to be disclosed in the record.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo) 
has expired.
  (By unanimous consent, Mr. Manzullo was allowed to proceed for 1 
additional minute.)
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska 
(Mr. Terry).
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, let me ask the same level of rhetorical 
question back. Does it not provide more confidence in the insurance 
contract if the purchaser of that contract has some assurances that, if 
decisions are not going to be made on the merits of the claim but on 
politics, that they at least be told?
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MANZULLO. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I am reading the 
gentleman's amendment. It says nothing about politics here. It simply 
says no department or agency of the United States or any of its 
officers may intervene in any pending settlement determination.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, unless such 
intervention is published in the Federal Register.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, that goes 
back to our original discussion, that the very intervention that is 
going to be published in the Federal Register already unlocks the door 
to a whole series of things that we may not want, foreign nationals and 
foreign countries.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MANZULLO. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, the issue is that OPIC should be making 
those decisions on the outcome of claims, not other agencies.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number 
of words.
  Mr. Chairman, I am a little troubled by the turn that the 
conversation has taken. I will be the first to admit that I think we 
put the cloak of secrecy too broadly over issues in this country.
  I think it is outrageous that the American public does not yet know 
what we did in Central America 20 or 25 years after the fact, 
destabilizing democratically elected governments.
  I think it is outrageous some of the things that happened in Chile, 
in Central America, in Asia. I think that we far too broadly keep 
information from the American public, things that are not designed to 
keep information from our enemies, or past enemies. They already know 
what was in those files. It is to prevent, I am afraid, sometimes, 
embarrassment for some people here. I think, as a general rule, we 
ought to open up more, and I so voted.
  But what this talks about is not sort of a sunshine. I just reject 
this concept that somehow we are turning the interests of America on 
its head by having the full range of information available to make 
these determinations.
  I think representing the full range of American interests in the 
decisions that OPIC makes is not turning American interests on their 
head. They should not necessarily be disconnected from the best sources 
of information that we have.
  The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is suggesting that, if 
something is offered up for the purpose of merely impeding settlement, 
that that should be prohibited or should be made more difficult.
  But this amendment that the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) has 
offered does not distinguish between things that are somehow impeded, 
and operation of the information that comes from Treasury, that comes 
from State, not just the CIA, that from whatever source we have this 
information available, there would, because there are seven independent 
agency heads who function as trustees or directors of OPIC, it would 
very much confuse the deliberations.
  If the information that they provided had the effect perhaps of 
delaying the processing of the claim as rapidly as maybe somebody would 
request, it may raise the obligation to put information in the record 
that, frankly, we do not want to have put in the Federal Registry. It 
would not be in America's best interest.
  But why, if that be the case, would the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. 
Terry) penalize either the taxpayer or the balance of OPIC in terms of 
the bottom line, in terms of having to pay more money. That seems to me 
to make no sense.
  I think we are confusing here politics, to use the word from the 
gentleman from Nebraska, with having national interests and the best 
information available to treat the policy holder and the American 
taxpayer in the best interests.
  I fear that if this amendment were adopted, not the Menendez 
perfecting amendment, but the amendment of the gentleman from Nebraska 
(Mr. Terry), operation at OPIC would go on. The people in the 
bureaucracy would continue to function.
  But it would raise questions for the board. It would make them harder 
to get the good information. They will not be able to do their job as 
well. That is only going to hurt the taxpayer, if it ends up costing 
taxpayer money in the long run, where OPIC does not surplus as much 
money. But because they operate in an entrepreneurial fashion, what

[[Page 25209]]

it is going to mean is that it is going to mean that there is going to 
be less money available to loan. It is going to make it more 
cumbersome. It is going to make the processing of claims based on less 
accurate information.
  Ultimately, it may well mean that fewer people are insured. I do not 
think that that is necessarily in our best interest. We do not need 
this to solve a problem that somebody in Nebraska has.
  I understand that we are moving forward with that claim, and 
something is happening. But we do not need to put a cumbersome process, 
freeze it into statute that is going to give less effective information 
and make the job of the director and OPIC harder.
  I strongly urge the rejection of the Terry amendment and the adoption 
of what the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) has offered by way 
of a substitute.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) to 
amendment No. 11 offered by the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 327, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Menendez) to the amendment No. 11 offered by the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Terry) will be postponed.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there further amendments to section 4?
  If not, the Clerk will designate section 5.
  The text of section 5 is as follows:

     SEC. 5. TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT AGENCY.

       (a) Purpose.--Section 661(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act 
     of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2421(a)) is amended by inserting before 
     the period at the end of the second sentence the following: 
     ``, with special emphasis on economic sectors with 
     significant United States export potential, such as energy, 
     transportation, telecommunications, and environment''.
       (b) Contributions of Costs.--Section 661(b) of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2421(b)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) Contributions to costs.--The Trade and Development 
     Agency shall, to the maximum extent practicable, require 
     corporations and other entities to--
       ``(A) share the costs of feasibility studies and other 
     project planning services funded under this section; and
       ``(B) reimburse the Trade and Development Agency those 
     funds provided under this section, if the corporation or 
     entity concerned succeeds in project implementation.''.
       (c) Funding.--Section 661(f) of the Foreign Assistance Act 
     of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2421(f)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(A) by striking ``$77,000,000'' and all 
     that follows through ``1996'' and inserting ``$48,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2000 and such sums as may be necessary for each 
     fiscal year thereafter''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ``in fiscal years'' 
     and all that follows through ``provides'' and inserting ``in 
     carrying out its program, provide, as appropriate, funds''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there amendments to section 5?
  If not, the Clerk will designate section 6.
  The text of section 6 is as follows:

     SEC. 6. PROGRAMS OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     the ITA--
       (1) for fiscal year 2000, $24,000,000 for its Market Access 
     and Compliance program, $68,000,000 for its Trade Development 
     program, and $202,000,000 for the Commercial Service program; 
     and
       (2) for each fiscal year thereafter, such sums as may be 
     necessary for the programs referred to in paragraph (1).
       (b) Appointments.--Subject to the availability of 
     appropriations, the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the 
     Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Director General of the 
     United States and Foreign Commercial Service, shall take 
     steps to ensure that Commercial Service employees are 
     stationed in no fewer than 10 sub-Saharan African countries 
     and 1 full-time Commercial Service employee is stationed in 
     the Baltic states, and that the Commercial Service has full-
     time employees in each country in South and Central America 
     and an adequate number of employees in the Caribbean to 
     ensure that United States businesses are made aware of 
     existing market opportunities for goods and services.
       (c) Initiative for Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America.--
     The Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Under Secretary 
     of Commerce for the International Trade Administration, shall 
     make a special effort to--
       (1) identify those goods and services of United States 
     companies which are not being exported to Latin America and 
     sub-Saharan Africa but which are being exported to countries 
     in those regions by competitor nations;
       (2) identify trade barriers and noncompetitive actions, 
     including violations of intellectual property rights, that 
     are preventing or hindering the operation of United States 
     companies in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America;
       (3) publish on an annual basis the information obtained 
     under paragraphs (1) and (2);
       (4) bring such information to the attention of authorities 
     in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America with the goal of 
     securing greater market access for United States exporters of 
     goods and services; and
       (5) report to the Speaker of the House of Representatives 
     and the President of the Senate the results of the efforts to 
     increase the sales of United States goods and services in 
     sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America.
       (d) Reporting on Violations of Trade Agreements.--The ITA 
     should--
       (1) identify countries and entities, as practicable, that 
     violate commitments under trade agreements with the United 
     States and the impact of these violations on specific sectors 
     of the United States economy;
       (2) identify steps taken by the ITA on behalf of United 
     States companies affected by these violations; and
       (3) publicize, on an annual basis, the information gathered 
     under paragraphs (1) and (2).
       (e) Global Diversity and Urban Export Initiative for the 
     ITA.--The ITA shall undertake an initiative entitled the 
     ``Global Diversity and Urban Export Initiative'' to increase 
     exports from minority-owned businesses, focusing on 
     businesses in under-served areas, including inner-city urban 
     areas and urban enterprise zones. The initiative should use 
     electronic commerce technology and products as another means 
     of helping urban-based and minority-owned businesses export 
     overseas.
       (f) Standards Attaches.--Subject to the availability of 
     appropriations, the International Trade Administration shall 
     take the necessary steps to increase the number of standards 
     attaches in the European Union and in developing countries.
       (g) Expansion of Programs to Assist Small Businesses.--The 
     International Trade Administration shall expand its efforts 
     to assist small businesses in exporting their products and 
     services abroad by using electronic commerce technology and 
     other electronic means--
       (1) to communicate with significantly larger numbers of 
     small businesses about the assistance offered by the ITA to 
     small businesses in exporting their products and services 
     abroad; and
       (2) to provide such assistance.
       (h) Authorization for Advertising.--The ITA is authorized 
     to advertise in newspapers, business journals, and other 
     relevant publications and related media to inform businesses 
     about the services offered by the ITA.


               Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Traficant

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 12 offered by Mr. Traficant:
       Page 10, strike line 13 and all that follows through line 
     24 and insert the following:
       (d) Reports on Market Access.--
       (1) Annual reports.--Not later than 90 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the 
     ITA should submit to the Congress, and make available to the 
     public, a report with respect to those countries selected by 
     the ITA in which goods or services produced or originating in 
     the United States, that would otherwise be competitive in 
     those countries, do not have market access. Each report 
     should contain the following with respect to each such 
     country:
       (A) Assessment of potential market access.--An assessment 
     of the opportunities that would, but for the lack of market 
     access, be available in the market in that country, for goods 
     and services produced or originating in the United States in 
     those sectors selected by the ITA. In making such assessment, 
     the ITA should consider the competitive position of such 
     goods and services in similarly developed markets in other 
     countries. Such assessment should specify the time periods 
     within which such market access opportunities should 
     reasonably be expected to be obtained.
       (B) Criteria for measuring market access.--Objective 
     criteria for measuring the extent to which those market 
     access opportunities described in subparagraph (A) have been 
     obtained. The development of such objective criteria may 
     include the use of interim objective criteria to measure 
     results on a periodic basis, as appropriate.
       (C) Compliance with trade agreements.--An assessment of 
     whether, and to what extent, the country concerned has 
     materially complied with existing trade agreements between 
     the United States and that country. Such assessment should 
     include specific information on the extent to which United

[[Page 25210]]

     States suppliers have achieved additional access to the 
     market in the country concerned and the extent to which that 
     country has complied with other commitments under such 
     agreements and understandings.
       (D) Actions taken by ita.--An identification of steps taken 
     by the ITA on behalf of United States companies affected by 
     the lack of market access in that country.
       (2) Selection of countries and sectors.--
       (A) In general.--In selecting countries and sectors that 
     are to be the subject of a report under paragraph (1), the 
     ITA should give priority to--
       (i) any country with which the United States has a trade 
     deficit if access to the markets in that country is likely to 
     have significant potential to increase exports of United 
     States goods and services; and
       (ii) any country, and sectors therein, in which access to 
     the markets will result in significant employment benefits 
     for producers of United States goods and services.

     The ITA should also give priority to sectors which represent 
     critical technologies, including those identified by the 
     National Critical Technologies Panel under section 603 of the 
     National Science and Technology Policy, Organization, and 
     Priorities Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6683).
       (B) First report.--The first report submitted under 
     paragraph (1) should include those countries with which the 
     United States has a substantial portion of its trade deficit.
       (C) Trade surplus countries.--The ITA may include in 
     reports after the first report such countries as the ITA 
     considers appropriate with which the United States has a 
     trade surplus but which are otherwise described in paragraph 
     (1) and subparagraph (A) of this paragraph.


       Modification to Amendment No. 12 Offered By Mr. Traficant

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the 
amendment be modified with the language at the desk.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment No. 12, as modified, offered by Mr. Traficant:
       Page 10, strike line 13 and all that follows through line 
     24 and insert the following:
       (d) Reports on Market Access.--
       (1) Annual reports.--Not later than March 30 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, 
     the TPCC should submit to the Congress, and make available to 
     the public, a report with respect to those countries selected 
     by the TPCC in which goods or services produced or 
     originating in the United States, that would otherwise be 
     competitive in those countries, do not have market access. 
     Each report should contain the following with respect to each 
     such country:
       (A) Assessment of potential market access.--An assessment 
     of the opportunities that would, but for the lack of market 
     access, be available in the market in that country, for goods 
     and services produced or originating in the United States in 
     those sectors selected by the TPCC. In making such 
     assessment, the TPCC should consider the competitive position 
     of such goods and services in similarly developed markets in 
     other countries. Such assessment should specify the time 
     periods within which such market access opportunities should 
     reasonably be expected to be obtained.
       (B) Criteria for measuring market access.--Objective 
     criteria for measuring the extent to which those market 
     access opportunities described in subparagraph (A) have been 
     obtained. The development of such objective criteria may 
     include the use of interim objective criteria to measure 
     results on a periodic basis, as appropriate.
       (C) Compliance with trade agreements.--An assessment of 
     whether, and to what extent, the country concerned has 
     materially complied with existing trade agreements between 
     the United States and that country. Such assessment should 
     include specific information on the extent to which United 
     States suppliers have achieved additional access to the 
     market in the country concerned and the extent to which that 
     country has complied with other commitments under such 
     agreements and understandings.
       (D) Actions taken by ita.--An identification of steps taken 
     by the USTR and ITA on behalf of United States companies 
     affected by the lack of market access in that country.
       (2) Selection of countries and sectors.--
       (A) In general.--In selecting countries and sectors that 
     are to be the subject of a report under paragraph (1), the 
     USTR and ITA should give priority to--
       (i) any country with which the United States has a trade 
     deficit if access to the markets in that country is likely to 
     have significant potential to increase exports of United 
     States goods and services; and
       (ii) any country, and sectors therein, in which access to 
     the markets will result in significant employment benefits 
     for producers of United States goods and services.

     The USTR and ITA should also give priority to sectors which 
     represent critical technologies, including those identified 
     by the National Critical Technologies Panel under section 603 
     of the National Science and Technology Policy, Organization, 
     and Priorities Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6683).
       (B) First report.--The first report submitted under 
     paragraph (1) should include those countries with which the 
     United States has a substantial portion of its trade deficit.
       (C) Trade surplus countries.--The TPCC may include in 
     reports after the first report such countries as the USTR and 
     ITA considers appropriate with which the United States has a 
     trade surplus but which are otherwise described in paragraph 
     (1) and subparagraph (A) of this paragraph.

  Mr. TRAFICANT (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the modification 
offered by the gentleman from Ohio?
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, just a 
formality, I do not have a copy of that document. I can take a quick 
look at it, and then I make reference to it.
  Mr. Chairman, under my reservation of objection, I yield to the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, the only change is that in the first 
part ``Reports on Market Access,'' I change the report requirement from 
the International Trade Administration to the Trade Promotion 
Coordination Committee to make it more compatible with other duties in 
similar areas that are making such reports.
  It follows through as far as the report is concerned in that regard, 
and that is the only modification that is made. The only other 
modification is, in the beginning, ``not later than March 30,'' rather 
than 90 days.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I have a response. I agree to the 
amendment. The problem is that there is an error in the manner in which 
the amendment is being inserted into the base bill.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois reserves the 
right to object to the modification of the amendment, not the 
underlying amendment. The underlying amendment is not under debate.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection 
based upon the fact that this is a technical error, and I would agree 
to accept the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The amendment is modified.
  The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) is recognized for 5 minutes 
on the amendment, as modified.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, the salient point of the difference 
between the committee's bill and the Traficant amendment deals with the 
issue of market access. The Traficant amendment says, in addition to 
all of the reporting on whether or not a Nation is complying with our 
trade agreements, the Traficant amendment also says the report must 
cover the availability of market access and whether or not market 
access is being made available by these countries pursuant to the 
report process.
  Second of all, it is to delineate what are those products and/or 
other areas of market availability that are being denied to us and what 
is their impact on jobs.
  Bottom line is this, not only are we being denied access, this says 
tell us who is denying us that access. Do not just say they are denying 
this access, tell us what that access denial really is, what products 
are impacted upon by this, and how can we, in fact, make gains through 
our export activity once we can overcome that market access problem.
  So that is the salient point, the difference between the major 
aspects of the bill itself and my perfecting amendment. I would hope 
that the committee would find favor with it and vote in favor with it.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment.

[[Page 25211]]

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment, as 
modified, offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
  The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Manzullo

  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Manzullo:
       Page 11, lines 4 and 5, strike ``minority-owned businesses, 
     focusing on'' and insert ``businesses that, because of their 
     minority ownership, may have been excluded from export trade, 
     and from''.
       Page 11, lines 8 and 9, strike ``urban-based and minority-
     owned'' and insert ``such''.

  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, this is a technical and perfecting 
amendment to the urban export initiative section for the International 
Trade Administration designed to take into account the concerns of the 
members of our committee that there be no automatic presumption of 
support for all minority-owned businesses under this initiative.
  It simply directs the ITA, pursuant to this initiative, to increase 
exports from those minority-owned businesses who may have been excluded 
from exporting. It is my understanding that it has full support of the 
minority.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Are there further amendments to this section?
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I had intended today to be on the floor in support of 
the amendments by the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).

                              {time}  1615

  And the reason being because of a situation we have with OPIC and one 
of its customers who has over the past several years paid premiums of 
over $20 million who has a rightful claim and is having a very 
difficult time collecting.
  As any business would know, when they buy insurance, they expect to 
have their claims paid on a timely basis when the facts are laid out. 
And that simply is not the case.
  The timeliness of the situation and the second Terry amendment having 
to do with concerns that have become I think very real, other 
departments interfering in the situation and for outside political 
reasons it is being held up as far as the payment of the claim itself, 
there is no question of the validity. But it is a matter of the 
technicalities going through the delays in place.
  As someone who has in the last 5 years always supported OPIC, it is a 
very great concern to me to see this happening to what I think is a 
very important agency, one that provides an outstanding financial 
potential. But when we have agencies coming into play introducing 
outside political consequences to the equation and not looking at the 
claim and its validity itself, it raises great grave concerns as far as 
I am concerned.
  I just wanted to make that statement. I would support both of the 
Terry amendments and would oppose the gutting amendments offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). Are there any other amendments 
to section 6?
  If not, the Clerk will designate section 7.
  The text of section 7 is as follows:

     SEC. 7. BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

       Section 233(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 
     U.S.C. 2193(b)) is amended--
       (1) by striking the second and third sentences;
       (2) in the fourth sentence by striking ``(other than the 
     President of the Corporation, appointed pursuant to 
     subsection (c) who shall serve as a Director, ex officio)'';
       (3) in the second undesignated paragraph--
       (A) by inserting ``the President of the Corporation, the 
     Administrator of the Agency for International Development, 
     the United States Trade Representative, and'' after 
     ``including''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following: ``The United States 
     Trade Representative may designate a Deputy United States 
     Trade Representative to serve on the Board in place of the 
     United States Trade Representative.''; and
       (4) by inserting after the second undesignated paragraph 
     the following:
       ``There shall be a Chairman and a Vice Chairman of the 
     Board, both of whom shall be designated by the President of 
     the United States from among the Directors of the Board other 
     than those appointed under the second sentence of the first 
     paragraph of this subsection.''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there amendments to section 7?
  If not, the Clerk will designate section 8.
  The text of section 8 is as follows:

     SEC. 8. STRATEGIC EXPORT PLAN.

       Section 2312(c) of the Export Enhancement Act of 1988 (15 
     U.S.C. 4727(c)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (5);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (6) and 
     inserting a semicolon; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(7) ensure that all export promotion activities of the 
     Agency for International Development are fully coordinated 
     and consistent with those of other agencies;
       ``(8) identify means for providing more coordinated and 
     comprehensive export promotion services to, and on behalf of, 
     small and medium-sized businesses; and
       ``(9) establish a set of priorities to promote United 
     States exports to, and free market reforms in, the Middle 
     East, Africa, Latin America, and other emerging markets, that 
     are designed to stimulate job growth both in the United 
     States and those regions and emerging markets.''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there amendments to section 8?
  If not, the Clerk will designate section 9.
  The text of section 9 is as follows:

     SEC. 9. IMPLEMENTATION OF PRIMARY OBJECTIVES.

       The Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee shall--
       (1) report on the actions taken or efforts currently 
     underway to eliminate the areas of overlap and duplication 
     identified among Federal export promotion activities;
       (2) coordinate efforts to sponsor or promote any trade show 
     or trade fair;
       (3) work with all relevant State and national 
     organizations, including the National Governors' Association, 
     that have established trade promotion offices;
       (4) report on actions taken or efforts currently underway 
     to promote better coordination between State, Federal, and 
     private sector export promotion activities, including co-
     location, cost sharing between Federal, State, and private 
     sector export promotion programs, and sharing of market 
     research data; and
       (5) by not later than March 30, 2000, and annually 
     thereafter, include the matters addressed in paragraphs (1), 
     (2), (3), and (4) in the annual report required to be 
     submitted under section 2312(f) of the Export Enhancement Act 
     of 1988 (15 U.S.C. 4727(f)).

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there amendments to section 9?
  If not, the Clerk will designate section 10.
  The text of section 10 is as follows:

     SEC. 10. TIMING OF TPCC REPORTS.

       Section 2312(f) of the Export Enhancement Act of 1988 (15 
     U.S.C. 4727(f)) is amended by striking ``September 30, 1995, 
     and annually thereafter,'' and inserting ``March 30 of each 
     year,''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there further amendments?


          Sequential Votes Postponed In Committee of the Whole

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 327, 
proceedings will now resume on those amendments on which further 
proceedings were postponed in the following order: The second-degree 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo), the 
underlying amendment No. 6 offered by the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Rohrabacher), amendment No. 8 offered by the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Sanford), the second-degree amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), the underlying amendment No. 
10 offered by the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry), the second-
degree amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Menendez), the underlying amendment No. 11 offered by the gentleman 
from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


  Amendment Offered by Mr. Manzullo to Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. 
                              Rohrabacher

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a

[[Page 25212]]

recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois 
(Mr. Manzullo) to amendment No. 6 offered by the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Rohrabacher) 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 CHAIRMAN pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 379, 
noes 49, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 495]

                               AYES--379

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Archer
     Armey
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Bryant
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Combest
     Condit
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fowler
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larson
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Toomey
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--49

     Abercrombie
     Andrews
     Bachus
     Barr
     Bartlett
     Burton
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Coburn
     Collins
     Conyers
     Cox
     DeFazio
     Duncan
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Hayworth
     Hinchey
     Hostettler
     Hunter
     Jackson (IL)
     Jones (NC)
     Kasich
     Kucinich
     LoBiondo
     McIntosh
     McKinney
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Pascrell
     Paul
     Peterson (MN)
     Radanovich
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Shadegg
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Stark
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Sununu
     Taylor (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Vento
     Wamp

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Brown (OH)
     Burr
     Jefferson
     Scarborough
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1643

  Messrs. TOWNS, BURTON of Indiana, SMITH of Michigan, HOSTETTLER, 
FRANK of Massachusetts, BACHUS, FOSSELLA, RADANOVICH, TAYLOR of 
Mississippi, Ms. McKINNEY, Ms. SLAUGHTER, and Mr. HINCHEY changed their 
vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. SHAYS, POMBO, YOUNG of Florida, and Mrs. JOHNSON of 
Connecticut changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment to the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), 
as amended.
  The amendment, as amended, was agreed to.


                Announcement by the Chairman Pro Tempore

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). Pursuant to House Resolution 
327, the Chair announces that he will reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes 
the period of time within which a vote by electronic device will be 
taken on each amendment on which the Chair has postponed further 
proceedings.


                 Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Sanford

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Sanford) 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 CHAIRMAN pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 104, 
noes 323, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 496]

                               AYES--104

     Abercrombie
     Andrews
     Armey
     Bachus
     Barr
     Bartlett
     Bilirakis
     Bonior
     Burton
     Buyer
     Campbell
     Carson
     Chabot
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Condit
     Cox
     Crane
     Cubin
     DeFazio
     DeMint
     Doolittle
     Duncan
     Ehrlich
     Fossella
     Gillmor
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hinchey
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Hunter
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jenkins
     Jones (NC)
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kingston
     Kucinich
     Largent
     Latham
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     Meehan
     Myrick
     Norwood
     Pascrell
     Paul
     Pease
     Peterson (MN)
     Pombo
     Rivers
     Rogan
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Salmon
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Schaffer
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Spence
     Stark
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Stump
     Sununu
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thompson (MS)
     Thune

[[Page 25213]]


     Tierney
     Toomey
     Visclosky
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)

                               NOES--323

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Archer
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Barton
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Bryant
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chambliss
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Combest
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hansen
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilliard
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Larson
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shaw
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stenholm
     Stupak
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thornberry
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Bass
     Brown (OH)
     Burr
     Jefferson
     Scarborough
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1652

  Mr. FOSSELLA and Mr. HALL of Texas changed their vote from ``no'' to 
``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


  Amendment Offered By Mr. Menendez to Amendment No. 10, As Modified, 
                          Offered By Mr. Terry

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). The pending business is the 
demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) to the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry), as modified, on which further 
proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by a voice 
vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment to the amendment, as 
modified.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment to the amendment, as modified.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 259, 
noes 169, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 497]

                               AYES--259

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (WI)
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Burton
     Buyer
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gilchrest
     Gonzalez
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefley
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Inslee
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Larson
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Ney
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (PA)
     Phelps
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Serrano
     Shays
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Sisisky
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NOES--169

     Aderholt
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Boehner
     Boswell
     Brady (TX)
     Bryant
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Cunningham
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Dickey
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Fossella
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goss
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hyde
     Isakson
     John
     Johnson, Sam
     Kasich
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo

[[Page 25214]]


     McCrery
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     McKinney
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ose
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pascrell
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rogan
     Rohrabacher
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherwood
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (TX)
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Toomey
     Traficant
     Vitter
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Brown (OH)
     Burr
     Jefferson
     Scarborough
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1701

  Messrs. DUNCAN, KASICH, McINNIS, Mrs. NORTHUP, Mr. WAMP and Mr. 
BRYANT changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. PALLONE, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN and Mrs. MORELLA changed their vote 
from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment to the amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


     Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Terry, as Modified, as Amended

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry), as modified, as amended.
  The amendment, as modified, as amended, was agreed to.


 Amendment Offered by Mr. Menendez to Amendment No. 11 offered by Mr. 
                                 Terry

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Menendez) to the amendment No. 11 offered by the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Terry) 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 CHAIRMAN pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 253, 
noes 173, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 498]

                               AYES--253

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coburn
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fowler
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hastings (FL)
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Larson
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Northup
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (PA)
     Phelps
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Serrano
     Shays
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Sisisky
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--173

     Aderholt
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Brady (TX)
     Bryant
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Ganske
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goss
     Green (WI)
     Gutknecht
     Hansen
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Istook
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson, Sam
     Kasich
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Knollenberg
     Largent
     Latham
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ose
     Packard
     Pascrell
     Pease
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rogan
     Rohrabacher
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherwood
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (TX)
     Spence
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Toomey
     Traficant
     Vitter
     Walden
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Brown (OH)
     Burr
     Jefferson
     Radanovich
     Scarborough
     Whitfield
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1711

  Mr. VITTER and Mr. EVERETT changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the amendment to the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


           Amendment No. 11, as Amended, Offered by Mr. Terry

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry), as 
amended.
  The amendment, as amended, was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the committee amendment 
in the nature of a substitute, as amended.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended, 
was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Pease) having assumed the chair, Mr. Ewing, Chairman pro tempore 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. 1993) to 
reauthorize the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and the Trade 
and Development Agency, and for other purposes,

[[Page 25215]]

pursuant to House Resolution 327, he reported the bill back to the 
House with an amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). Under the rule, the previous 
question is ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the committee 
amendment in the nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of the 
Whole? If not, the question is on the amendment.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 357, 
noes 71, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 499]

                               AYES--357

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Archer
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barrett (NE)
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Bryant
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chambliss
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larson
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (PA)
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--71

     Andrews
     Armey
     Bachus
     Barr
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Burton
     Buyer
     Campbell
     Chabot
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Coble
     Coburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cox
     Crane
     DeFazio
     DeMint
     Doolittle
     Duncan
     Ehrlich
     Goode
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hilleary
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jones (NC)
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kingston
     Kucinich
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     Miller (FL)
     Myrick
     Pascrell
     Paul
     Pease
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pombo
     Rogan
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Ryun (KS)
     Salmon
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Schaffer
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Smith (MI)
     Stark
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Sununu
     Tancredo
     Taylor (NC)
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Wamp
     Watts (OK)

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Brown (OH)
     Burr
     Jefferson
     Scarborough
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1730

  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________