[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 4508-4511]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




         FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1999

  Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 104 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 104

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 819) to authorize appropriations for the 
     Federal Maritime Commission for fiscal years 2000 and 2001. 
     The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. 
     General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not 
     exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the 
     chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure. After general debate the 
     bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute 
     rule. The bill shall be considered as read. During 
     consideration of the bill for amendment, the chairman of the 
     Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition on 
     the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment has 
     caused it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional 
     Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. 
     Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. The 
     chairman of the Committee of the Whole may: (1) postpone 
     until a time during further consideration in the Committee of 
     the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any amendment; and 
     (2) reduce to five minutes the minimum time for electronic 
     voting on any postponed question that follows another 
     electronic vote without intervening business, provided that 
     the minimum time for electronic voting on the first in any 
     series of questions shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of 
     consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall 
     rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as 
     may have been adopted. The previous question shall be 
     considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to 
     final passage without intervening motion except one motion to 
     recommit with or without instructions.

                              {time}  1345

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Stearns). The gentlewoman from North 
Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley), 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.
  Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday the Committee on Rules met and granted an 
open rule for H.R. 81, the Federal Maritime Commission Authorization 
Act. The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided 
between the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure.
  The rule provides that the bill shall be open for amendment at any 
point and authorizes the Chair to accord priority in recognition to 
Members who have preprinted their amendments in the Congressional 
Record.
  The rule allows the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to 
postpone votes during consideration of the bill, and to reduce votes to 
5 minutes on a postponed question if the vote follows a 15-minute vote.
  Finally, the rule provides for one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 104 is an open rule for a good, noncontroversial 
bill. The Federal Maritime Commission Authorization Act allocates $15.7 
million for the Federal Maritime Commission in 2000 and $16.3 million 
for the Commission in 2001, an increase of approximately $1 million.
  Because the Commission ably protects United States shippers and 
carriers, including Sea-Land Service of Charlotte, North Carolina, from 
the unfair trade practices of foreign governments and flag carriers, 
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported a bill that 
makes no changes to the duties of the Commission. I urge my colleagues 
to support this open rule and to support the underlying legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, my dear friend, the 
gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick), for yielding me the 
customary half-hour, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, like every other Member of this House, I am a big fan of 
the Federal Maritime Commission. It protects United States shippers 
from the restrictive rules of foreign governments and from the unfair 
practices of foreign flagged carriers. It investigates complaints and 
helps keep shippers in compliance with the Shipping Act of 1984. It 
also monitors tariffs to make sure they are reasonable.
  In short, Mr. Speaker, the Federal Maritime Commission keeps order on 
the high seas, especially when it comes to commerce. The commissioners 
do very good work, and their work should continue.
  I support this open rule and the bill to fund the Federal Maritime 
Commission in fiscal years 2000 and 2001. However, Mr. Speaker, let me 
note that I do not think that this bill even needs a rule at all.
  The Federal Maritime Commission has such widespread support that, 
once upon a time, this bill was on the suspension calendar. I know of 
no amendments to this bill, so I am wondering why we are bringing the 
bill up with a rule in the first place.
  Mr. Speaker, this is starting to become a pattern. Bills that 
normally come up under suspension of the rules are instead being sent 
to the Committee on Rules and coming to the floor for a vote. In fact, 
9 of the last 15 bills that we have sent to the Committee on Rules have 
passed by more than 400 votes.
  On the other hand, Mr. Speaker, the bills that should have open rules 
are

[[Page 4509]]

being closed down. We just finished the Ed-Flex bill, which was brought 
to the floor under a restrictive rule with a preprinting requirement 
and a time cap. Twenty-three Democratic amendments were submitted and 
preprinted; two Republican amendments were submitted and preprinted. 
Both Republican amendments were considered and only three of the 23 
Democratic amendments were considered before the time cap was up.
  In other words, Mr. Speaker, 20 Democratic amendments which were 
preprinted in the Record, according to the rule, were blocked from 
consideration. In order to give Members more time to offer their 
amendments, the Democratic ranking member of the committee, the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay) made a unanimous consent request for 
2 additional hours, which the Republican chairman, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), denied.
  I wonder, Mr. Speaker, why we need a rule for this simple 2-page 
noncontroversial bill while bigger and more controversial rules, like 
Education and Kosovo, are brought up under restrictive rules.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Myrick). Pursuant to House Resolution 
104 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of 
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the 
bill, H.R. 819.

                              {time}  1352


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 819) to authorize appropriations for the Federal Maritime 
Commission for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, with Mr. Stearns in the 
chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and the 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) will each control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I am quite pleased to bring this bill to the floor 
today to authorize expenditures of the Federal Maritime Commission. The 
Federal Maritime Commission has important work ahead to implement the 
important provisions of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998. That act 
contains the first major amendments to deregulate international ocean 
shipping since 1984.
  H.R. 819 also contains funds for the Federal Maritime Commission to 
enforce the provisions of the Foreign Shipping Practices Act and to 
carry out the other responsibilities of the Commission. So I would urge 
my colleagues to support this important bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I would report to the House that thus far, in the early 
days of this Congress, the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure has already had nine bills pass the House and ten other 
measures pass the committee and which we are prepared to bring to the 
floor of the House. So we are off to a very fast start on the committee 
and look forward to a very productive legislative session.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 819, the Federal 
Maritime Commission Authorization Act of 1999. The Federal Maritime 
Commission performs a vital role of protecting our international trade 
from unfair practices by foreign governments and is actively engaged in 
implementing the new Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998. Deregulation of 
international maritime shipping begins May 1. The ocean carriers and 
shippers are quickly moving to enter into service contracts in which 
their competitors will no longer know the rates. A new era in 
competition in international shipping is about to begin.
  The Commission has also been actively involved in resolving practices 
by the governments of China, Japan and Brazil that distort the free 
market system of international shipping by imposing restrictions on 
U.S. carriers in these trades.
  H.R. 819 authorizes $15.6 million for the Federal Maritime Commission 
for fiscal year 2000 and $16.3 million for fiscal year 2001. The fiscal 
year 2000 funding level is $385,000 above the amount requested by the 
President to fund the appointment of the fifth commissioner and his 
staff. Mr. Chairman, this is a very reasonable budget request.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 819, the Federal 
Maritime Commission Authorization Act of 1999.
  Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 819, the 
Federal Maritime Commission Authorization Act. The Federal Maritime 
Commission (FMC) was created to advocate for an open and fair system of 
international ocean borne transportation for U.S. imports and exports.
  One of the most important responsibilities vested in the Commission 
is its duty to protect U.S. ocean borne trade and U.S. carriers from 
discriminatory or unfavorable treatment by foreign governments. The 
Commission has a long history of using its authority to impose 
sanctions and other retaliatory measures, to force foreign governments 
to abandon protectionist policies and to open maritime markets to U.S. 
companies. These ongoing actions have created business opportunities 
for U.S. shipping companies and provide more favorable transportation 
conditions for U.S. exports. Presently, the FMC is contending with the 
monitoring and/or reviewing conditions and activities in the U.S./China 
trade, commitments to reform Japanese port practices, and conditions in 
Brazil which may be hindering free and open ocean trade.
  The FMC performs a wide range of other important statutory functions 
as well. This includes policing anti-competitive abuses of antitrust 
immunity, various types of fraud against consumers, mis-description or 
mis-declarations of cargo, illegal or unfiled agreements, unlicensed 
freight forwarding, untariffed cargo carriage and illegal kickbacks, 
and unbonded passenger vessel operations. Another essential 
responsibility of the Commission is the oversight of carrier activity 
and commercial conditions in the U.S. liner trades. The Commission also 
conducts a variety of economic analyses of the pricing and service 
behavior of carriers operating in the U.S. trades, as well as research 
on emerging trends in the liner shipping industry. Most uniquely, the 
Commission provides an expeditious and inexpensive forum for the 
resolution of disputes between private parties involved in ocean 
transportation.
  The territory of Guam has utilized the adjudication arm of the FMC in 
its quest to obtain honest and fair prices for shipping products to and 
from the island. These so called ``rate cases'' have been instrumental 
in exposing the historical inequity in shipping costs for Guam that 
have long been the unseemly by-product of the Jones Act.
  Guam's potential for serving as a ``clearinghouse for maritime 
transported trade goods'' is limited by the application of the Jones 
Act and other federal coastwise shipping laws, cargo-preference laws, 
and cabotage laws. Generally, these laws require that goods shipped 
between U.S. ports (e.g. Guam to San Francisco) must be carried on U.S. 
built ships that are of U.S. registry and manned by U.S. crews.
  The political coalition that protects the U.S. shipping interests 
through the Jones Act and associated laws is not only formidable, it is 
probably the best-organized and broadest coalition of interests in 
Washington. This coalition includes the U.S. shipbuilders who have an 
interest in requiring that the domestic U.S. trade be reserved for 
them; maritime labor unions who fight for jobs on these ships; 
conservative defense ``hawks'' who argue that only a domestic U.S. 
flagged fleet can be counted on in war time; and communities with 
strong maritime interests.
  Guam makes the best case for Jones Act reform--we are technically in 
the domestic market of offshore trade, so a reform aimed at our 
specific needs would not necessarily upset

[[Page 4510]]

the total balance of domestic political interests. Under current 
artificial conditions, Guam does not have adequate economies of scale 
to attract and sustain large port transshipment industries. For 
example, the rates for a container shipment from the U.S. west coast to 
Guam is three times higher, on average, than for a similar container 
going from the west coast to Japan. It is almost impossible to compete 
with these numbers. An unfortunate result was the 1996 relocation of 
the Navy's Diego Garcia supply ship from Guam to Yokosuka based on the 
econmics of these shipping rates.
  Our problem has always been the political reluctance of the ``Jones 
Act coalition'' to allow any erosion of current law. They argue that 
allowing one exemption, however minor, starts us down a slippery slope 
that jeopardizes all the other interests. The defense of the Jones Act 
reaches across party lines, so that neither the Democrats nor the 
Republicans in Congress or in the respective Democrat (Clinton) and 
Republican (Bush) administrations have had any burning desire to mess 
with it. Our most visible allies for Jones Act reform are the farmers 
in the Midwest who feel that the Jones Act makes their grain exports 
less competitive because of the artifically high transportation costs. 
Unfortunately, the farmers' arguments do contribute to the feeling that 
the slippery slope fear has some merit to it.
  Transportation and trade have links, but in our case, the links are 
tenuous. While the world is moving to a global economy with freer 
trade, that trade is not going to pass through our port unless we have 
an economically attractive package to offer to exporters in 
transportation services. ``Transshipment'' through Guam is also 
hindered by customs and tariff issues. Guam is not in the U.S. customs 
zone, which means that except for goods manufactured on Guam, other 
goods arriving from Guam are foreign. Certain goods manufactured on 
Guam are subject to customs quotas. Multilateral trade agreements 
(NAFTA, APEC) are moving us in a direction where trade barriers are 
being eased. While we do not have complete free trade in any area, it 
is likely that high technology products will lead the way on this 
movement. But where there is free trade, the advantages of a U.S. 
territory outside the customs zone also may evaporate--and if the only 
advantage therefore is our transportation costs, then we are not 
attractive to exporters under the current Jones Act constraints.
  Certainly, it is difficult to argue against the National Security 
element of the Jones Act. Admittedly, there seems to be some truth to 
it and in that narrow regard, I support the arguments. However, in the 
case of my home territory, Guam, we will seek a workable and proven 
solution that will provide relief to the solitary economic anomaly of 
being the only U.S. port in Asia. On behalf of the people of Guam, I 
look forward to working with the Honorable Harold J. Creel, Jr., 
Chairman of the Federal Maritime Commission and the Honorable Clyde 
Hart, Administrator of the U.S. Maritime Administration toward this 
end. Si Yu'os Ma'ase.
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests 
for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read for amendment under 
the 5-minute rule.
  The text of H.R. 819 is as follows:

                                H.R. 819

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Maritime Commission 
     Authorization Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FEDERAL MARITIME 
                   COMMISSION.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the Federal 
     Maritime Commission--
       (1) for fiscal year 2000, $15,685,000; and
       (2) for fiscal year 2001, $16,312,000.

  The CHAIRMAN. During consideration of the bill for amendment, the 
Chair may accord priority in recognition to a Member offering an 
amendment that he has printed in the designated place in the 
Congressional Record. Those amendments will be considered read.
  The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a demand for 
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5 
minutes the time for voting on any proposed question that immediately 
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first 
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
  Are there any amendments to the bill?
  If not, under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Pease) having assumed the chair, Mr. Stearns, Chairman 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. 819) to 
authorize appropriations for the Federal Maritime Commission for fiscal 
years 2000 and 2001, pursuant to House Resolution 104, he reported the 
bill back to the House.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 403, 
nays 3, not voting 27, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 50]

                               YEAS--403

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     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
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     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)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larson
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     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
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pascrell

[[Page 4511]]


     Pastor
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     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
     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
     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
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--3

     Chenoweth
     Paul
     Sensenbrenner

                             NOT VOTING--27

     Bartlett
     Bilirakis
     Boyd
     Callahan
     Cramer
     Cubin
     DeFazio
     Dooley
     Duncan
     Gilchrest
     Hall (OH)
     Hastings (FL)
     Hostettler
     King (NY)
     Lewis (KY)
     Millender-McDonald
     Moakley
     Oxley
     Pitts
     Pryce (OH)
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Turner
     Vento
     Watkins
     Weldon (PA)
     Wicker

                              {time}  1419

  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated for:
  Mr. CALLAHAN. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 50, on H.R. 819, 
I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted 
``aye.''

                          ____________________