[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 21]
[House]
[Pages 30647-30652]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



          FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS, FISCAL YEAR 2000

  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 385, 
I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 82) making further continuing 
appropriations for the fiscal year 2000, and for other purposes, and 
ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
  The text of House Joint Resolution 82 is as follows:

                              H.J. Res. 82

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That Public 
     Law 106-62 is further amended by striking ``November 18, 
     1999'' in section 106(c) and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``November 23, 1999''. Public Law 106-46 is amended by 
     striking ``November 18, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``November 23, 1999''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). Pursuant to House 
Resolution 385, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) and the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young).


                             General Leave

  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks on H.J. Res. 82, and that I may include tabular and extraneous 
material.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  This continuing resolution extends the current CR for 5 days, until 
November 23, specifically for the purpose of allowing the Senate to 
have time to consider the measures that we will send them today.
  Mr. Speaker, in the interest of allowing our Members to get home to 
their families and preparing for the Thanksgiving period, I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 20 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, I would very much like to see Members get home for 
Thanksgiving, but I think my public duty is to help Members understand 
what they are going to be voting on before they go home, because 
otherwise when they do go home, their experience with the news media 
and angry constituents is not going to be a very pleasant one; and I am 
afraid there are a lot of nasty surprises in this bill, some of which I 
will be discussing over the next 12 to 15 hours.
  Let me say, first of all, that this bill has been a battleground 
about national priorities and national direction. It has

[[Page 30648]]

been the arena for battles between the President and his allies on one 
side and his political opponents on the other. By any measure, I think 
it is safe to say that the President has won victory after victory. We 
are going to be stuck having to extend the government, I am afraid, 
several times through CRs like this one because of some of the 
decisions made in the bill that is coming next, and people need to 
understand how they interrelate.
  I think you can say, for instance, that in the area of international 
leadership, the President and those of us who agree with him have won a 
great victory in funding the Wye peace process agreement. We have won a 
very important battle in making sure that debts that would never be 
repaid are going to be wiped out so that Latin America and Africa can, 
in fact, become good markets for our products as well as stable 
neighbors in an ever more complicated world.
  We have won the fight to, at least for now, take the U.S. off the 
list of U.N. deadbeats. On the environmental front, the President has 
beaten down virtually every antienvironmental rider that was tossed his 
way. In the fight against street crime, the President won 50,000 new 
cops.
  On the education front, it is important to understand some of the 
major achievements that we have made. We have seen a lot of people 
denigrate the President's effort to provide for 100,000 new teachers. I 
want to put that effort in context. What Democrats have been fighting 
for on education in this package is a four-pronged research-based 
attack on educational incompetence and poor performance. The research 
shows, for instance, that children do much better in smaller classes. 
That is why the President fought so hard for and won the battle for 
100,000 new teachers. That research also shows that, especially at the 
high school level, students perform better, they exhibit less 
antisocial adolescent behavior, and there is far less violence in high 
schools that are smaller.
  And so we have an initiative that will provide for smaller high 
schools, or at least to help local school districts build smaller 
learning centers within their high schools. The research also shows 
that students do best when their teachers are welltrained. It sounds 
obvious, but some people seem to have missed it. So we have an 
initiative in this bill that will add additional funding for 
partnership grants between university schools of education and local 
school districts so that those schools of education are producing the 
kinds of teachers that the districts actually need. And also in the 
process, we are trying to raise the standards for those teachers so 
that they are actually getting a degree in the subject that they are 
going to wind up teaching, also I guess a shocking idea in some 
quarters.
  And lastly, research also shows that if you want to reform schools, 
you need to do it from bottom to top and around again, that reform has 
to be comprehensive, systemic; and that is why this bill adds 
additional money to the Obey-Porter bipartisan comprehensive school 
reform package.
  All of those are very good things. I say that there is no doubt on 
the major issues that have divided us the last 3 months, the President 
has run the table. He has won on issue after issue. But I think there 
are some things that are just as important as winning and losing, and I 
want to talk about some of them as we discuss this continuing 
resolution. We are being asked to continue the government a few more 
days so it gives us time to pass the next bill that is coming at us. I 
think we need to understand what is in that bill before we vote on this 
resolution.
  There are many things in that package that disturb me. The protracted 
battle to persuade the majority to allow the United States to pay its 
back dues to the United Nations has resulted in a compromise that may 
still prevent release of all of the funds that are needed to return the 
U.S. to a position of good standing in the U.N. I think that is 
regrettable.
  The Republican majority was also steadfast in its refusal to provide 
the Justice Department with the $14 million that they need to pursue 
tobacco litigation. This money is needed for efforts to recover the 
hundreds of billions of tax dollars paid through the Medicare trust 
fund, the Public Health Service, the veterans and military medical 
systems, and the Social Security disability fund in dealing with 
tobacco-related illnesses. The tobacco companies that lied repeatedly 
to the American people about the health effects of smoking should pay a 
substantial portion of those costs. The Republican majority is clearly 
trying to protect them from having to repay the taxpayers.
  I believe funds will be found by the administration to initiate 
litigation; but as everybody knows, legal outcomes are often dictated 
by the relative size of legal war chests. That is one of the things, 
for instance, that I am told CBS news had to take into account when 
they discussed whether or not to put on that famous ``60 Minutes'' 
special which went after the tobacco companies for not telling the 
truth. I would say that while the appropriation requested by the 
Justice Department to augment their ability to pursue that issue is 
small, the long-term fiscal impact on the Federal Government could be 
enormous; and we have failed to recognize that in the bill that is 
coming to us.
  The Republican majority also repeatedly refused to include language 
that both the White House and I asked them to include to ensure that 
100 percent of the money paid from the Medicare and Social Security 
trust funds is returned to those trust funds if it is recovered in 
litigation. That item was repeatedly raised during negotiations. It is 
the fair thing to do with those funds. I find it hard to construct an 
argument that they should be used for a different purpose, but the 
Republican leadership flatly rejected that concept in both the Senate 
and the House.

                              {time}  1315

  I think the reason (and this was even said in conference,) they did 
not want to approve this language is because it would provide 
incentives to proceed with the lawsuit. Well, we ought to proceed with 
that lawsuit.
  I think nothing more clearly underlies or underscores the hollowness 
of the claim of the majority that they have suffered a recent 
conversion and are now strong supporters of Social Security. Nothing is 
more clearly underscoring of the hollowness of that claim than their 
new-found concern over the solvency of those trust funds. It is a 
concern that suddenly emerged around here after Labor Day when polling 
data demonstrated to them how badly they had been damaged by their 
attempts to pass a huge tax bill that rewarded the rich, using all of 
the resources needed to strengthen Social Security and Medicare.
  Another issue at the center of negotiations was whether to include a 
small across-the-board cut. This cut was not necessary to reach the 
offset targets to make sure the bill was paid for; more than enough 
money was available from other sources. It is simply an attempt by the 
majority to create a symbol that could be used to pretend that in the 
midst of this orgy of gimmickry in spending, that they are continuing 
to be fiscally responsible.
  If my colleagues take a look at the dollars being provided across the 
board by the majority, it is apparent, it is apparent to me that the 
Republican leadership is willing to spend almost any amount to get out 
of town, just so long as we can obscure how much that really is through 
accounting gimmicks. I think that is a big mistake.
  The problem with an across-the-board cut is that people say, ``My 
God, any agency head ought to be able to administer a half a percent 
cut across the board.'' Of course they could. They could easily find 
waste if they are left to their own devices. But that is not the way 
this across-the-board cut is designed. Their across-the-board cut 
completely abandons the core responsibility of Congress to determine 
spending priorities. There are programs that could afford a 1 or 2 or 
even 10 percent cut. But, instead, the Congress requires much more 
limited authority be given to the President, and that means that this 
Congress ignores the fact that there are some programs that require a

[[Page 30649]]

precise amount of money in order to protect the taxpayers' interest.
  Those kinds of programs fall into two categories: one, to protect 
public safety, and the other to control the in-flow and out-flow of 
public funds. These are largely accounts that include things like the 
FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Air Traffic Control, 
Customs Service, and Border Patrol. Numerous studies have demonstrated 
that cuts in the administration of the Social Security agency can drive 
up the error rate in the disbursement of those funds enough to cost the 
Federal Government as much as $6 for every dollar saved in reduced 
expenditures in Social Security Administration; and yet those studies 
are ignored in the way this cut is applied.
  Then we get to the question of national defense. The way national 
defense is treated in this across-the-board cut is very interesting. It 
was treated the way this bill treats it in order to protect 
congressional pork. So what the provision requires is that we will have 
to see about a $520 million reduction in operation and maintenance 
accounts, which is the core of our military readiness, and that is 
occurring at the same time that the Pentagon reported that two out of 
the 10 divisions in the U.S. Army are now rated at C-4; in other words, 
not close to having the parts, people, and maintenance that are 
necessary to undertake military action. Yet, operation and maintenance 
is going to be required to be cut by a larger percentage than anything 
else in this bill. The reason for that is because the folks who put 
this bill together wanted to protect the projects and the pork in the 
research and procurement accounts. So we get that weird anomalous 
result.
  I will insert in the Record at this point, Mr. Speaker, extraneous 
material related to my remarks, and I will expand further on that 
subject for the Record.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I am amazed, for instance, that on pay-fors, 
that the conferees chose to ignore the opportunity to recoup for the 
taxpayers money that we should be recouping from the sale of what is 
known as the Block C portion of spectrum sales. Several years ago when 
block seed portion of the spectrum was auctioned off a number of 
winning bidders went into bankruptcy without paying the Government for 
the spectrum rights that they had purchased. They have been allowed to 
hold on to those spectrum rights, refused to make any payments, and now 
they have the prospect of reemerging from bankruptcy by selling their 
share of the spectrum for a good deal more than they paid for it. It is 
a good deal if you can get it, but the American taxpayers are taking a 
bath; and we were blocked from correcting this specifically by one 
Member of the House Republican leadership.
  But what bothers me the most about this proposal is the fact that it 
is laced through with accounting fixes to conceal an orgy of spending 
that every Member would deny if confronted with it by his constituents. 
I will insert in the Record a chart which shows that when this bill is 
passed, the Congress will have spent $17,400 million that will not be 
counted in determining how much that we have spent. It also has 
declared almost $15 billion in expenditures to emergency spending so 
that they are also exempt from spending limits we are supposed to be 
abiding by.

                LIST OF GIMMICKS IN APPROPRIATIONS BILLS
                        [In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        BA         O
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         SPENDING NOT COUNTED BY CONGRESS
 
Directed CBO to reduce their spending estimates,
 but actually spends Social Security:
    AG--Directed outlay scoring (1.14% of BA).....  .........       -163
    CJ--Directed outlay scoring (1.14% of BA).....  .........       -336
    DOD--Directed outlay scoring..................  .........    -10,500
    E&W--Directed outlay scoring (1.14% of BA)....  .........       -103
    FO--Directed outlay scoring (1.14% of BA).....  .........       -144
    INT--Directed outlay scoring (1.14% of BA)....  .........       -170
    L-HHS--Directed outlay scoring (1.14% of BA)..  .........       -970
    Directed outlay scoring (highway and transit    .........     -1,341
     firewalls)...................................
    TRANS--Directed outlay scoring (1.14% of BA)..  .........       -143
    TPO--Directed outlay scoring (1.14% of BA)....  .........       -151
    VA HUD--Directed outlay scoring (1.14% of BA).  .........       -820
    DOD--Spectrum asset sales.....................     -2,600     -2,600
                                                   ---------------------
        Subtotal..................................     -2,600    -17,441
                                                   =====================
Declaration of emergencies for normal program
 spending:
    Declare Year 2000 Census an emergency.........     -4,476     -4,118
    Defense emergency designations................     -7,200     -5,500
    Declare part of Head Start an emergency.......     -1,700       -629
    LIHEAP emergency declaration..................     -1,100       -825
    Refugees emergency declaration................       -427       -126
    Forest Service Wildland Fire Management.......        -90         -3
    Public health emergency declaration...........       -584       -310
                                                   ---------------------
        Subtotal..................................    -15,577    -11,511
                                                   =====================
   FY 2000 SPENDING COUNTED AGAINST 1999 OR 2001
 
Legally delay spending until the final days of the
 fiscal year so it is counted next year:
    DOD--Delay contractor payments................          0     -1,250
    Labor HHS--Delayed Obligations $5.0 B in BA     .........     -1,674
     delayed until 9/29/00........................
    VA medical care delay obligation of $900 M....  .........       -720
    FO--Delayed obligations.......................  .........       -104
    CJS--Delayed availability of balances in Crime       -485       -485
     Victims Fund until after FY 2000.............
    Rescind section 8 housing funds...............     -1,300          0
                                                   ---------------------
        Subtotal, delayed obligations.............     -1,785     -4,233
                                                   =====================
Legally count spending against last fiscal year        -1,800     -1,800
 even though it is available for FY 2000: DOD--
 Advance Appropriations...........................
Legally count spending against next fiscal year
 even though it is available for FY 2000:
    DOE--Elk Hills School Lands Fund..............        -36        -36
    L-HHS--Increased advance funding for FY 2001      -10,100       -532
     (total FY 2001 advances are $19 billion).....
    HUD--section 8 advance appropriation for FY        -4,200          0
     2001 (37% of program total)..................
                                                   ---------------------
        Subtotal..................................    -16,136     -2,368
                                                   =====================
     MISCELLANEOUS SPECIAL ACCOUNTING GIMMICKS
 
Across the Board cut 0.38%........................     -2,143     -1,206
Capture Federal Reserve Surplus...................     -3,752     -3,752
New Hires Data Base for student loan collection          -878       -876
 (incl directed scoring)..........................
Slip military and civilian pay by one day.........  .........     -3,589
Labor HHS-HEALTH loan recapture...................  .........        -27
United Mine Workers Combined Benefit Fund.........        -68        -39
L-HHS--Title XX, social services block grant, cut        -608       -430
 below mandatory level............................
TRANS--Mandatory offsets (rescission of FAA               -30        -10
 contract authority)..............................
                                                   ---------------------
    Subtotal......................................     -7,479     -9,929
                                                   =====================
    Grand total...................................    -43,577    -45,482
------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, in this bill, for instance, they have decided 
now that they are going to declare Head Start to be an emergency. It 
has only been on the books since 1965. I guess we just found out that 
it is an emergency to deal with these kids. What they are really saying 
is they have a political emergency that requires them to hide the real 
cost of this bill from their taxpayers. That is the real emergency 
designation that is going on here.
  Then they move about $4.2 billion in outlays into different years. 
That saves no money. It simply hides money. They have miscellaneous 
spending, accounting gimmicks all told of $45 billion on the outlays 
side, and $43 billion on the budget authority side. If my colleagues 
want to go home and explain to their constituents that kind of hide-
and-seek attention to fiscal affairs, be my guest. That is not my 
flavor of ice cream.
  Let me make one other comment, Mr. Speaker. One of the reasons that I 
have been so unhappy with this bill, as I said earlier, is that it 
stands over 1 foot high. I defy anyone to tell me, and I have a ruler 
to prove it, I defy any of my Republican colleagues, I defy any of my 
Republican colleagues to tell me what is in these authorization bills 
that they are asking us to swallow. How much are we going to hear? How 
much are the reporters in the gallery going to dig out after we have 
left that we do not know about? I am afraid, a lot. But I have to say 
that what bothers me more than anything is that these accounting 
gimmicks may appear to be funny, but in fact, they are not funny at 
all. I would not laugh too long, because what we are witnessing here is 
something that is immensely corrosive of democracy and this 
institution's role in democracy.
  Mr. Speaker, the primary job that the Congress has each year is to 
pass a budget. If we cannot be honest with the American people about 
what we are doing in that budget, I think they have a right to question 
whether we are being honest with them on anything that we say to them. 
And the fact is that the list of accounting shell games that are in 
this bill, not for policy reasons, but for political reasons, I think 
brings discredit on the entire institution. That is because I guess we 
are determined to live under a fiction that requires us to pretend that 
we are spending billions of dollars less than we are actually spending.
  Frankly, a lot of this spending is perfectly justifiable. I think 
that the Republican educational priorities are good. I support them as 
well as our own. But I do not like the fact that we are hiding what we 
are doing in the process. I will have more to say about this along the 
line.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers except 
myself

[[Page 30650]]

to close, so I will continue to reserve my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). The gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) has 10 minutes remaining.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer).
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Speaker, I came to this body this morning prepared to 
vote for a bipartisan omnibus bill, prepared to support reforms in the 
quality and in the resources for our education budget and for our 
schoolchildren across the country; prepared to defend firewalls on 
Social Security and further reduce the deficit and the debt, which is 
the best tax cut for all Americans. I have spent the last hour and a 
half to 2 hours in the parliamentarian's office reading through this 
bill and getting through a little bit of it; and the more I read of it, 
the more concerns I have about Social Security and debt reduction.
  The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) has said that there are some 
gimmicks and games, and I think maybe a hope and a prayer in this 
budget that we do not dip further than CBO has already said, which they 
have stated that Congress has dipped $17 billion into Social Security. 
The most important thing for me in this budget is to not touch Social 
Security, further reduce the debt, and get quality education reforms. I 
do not see any firewalls on Social Security in this. CBO has not even 
scored this. We do not know what it does to Social Security.
  Furthermore, when we have Head Start at $1.7 billion declared as an 
emergency, I am not sure what that does to Social Security. I am not 
sure saying that $2.4 billion becomes available on October 1, 2000, the 
next fiscal year, what is that impact on Social Security? Delayed 
obligations, $3 billion for NIH, $450 million for the Centers for 
Disease Control. What is the impact there on Social Security?
  So all of these things give me a great deal of hesitation and 
reservation and concern, and I do not intend to vote for this omnibus 
bill.
  Now, on education, Mr. Speaker, we have $145 million for public 
charter schools. I think that is a step in the right direction. We have 
$1.4 billion for more teachers, not just for more numbers; but we say 
25 percent of the funds can go to quality improvement, to professional 
development. That is good progress, and I highly support that 
discretion and flexibility.

                              {time}  1330

  We furthermore have $335 million for the Eisenhower Professional 
Development Program, again to try to address the shortage in quality of 
teaching and too many teachers teaching outside their subject area. So 
I think there are some high concerns for success in education but I do 
not think this addresses the Social Security firewalls. It does not get 
scored by CBO, and I would encourage my colleagues to read this bill.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton).
  Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Obey) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, the budget process obviously allows us to say what is 
important to the American people. It is a process where we say some are 
winners and some are losers. It is a process for the Nation to declare 
what the priorities are. Obviously we cannot win everything we want so 
it has to be a compromise, but I can say, Mr. Speaker, the people in 
North Carolina, where there was actually a disaster, never was an 
emergency declared because it was not politically the right thing. 
Maybe those who indeed would have said that would have come from Social 
Security, we are trying to get the kind of basic relief, not all of it, 
just the basic relief, for our farmers which is in doubt.
  Now, I want to vote for this bill because there are good things in 
it. I know there are winners and losers but I can say, Mr. Speaker, 
that as we go forward I think it says something about the American 
people when we ignore that over 72,000 people were affected in the 
region, farmers lost a tremendous amount of their crops. Many of them 
are going bankrupt and yet there is not the kind of relief that even 
responds in a very basic way to their needs, not all the relief because 
we knew an emergency was not declared.
  We were willing to fight for that next year, but we need at least the 
$81 million that was there for marketing. So I would urge, Mr. Speaker, 
that we look at that to try to make sure that this budget process, as 
we vote on it, indeed is speaking to the basic need. Some will be 
winners, some will be losers, but the American nation should not lose 
the principle of responding to those who are most desperately in need, 
while we go forward with such an enormous amount of resources. Eighty-
one million dollars is a pittance; it is what is symbolic of what we 
stand for that we should make sure that as we consider this bill that 
at least the American farmers know that they were part of the 
consideration in this budget process.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I very much appreciate and thank the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the distinguished ranking member, 
for yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, as we approach yet another CR, with all of the terrible 
problems that the ranking member has described, I think it fair to say 
that none has been more harmed by the procedures of the House this year 
than the people I represent.
  Shall I paraphrase Elizabeth Barrett Browning? How shall I dislike 
it? Let me count the ways.
  What is this bill? The Commerce, Justice, State, Foreign Ops, 
Interior, Labor, HHS, DC bill, plus? All of our appropriations that 
remain have been packed on to the tiny D.C. appropriation. Five hundred 
thousand people are being used to take 300 million, or bills for 300 
million, across the finish line, and the Nation's capital be damned; we 
just have to wait to spend our own money, understand, because almost 
all of the money in the D.C. appropriation is money raised in the 
District of Columbia.
  Obviously I have to be for it. What kind of position does that put me 
in? The disgrace as affects the Nation's capital is outflanked only by 
what the procedures of the House this year have done for democracy 
itself and how we have displayed ourselves before the people of the 
United States. We have become, in and of ourselves, a threat to 
democracy. We have made democratic procedures a living joke on C-SPAN.
  We are going to have before us a bill brimming with controversy. 
There is the international family planning gag rule that is certain to 
take the lives of countless of the poorest women in the world, with no 
chance to debate it up and down. There is the dairy controversy we have 
heard so much about today.
  In a democracy, we vote our differences up and down. In a democracy 
we even vote our compromises up and down. This House has become an 
embarrassment to itself. However, I am very glad the Nation has been 
able to see it because maybe when we go home there will be a backlash 
that will keep us from ever doing this again.
  The delay, with another CR, has needlessly harmed the people of the 
District of Columbia right at a time when we have gotten a new reform 
mayor and a reform city council. This has not made an ounce of 
difference to this body. The reputation of the House has been 
permanently damaged as an institution. We can reclaim it only by 
returning to regular order and democratic procedures.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remainder of the time.
  Mr. Speaker, as I understand it section 1001 of the omnibus bill 
effectively waives the pay-as-you-go rules for all of the authorizing 
legislation included in the omnibus package. It also effectively, as I 
understand it, waives the pay-as-you-go rules for the outyear effects 
of other legislation passed this legislation.
  I would like to ask the leadership of this House why these rules are 
being

[[Page 30651]]

waived and how much spending is not being counted as a result of that?
  We have seen no CBO scoring on the omnibus package. Can anyone tell 
us the amount of spending covered by these budget waivers?
  I would also ask why Members' pay was exempted from this across-the-
board cut when it was included in the previous across-the-board cut 
that was made?
  I think those are but some of the questions that Members ought to be 
asking before they vote on the budget that is coming at us later this 
afternoon.
  I would also say, Mr. Speaker, I regret the time that we have taken 
but I think every hour that we spend gives Members an additional 
opportunity to understand what is in these bills, and I think in the 
end that serves the interest both of every Member and the taxpayers 
that they are trying to represent.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.
  Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to all of the discussion and the 
debate from the Members on the other side of the aisle, and if any of 
that debate related to this CR that is presently before us I would have 
a lengthy response, but none of that debate relates to this CR. So at 
this point I would just like to make this suggestion, let us pass the 
CR and then get on to the appropriations bill that has been the subject 
of debate using this as a vehicle.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). All time for debate has 
expired.
  The joint resolution is considered as having been read for amendment.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 385, the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint 
resolution.
  The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 
time, and was read the third time.


                 Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Obey

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the joint 
resolution?
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, under these circumstances, regrettably I am.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Obey moves to recommit the joint resolution to the 
     Committee on Appropriations.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently, a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  The Chair would announce that if a vote on passage of the joint 
resolution is required, pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair will 
reduce to 5 minutes the time for votes on final passage and questions 
incidental thereto.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 1, nays 
420, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 606]

                                YEAS--1

       
     Forbes
       

                               NAYS--420

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Baca
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     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)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     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
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larson
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     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
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     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
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Ackerman
     Bachus
     Brady (TX)
     Burton
     Capps
     Conyers
     Delahunt
     Hutchinson
     Jefferson
     Johnson, Sam
     Meehan
     Visclosky
     Wexler

                              {time}  1359

  Messrs. TANNER, HEFLEY, BATEMAN, DAVIS of Illinois, MOLLOHAN, LINDER, 
CLYBURN, Ms. VELAZQUEZ and Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas changed their vote 
from ``yea'' to ``nay.''

[[Page 30652]]

  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                              {time}  1400


                       Motion Offered By Mr. Obey

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
House voted to reject the motion to recommit the bill to the Committee 
on Appropriations.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). Did the gentleman from 
Wisconsin vote on the prevailing side of the question on the motion?
  Mr. OBEY. Yes, I did, Mr. Speaker.


            Motion To Table Offered By Mr. Young of Florida

  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I move to lay on the table the 
motion to reconsider.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) to lay on the table the motion to 
reconsider the vote offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. An insufficient number having arisen, a 
recorded vote is not in order.
  So a recorded vote was refused.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the joint 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 403, 
noes 16, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 607]

                               AYES--403

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     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)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larson
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Minge
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (PA)
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--16

     Baldwin
     Barrett (WI)
     Coburn
     Forbes
     Green (WI)
     Kind (WI)
     Manzullo
     Miller, George
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Paul
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Ryan (WI)
     Sensenbrenner
     Souder

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Ackerman
     Brady (TX)
     Capps
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Delahunt
     Herger
     Jones (OH)
     Meehan
     Mink
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Visclosky
     Wexler
     Woolsey

                              {time}  1408

  Mr. COYNE changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye''.
  So the joint resolution was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________