[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 13654-13682]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY AND RELATED 
                   AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2002

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 192 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, 
H.R. 2500.

                              {time}  1411


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 2500) making appropriations for the Departments of 
Commerce, Justice, and

[[Page 13655]]

State, the Judiciary, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 2002, and for other purposes, with Mr. Hastings of 
Washington in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole House rose earlier 
today, a request for a recorded vote on Amendment No. 28 by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) had been postponed and the 
bill was open for amendment from page 47, line 20 through page 48, line 
9.
  Pursuant to the order of the House of today, each amendment shall not 
be subject to amendment (except that the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Appropriations, or a designee, each may 
offer one pro forma amendment for the purpose of further debate on any 
pending amendment); and amendments numbered 1, 8, 19, 36, 34, 5, 33, 
38, 17, 20, 22, 24, 25, 35, 10, 11, and 40 shall be debatable only for 
10 minutes, equally divided and controlled by a proponent and an 
opponent.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:
       In addition, for expenses related to planning, testing, and 
     implementing the long-form transitional database for the 2010 
     decennial census, $65,000,000.
       In addition, for expenses to collect and publish statistics 
     for other periodic censuses and programs provided for by law, 
     $171,138,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That regarding engineering and design of a facility at the 
     Suitland Federal Center, quarterly reports regarding the 
     expenditure of funds and project planning, design and cost 
     decisions shall be provided by the Bureau, in cooperation 
     with the General Services Administration, to the Committees 
     on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     provided in this Act or any other Act under the heading 
     ``Bureau of the Census, Periodic Censuses and Programs'' 
     shall be used to fund the construction and tenant build-out 
     costs of a facility at the Suitland Federal Center.

       National Telecommunications and Information Administration


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses, as provided for by law, of the 
     National Telecommunications and Information Administration 
     (NTIA), $13,048,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1535(d), the 
     Secretary of Commerce shall charge Federal agencies for costs 
     incurred in spectrum management, analysis, and operations, 
     and related services and such fees shall be retained and used 
     as offsetting collections for costs of such spectrum 
     services, to remain available until expended: Provided 
     further, That hereafter, notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, NTIA shall not authorize spectrum use or provide any 
     spectrum functions pursuant to the National 
     Telecommunications and Information Administration 
     Organization Act, 47 U.S.C. 902-903, to any Federal entity 
     without reimbursement as required by NTIA for such spectrum 
     management costs, and Federal entities withholding payment of 
     such cost shall not use spectrum: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary of Commerce is authorized to retain and use as 
     offsetting collections all funds transferred, or previously 
     transferred, from other Government agencies for all costs 
     incurred in telecommunications research, engineering, and 
     related activities by the Institute for Telecommunication 
     Sciences of NTIA, in furtherance of its assigned functions 
     under this paragraph, and such funds received from other 
     Government agencies shall remain available until expended.


    Public Telecommunications Facilities, Planning and Construction

       For grants authorized by section 392 of the Communications 
     Act of 1934, as amended, $43,466,000, to remain available 
     until expended as authorized by section 391 of the Act, as 
     amended: Provided, That not to exceed $2,358,000 shall be 
     available for program administration as authorized by section 
     391 of the Act: Provided further, That, notwithstanding the 
     provisions of section 391 of the Act, the prior year 
     unobligated balances may be made available for grants for 
     projects for which applications have been submitted and 
     approved during any fiscal year.


                   Information Infrastructure Grants

       For grants authorized by section 392 of the Communications 
     Act of 1934, as amended, $15,503,000, to remain available 
     until expended as authorized by section 391 of the Act, as 
     amended: Provided, That not to exceed $3,097,000 shall be 
     available for program administration and other support 
     activities as authorized by section 391: Provided further, 
     That, of the funds appropriated herein, not to exceed 5 
     percent may be available for telecommunications research 
     activities for projects related directly to the development 
     of a national information infrastructure: Provided further, 
     That, notwithstanding the requirements of sections 392(a) and 
     392(c) of the Act, these funds may be used for the planning 
     and construction of telecommunications networks for the 
     provision of educational, cultural, health care, public 
     information, public safety, or other social services: 
     Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, no entity that receives telecommunications services 
     at preferential rates under section 254(h) of the Act (47 
     U.S.C. 254(h)) or receives assistance under the regional 
     information sharing systems grant program of the Department 
     of Justice under part M of title I of the Omnibus Crime 
     Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796h) may 
     use funds under a grant under this heading to cover any costs 
     of the entity that would otherwise be covered by such 
     preferential rates or such assistance, as the case may be.

               United States Patent and Trademark Office


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the United States Patent and 
     Trademark Office provided for by law, including defense of 
     suits instituted against the Under Secretary of Commerce for 
     Intellectual Property and Director of the United States 
     Patent and Trademark Office, $846,701,000, to remain 
     available until expended, which amount shall be derived from 
     offsetting collections assessed and collected pursuant to 15 
     U.S.C. 1113 and 35 U.S.C. 41 and 376, and shall be retained 
     and used for necessary expenses in this appropriation: 
     Provided, That the sum herein appropriated from the general 
     fund shall be reduced as such offsetting collections are 
     received during fiscal year 2002, so as to result in a final 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation from the general fund 
     estimated at $0: Provided further, That during fiscal year 
     2002, should the total amount of offsetting fee collections 
     be less than $846,701,000, the total amounts available to the 
     United States Patent and Trademark Office shall be reduced 
     accordingly: Provided further, That an additional amount not 
     to exceed $282,300,000 from fees collected in prior fiscal 
     years shall be available for obligation in fiscal year 2002.

                         Science and Technology

                       Technology Administration


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for the Under Secretary for 
     Technology/Office of Technology Policy, $8,094,000.

             National Institute of Standards and Technology


             Scientific and Technical Research and Services

       For necessary expenses of the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology, $348,589,000, to remain available 
     until expended, of which not to exceed $282,000 may be 
     transferred to the ``Working Capital Fund''.


                     Industrial Technology Services

       For necessary expenses of the Manufacturing Extension 
     Partnership of the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology, $106,522,000, to remain available until expended.
       In addition, for necessary expenses of the Advanced 
     Technology Program of the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology, $12,992,000, to remain available until expended.


                  Construction of Research Facilities

       For construction of new research facilities, including 
     architectural and engineering design, and for renovation of 
     existing facilities, not otherwise provided for the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology, as authorized by 15 
     U.S.C. 278c-278e, $20,893,000, to remain available until 
     expended.

            National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration


                  Operations, Research, and Facilities

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses of activities authorized by law for 
     the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 
     including maintenance, operation, and hire of aircraft; 
     grants, contracts, or other payments to nonprofit 
     organizations for the purposes of conducting activities 
     pursuant to cooperative agreements; and relocation of 
     facilities as authorized by 33 U.S.C. 883i, $2,197,298,000, 
     to remain available until expended: Provided, That fees and 
     donations received by the National Ocean Service for the 
     management of the national marine sanctuaries may be retained 
     and used for the salaries and expenses associated with those 
     activities, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302: Provided further, 
     That, in addition, $68,000,000 shall be derived by transfer 
     from the fund entitled ``Promote and Develop Fishery Products 
     and Research Pertaining to American Fisheries'': Provided 
     further, That grants to States pursuant to sections 306 and 
     306A of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, 
     shall not exceed $2,000,000: Provided further, That, of the 
     $2,220,298,000 provided for in direct obligations under this 
     heading (of which $2,197,298,000 is appropriated from the 
     General Fund, $71,000,000 is provided by transfer, and 
     $17,000,000 is derived from deobligations from prior years), 
     $375,609,000 shall be for the National Ocean Service, 
     $542,121,000 shall be for the National Marine Fisheries 
     Service, $317,483,000 shall be for Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Research, $659,349,000 shall be for the National Weather 
     Service, $149,624,000 shall

[[Page 13656]]

     be for the National Environmental Satellite, Data, and 
     Information Service, and $176,112,000 shall be for Program 
     Support: Provided further, That, hereafter, ocean assessment, 
     coastal ocean, protected resources, and habitat conservation 
     activities under this heading shall be considered to be 
     within the ``Coastal Assistance sub-category'' in section 
     250(c)(4)(K) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985, as amended: Provided further, That, of 
     the amount provided under this heading, $304,000,000 shall be 
     for the conservation activities defined in section 
     250(c)(4)(K) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985, as amended: Provided further, That no 
     general administrative charge shall be applied against an 
     assigned activity included in this Act and, further, that any 
     direct administrative expenses applied against an assigned 
     activity shall be limited to 5 percent of the funds provided 
     for that assigned activity so that total National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration administrative expenses shall not 
     exceed $257,200,000: Provided further, That any use of 
     deobligated balances of funds provided under this heading in 
     previous years shall be subject to the procedures set forth 
     in section 605 of this Act: Provided further, That, in 
     addition, not to exceed $3,000,000 shall be derived by 
     transfer from the fund entitled ``Coastal Zone Management''.
       In addition, for necessary retired pay expenses under the 
     Retired Serviceman's Family Protection and Survivor Benefits 
     Plan, and for payments for medical care of retired personnel 
     and their dependents under the Dependents Medical Care Act 
     (10 U.S.C. ch. 55), such sums as may be necessary.


               procurement, acquisition and construction

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For procurement, acquisition and construction of capital 
     assets, including alteration and modification costs, of the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 
     $749,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That unexpended balances of amounts previously made available 
     in the ``Operations, Research, and Facilities'' account for 
     activities funded under this heading may be transferred to 
     and merged with this account, to remain available until 
     expended for the purposes for which the funds were originally 
     appropriated: Provided further, That, of the amount provided 
     under this heading, $26,000,000 shall be for the conservation 
     activities defined in section 250(c)(4)(K) of the Balanced 
     Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended: 
     Provided further, That none of the funds provided in this Act 
     or any other Act under the heading ``National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration, Procurement, Acquisition and 
     Construction'' shall be used to fund the General Services 
     Administration's standard construction and tenant build-out 
     costs of a facility at the Suitland Federal Center.


                    pacific coastal salmon recovery

       For necessary expenses associated with the restoration of 
     Pacific salmon populations and the implementation of the 1999 
     Pacific Salmon Treaty Agreement between the United States and 
     Canada, $110,000,000, subject to express authorization: 
     Provided, That this amount shall be for the conservation 
     activities defined in section 250(c)(4)(K) of the Balanced 
     Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended.
       In addition, for implementation of the 1999 Pacific Salmon 
     Treaty Agreement, $25,000,000, of which $10,000,000 shall be 
     deposited in the Northern Boundary and Transboundary Rivers 
     Restoration and Enhancement Fund, of which $10,000,000 shall 
     be deposited in the Southern Boundary Restoration and 
     Enhancement Fund, and of which $5,000,000 shall be for a 
     direct payment to the State of Washington for obligations 
     under the 1999 Pacific Salmon Treaty Agreement.


                      coastal zone management fund

       Of amounts collected pursuant to section 308 of the Coastal 
     Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1456a), not to exceed 
     $3,000,000 shall be transferred to the ``Operations, 
     Research, and Facilities'' account to offset the costs of 
     implementing such Act.


                      fishermen's contingency fund

       For carrying out the provisions of title IV of Public Law 
     95-372, not to exceed $952,000, to be derived from receipts 
     collected pursuant to that Act, to remain available until 
     expended.


                     foreign fishing observer fund

       For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the 
     Atlantic Tunas Convention Act of 1975, as amended (Public Law 
     96-339), the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
     Management Act of 1976, as amended (Public Law 100-627), and 
     the American Fisheries Promotion Act (Public Law 96-561), to 
     be derived from the fees imposed under the foreign fishery 
     observer program authorized by these Acts, not to exceed 
     $191,000, to remain available until expended.


                   fisheries finance program account

       For the cost of direct loans, $287,000, as authorized by 
     the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, as amended: Provided, That 
     such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall 
     be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act 
     of 1974: Provided further, That none of the funds made 
     available under this heading may be used for direct loans for 
     any new fishing vessel that will increase the harvesting 
     capacity in any United States fishery.

                        Departmental Management


                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses necessary for the departmental management of 
     the Department of Commerce provided for by law, including not 
     to exceed $3,000 for official entertainment, $37,843,000.

                              {time}  1415


               Amendment No. 39 Offered by Ms. Velazquez

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

       Amendment No. 39 offered by Ms. Velazquez:
       Page 59, line 13, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 71, line 4, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $8,000,000)''.
       Page 73, line 3, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $7,000,000)''.
       Page 95, line 3, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $7,000,000)''.
       Page 95, line 19, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.

  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, our country is coming off of one of the 
greatest economic growth periods in our Nation's history. This 
phenomenal expansion has been driven by our small businesses, which are 
the engine of our economy. The contribution of American entrepreneurs 
cannot be underestimated. Small businesses employ half our workers, 
create new jobs 75 percent faster than large companies, and make up 
half of our GDP.
  The SBA fuels this powerful engine through its loan and technical 
assistance programs. SBA maintains a loan portfolio of $45 billion to 
nearly a half million businesses, accounts for nearly half of all 
venture capital financing, and helped secure financing for eight of 
Fortune Magazine's 100 fastest-growing firms in 1999. The SBA has even 
helped launch household brand names like Fed-Ex, Intel, and Apple.
  Unfortunately, this bill's funding levels leave the agency short by 
$130 billion. It zeros out ten programs and underfunds another half-
dozen. This leaves our small businesses close to running on empty.
  This amendment, offered by my colleague, the gentlewoman from New 
York (Mrs. Kelly), and myself, will restore $17 million to the agency, 
allowing us to adequately fund SBA's 7(a) loan program and maintain for 
PRIME and BusinessLinc, two critical small business development 
programs.
  Mr. Chairman, access to capital means access to opportunity for small 
business owners. The 7(a) loan program, which helps small businesses 
obtain long-term capital they need for growth and expansion, directly 
translates into jobs and a net return on our investment. Last year 
alone, 7(a) made 43,000 loan guarantees worth over $10.5 billion. The 
7(a) program accounts for 30 percent of all long-term small business 
loans. The current 7(a) funding is almost $40 million below last year, 
threatening 20,000 small business loans.
  This amendment will restore $10 million to the 7(a) program, bringing 
the level up to $88 million, still far below the $117 million we 
provided last year for the program. With more and more reports coming 
to light every day that capital is becoming increasingly difficult for 
small businesses to obtain, having an adequately funded 7(a) program 
will be critical to our Nation's small business success.
  Oftentimes even before an enterprise gets their first loan, the dice 
have already been cast on whether they will succeed. The PRIME 
initiative gives entrepreneurs the understanding about potential 
business opportunities, pitfalls, and the necessary steps to success. 
Studies consistently show that entrepreneurs who receive counseling and 
technical assistance are twice as likely to succeed. This program 
ensures those mistakes do not happen. Our amendment funds the program 
at a modest $5 to $10 million less than what was funded last year.
  Finally, while many areas of this country have prospered, there are 
pockets of communities that have not

[[Page 13657]]

benefited from the economic boom of the last 10 years. BusinessLinc 
helps entrepreneurs in these communities to penetrate otherwise 
inaccessible national markets through a mentoring program linking small 
firms with large corporate mentors. Our amendment provides a modest 
level of $2 million to sustain BusinessLinc, still well below last 
year's level of $7 million.
  Our amendment is paid for through minor cuts to the administrative 
accounts of the Department of Commerce, Justice, and State. I do not 
anticipate these cuts will cause any hardship, because the levels are 
well above last year's. It will be a very small price to pay for 
programs that deliver such strong returns.
  Mr. Chairman, our amendment is a commitment to America's small 
businesses, which helped to spur and sustain our historic ``long 
boom.'' The foundation of American prosperity is built by 
entrepreneurs; and in these less certain times, we must provide the 
incentives, knowledge, and guarantees to continue their mission of 
success.
  I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the amendment 
of the gentlewoman from New York.
  Mr. Chairman, we recognize the importance of many of the small 
business programs in this bill, particularly the 7(a) business loan. 
However, I think everyone should understand that we have already funded 
the Small Business Administration very generously in this bill.
  We are over the President's request by $186 million. Let me go back 
again: this bill is over the President's request by $186 million. For 
the 7(a) program, we have provided $77 million in new budget authority. 
This amount, along with anticipated carryover funding, will support $10 
billion in loans for fiscal year 2002, which is an increase of over $1 
billion above the current level. So we are going to be over $1 billion 
above the current level.
  So even without this amendment, the 7(a) program for fiscal year 2002 
will represent a significant increase above the current level.
  The other two programs the gentlewoman seeks to fund, PRIME and 
BusinessLinc, were not included in the President's budget. These 
programs were judged by the administration to be duplications of 
existing programs to assist entrepreneurs, including microloan 
technical assistance, new markets technical assistance, small business 
development centers, women's business centers, business information 
centers, all of which are funded for fiscal year 2002. The increases 
proposed by this amendment are unnecessary.
  We also would oppose the gentlewoman's proposal to further increase 
SBA programs at the expense of the State Department. Both sides of the 
aisle for the last several years have talked about giving the Secretary 
of State the necessary resources. This amendment will cut $15 million 
from Secretary Powell's initiatives to make urgently needed 
improvements to diplomatic readiness and to the Department's optimally 
automated system. So we would be taking this from the Defense 
Department at the very time both sides want to meet Secretary Powell's 
concerns.
  In addition, the amendment includes a cut which, though small, would 
have a serious impact on the Department of Commerce, a 5 percent cut to 
the Department's management accounts, which is overwhelmingly where we 
get the real dollars and salaries, which may very well result in 
reductions in force.
  So we are over, we are well over, we are beyond with the carryover. 
We are well over last year. Potential risks really create a difficult 
time for Secretary Powell, so I strongly urge opposition to the 
amendment.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in full support of the amendment 
offered by the gentlewomen from New York, Ms. Velazquez and Mrs. Kelly.
  Mr. Chairman, I have said on many occasions and will continue to say 
throughout further debate on this bill that my chairman, the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr.  Wolf), has done a wonderful job on this bill. That 
is why I say we will support this bill, and I will be asking both sides 
to vote for it in large numbers, if not unanimously.
  However, I also said, and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) 
knows that, that if there is a weakness in this bill, it is what was 
not done for the SBA, and in fact what was the harm we did to SBA.
  So while I myself am not crazy about cuts to the Department of 
Commerce or the Department of State, I realize the importance, one, of 
trying to pass this amendment here today, and at the minimum, to try to 
bring forth the understanding that this is an issue that we are not 
finished with; that in conference and as we move this bill on, we have 
to try to do something about the Small Business Administration.
  So I think that what should be noted here is that we have people on 
this side who support this bill, but who feel that something should be 
done to remedy that one part of the bill that is very weak. I am a 
prime example of that.
  So I would hope that the chairman does not see this in any way as an 
attack on the bill, but certainly an understanding that there is work 
yet that needs to be done.
  In addition, I think it would be proper at this point to accept this 
amendment and then, as we go to conference, we can make the changes 
necessary in that State and Commerce situation.
  Now, we have been very good to the Commerce Department in this bill. 
We are very good to the State Department. There is no reason why we 
cannot be good to SBA, and then find a way to take care of these two 
cuts that we would be making, or this shifting of dollars that we would 
be making by this amendment.
  So I would hope, again, that the chairman would take this amendment 
in the spirit that it is intended, and that is to remedy that one part 
of the bill that is week and one that I know he wants to strengthen.
  Secondly, I would hope that we use it, again, as a unifying situation 
to bring us together even further on the bill as we move along.
  Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Velazquez-Kelly 
amendment to increase the funding for the three crucial programs of the 
U.S. Small Business Administration, the 7(a) loan program, the PRIME 
program, and the BusinessLinc program. Together, these programs help 
our Nation's smallest businesses prosper and survive.
  Our amendment provides for an additional $10 million for the 7(a) 
loan program. This lending program supports over $10 billion in new 
business loans annually. It brings money back into the Federal 
Treasury. It is a very good program.
  Last year, the SBA 7(a) loans accounted for over 30 percent of all 
long-term loans made to U.S. small businesses. In my district, the 7(a) 
program was responsible for 93 loans totalling over $22 million last 
year. Without appropriate funding this year, the program will not be as 
far-reaching as in past years.
  I commend the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Wolf) and the ranking 
member, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) for the bill they 
have brought before us, and for acting to fund the 7(a) program at $77 
million, but I urge that we go one step further and give this 
worthwhile program the funds needed to ensure its viability.


  In the midst of economic uncertainty, that is not the time to impose 
fees on lenders and reduce access to loans for small businesses.
  The Kelly-Velazquez amendment also includes $5 million for the 
Program for Investment in Microenterprises, known as the PRIME program, 
which is designed to increase investment and technical assistance in 
traditionally underserved areas. These much-needed funds will help 
PRIME provide training, technical assistance, and access to credit to 
entrepreneurs.
  Long-term studies charting the effects of microenterprise investment 
have found that low-income individuals engaged in microenterprise 
development increase their personal incomes, build assets, and decrease 
their reliance on government benefits.

[[Page 13658]]

  When we are telling people that it is time that they go from welfare 
to work, we are teaching them skills and training them to do jobs, and 
what we also must do then is provide them with the ability to go on to 
reach the American dream, and that is to begin and to succeed in 
businesses, tiny little businesses, with microloan programs, so that 
they, too, can experience the ability to be part of the American dream.
  Who knows who and where the next Steve Jobs or Bill Gates is going to 
come from. It may come from one of these programs. It is a very 
important program that we do with BusinessLinc, with the PRIME program, 
and with the 7(a) loan programs. I have people in my own district who 
have moved from welfare into now very successful businesses.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the Nation's small 
businesses and small business access to financial and technical 
assistance and adopt this amendment.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, very clear, we are not adding one dime to a $39 
million-plus appropriation, not one dime. What we are doing is 
adjusting close to $17 million of that $39 billion in three programs 
that have already been funded a 100 percent increase.
  What are we doing here? The SBA has had bipartisan support helping 
small businesses throughout America.

                              {time}  1430

  We forget that small business accounts for 99.7 percent of America's 
employers and employs are 52 percent of the private work force. Small 
companies account for 47 percent of the Nation's sales.
  Indeed, over the last decade, America has experienced a period of 
growth unprecedented in our history. But the economic boom is slowing 
down, financial losses for many companies are mounting, and job cuts 
are affecting every industry in America. The current CJS appropriations 
bill has called for a $129.7 million cut to the Small Business 
Administration. At a time when we can least afford to do that for the 
Nation's small businesses, we are doing that. And we come up with the 
excuses that we cannot find the money here, we cannot find the money 
there, and we cannot wreck the President's budget. We have already done 
that. We have done that in a bipartisan way as well.
  Not one dime, Mr. Chairman, is being added to this appropriation, 
simply taking from specific programs that have already been budgeted a 
100 percent increase. I do not know. That is crazy, it sounds to me. 
That does not sound like good budgeting. Not at all.
  These cuts affect the very guts of small business. The New Markets 
Venture Capital Companies, the BusinessLINC, the HUBZone program, the 
Small Business Investment Company Program, and these are the programs 
that serve a lot of low-income areas, areas that need our help. I think 
we can agree that slashing funding for these key SBA programs pushes 
aside the collective futures of women-owned and minority-owned small 
businesses while at the same time assuring that other small businesses 
lose access to vital capital resources offered by the agency.
  I want to salute the ranking member of the Committee on Small 
Business, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), and my good 
friend and colleague, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly). This 
change that they have offered is on target, is real, and is realistic. 
To begin with, the 7(a) loan program has a history of success in 
ensuring that capital is available when small businesses need it. Since 
1992, the 7(a) program has helped with over $76 billion in loans to 
entrepreneurs. Last year alone, the 7(a) program provided for 43,000 
loans throughout the United States of America into practically every 
district in this country.
  The current CJS bill calls for the 7(a) program to be slashed from 
$114 million to $77 million for 2002. This would result in 
approximately 20,000 fewer loans. Twenty thousand. How can we tell the 
American small businessperson that help is not on the way in this 
business-friendly administration? This amendment would begin by 
restoring $10 million to the 7(a) program, bringing the fiscal year 
2002 funding level up to $87 million in the appropriations, still well 
below the 2001 appropriation.
  Likewise, the Velazquez-Kelly amendment would add $2 million for the 
BusinessLINC program. The offsets for these funding increases will come 
from three of the biggest agencies in the Federal Government. The 
Congressional Budget Office has scored the Velazquez-Kelly amendment 
budget-neutral. Now, how many amendments do we see on this floor that 
can say that? Budget-neutral.
  So let us stand for the American worker for a change and help restore 
the fuel that drives the American economy.
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite 
number of words, and I rise in support of the Velazquez-Kelly 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I join with those individuals who recognize that small 
businesses are in fact the economic engine that drives the economy of 
this country. It is amazing to me that we can understand how important, 
how relevant, how impactful small businesses are to the economic 
viability and well-being of our Nation and then cut those programs that 
are designed to enhance and promote the same.
  This amendment is not a difficult amendment. It is not one that is 
difficult to understand. It is not even one that costs a great deal of 
money. But it is one that would generate in the hearts and minds of 
small business people all over the Nation that this Congress, that this 
administration does in fact understand what small businesses mean to 
America.
  So I want to commend both my colleagues, the gentlewoman from New 
York (Mrs. Kelly) and the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez). It 
seems as though New York has some understanding of small business when 
we get two people, one from each side of the aisle, recognizing that 
without the resources there is no way that we can keep our small 
businesses alive, well, healthy, vibrant, and generating what is needed 
to keep our economy growing.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his 
very fine words, and I want to add my support for the amendment of both 
gentlewomen from New York and add just a special aspect.
  As my colleague well knows, we have suffered in Houston an enormous 
impact from Tropical Storm Allison. Part of the FEMA recovery is the 
Small Business Administration that is on the ground helping businesses, 
small businesses that are the backbone of our community, recoupment. 
This is an important amendment not only for those that have been 
damaged severely by the storm, over $4 billion in damages, but for all 
of the small businesses around the country, and particularly those 
regional offices that have been so outstanding in helping to restore 
those businesses.
  So I thank the gentleman for yielding. This is an excellent 
amendment, and might I conclude by simply saying budget-neutral. I 
think that is a key element to the need for passing this amendment and 
providing opportunity for our small businesses.
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I want to 
thank the gentlewoman from Texas for her remarks, and I associate 
myself with them.
  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite 
number of words.
  Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. 
Velazquez), the ranking minority member of the Committee on Small 
Business, and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly) for their hard 
work on this amendment, which I rise in support of.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to encourage my colleagues to support the 
Velazquez-Kelly Amendment that attempts to restore funding to the 7(a) 
Loan Program, BusinessLINC and PRIME programs.

[[Page 13659]]

  As a member of the Small Business Committee I fear that a reduction 
in those programs that assist numerous small businesses especially in 
rural and low-income areas--will greatly hinder their success.
  Key programs such as PRIME, the 7(a) Loan Program, and Business Link 
which are critical to business growth have been inadequately funded or 
zeroed out completely in this bill.
  In an economy with more questions than answers, we should be 
increasing opportunities to access capital and technical assistance--
not eliminating them when they are most needed.
  Point out--many of these programs were designed to assist small 
businesses in low income areas and in minority communities. My district 
is one which needs this assistance.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment which will restore 
funding to these vital programs used by small businessmen and women.
  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number 
of words.
  Mr. Chairman, I also rise in support of the amendment. There have 
been many calls from small businesses throughout my State that are 
looking at the reinstatement of some of the funding, so I am very happy 
to support both the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) and the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly) in their effort to be able to do 
that.
  The current Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations (CJS) Bill, 
particularly the SBA program funding levels, is perhaps the worst bill 
in this nation's history for small businesses.
  The current CJS appropriations bill called for several loan and 
technical assistance programs to be zeroed out in fiscal year 2002.
  The total cut from $860 million down to $728 million in SBA's overall 
budget. This would cause over 10 critical programs to be zeroed out, 
including New Markets Venture Capital Companies, BusinessLINC, the 
HUBZone program and the Small Business Investment Company Program.
  Cutting access to capital and technical assistance resources in a 
time of serious economic uncertainty creates a dangerous scenario where 
small businesses and the jobs they create will suffer in the long-term.
  That scenario begins with the nearly $40 million dollar cut in the 
7(a) Loan Program and the zeroing out of the ``Program for Investments 
and Microentrepreneurs'' or PRIME.
  The Velazquez-Kelly Amendment is a bipartisan proposal that looks to 
restore a measure of that funding to the 7(a), BusinessLINC and PRIME 
programs.


                   the 7(a) loan program adjustments

  The 7(a) Program history of success is founded in over $76 billion in 
loans to entrepreneurs since 1992. Last year alone, the 7(a) Program 
provided for 43,000 loans totaling $10.5 billion for small businesses.
  Unfortunately, the current bill calls for the 7(a) Program to be 
slashed from $114 million in fiscal year 2001 to $77 million in fiscal 
year 2002. This would result in approximately 20,000 fewer loans being 
made.
  The amendment would begin by restoring $10 million to the 7(a) 
Program bringing the fiscal year 2002 funding level up to $87 million 
appropriations--this is still well below fiscal year 2001 
appropriations.


                  The BusinessLINC Program Adjustments

  The BusinessLINC Program would promote mentor-protege relationships 
between small businesses in low-income and high unemployment areas and 
large companies.
  While the fiscal year 2001 appropriation called for $7 million, the 
current legislation would eliminate the program by zeroing out 
appropriations for fiscal year 2002.
  The Velazquez Amendment would add $2 million to the CJS 
appropriations bill--unfortunately this still represents more than a 60 
percent cut in the program.


                     The PRIME Program Adjustments

  PRIME establishes a technical assistance program for disadvantaged 
Microloan participants located in low-income communities.
  But more importantly, PRIME creates a system where before the loan 
process even begins, entrepreneurs are brought to discuss every detail 
of the process--and in doing so are able to better determine whether a 
loan is or is not necessary.
  The fiscal year 2001 appropriation was at $15 million for PRIME--H.R. 
2500 as reported out of Committee would zero out the program in fiscal 
year 2002.
  While the amendment would add $5 million back to the program, it 
still means the program will be operating at a 66 percent cut from the 
previous year.
  The offsets for these funding increases will come from three of the 
biggest agencies in the federal government. The Congressional Budget 
Office has scored the Velazquez-Kelly Amendment ``budget neutral.''
  While these offsets come at a price to other agency budgets, we 
believe these requests are not excessive.
  The Department of Commerce General Administration budget would be 
reduced by a total of $2 million--which keeps it at the current funding 
level. There is also off budget funds, such as working capital funds, 
that can also help offset this reduction.
  The State Department would be reduced by $8 million in their 
Diplomatic and Consular programs. This account received $400 million in 
increase in their overall budget.
  Finally, the State Department's Capital Investment Fund would be cut 
by $7 million. This Fund was increased by $113 million over the current 
funding level--which represents a 100 percent increase.
  The cuts in the program represent a cut at the heart of SBA's ability 
to deliver key financial and technical assistance to small businesses.
  This is especially important as the economy slows and mainstream 
capital sources begin to tighten credit standards--particularly in the 
high-risk pool of small business lending.
  In addition, it will retain the services these programs provide to 
businesses in low-income areas--companies that are frequently well-
removed or simply ignored by conventional lending sources.
  While the amendment would add only a small portion, approximately $17 
million, back to these programs, it would allow them to remain an 
important part of the public policy of the SBA well into the future.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the bipartisan 
Velazquez-Kelly amendment which would restore a portion of the funding 
that was cut from the Small Business Administration's 7(a) loan and 
other crucial programs in the FY 2002 Commerce, Justice, State spending 
bill. By providing loan guarantees to eligible small businesses that 
would otherwise be unable to secure financing, 7(a) loans fill the gap 
left by traditional private lenders and supplies the necessary capital 
for America's small businesses to expand and create jobs.
  Last year, this crucial program backed more than 43,000 loans worth 
over $10.5 billion to small firms nationwide. In the first 6 months of 
this year, 24 different financial institutions in Rhode Island approved 
over 540 7(a) loans for a total of over $61 million to Rhode Island's 
small business community. In fact, 7(a) loans make up nearly one-third 
of all long-term loans made to U.S. small businesses.
  Mr. Chairman, this program is important to every small business in 
America, and it deserves the continued support of the Congress. At a 
time when an economic downturn threatens businesses, jobs, and families 
across the country, cuts to SBA programs pose more danger than ever. 
Therefore, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the 
Velazquez-Kelly amendment, and I strongly and admirably commend the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) and the gentlewoman from New 
York (Mrs. Kelly) on their efforts.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to address the severe funding cuts in 
Small Business Administration programs that were reported in the FY 
2002 Commerce-Justice-State spending bill.
  While I understand the appropriators' difficult task for maintaining 
fiscal responsibility while adequately funding the wide variety of 
programs contained in this bill, I am extremely disappointed in the 
subcommittee's decision to slash SBA funding by $132 million, a 15 
percent decrease from FY 2001.
  In particular, I am very concerned about the $30 million in cuts to 
the 7(a) guaranteed loan program. By providing loan guarantees to 
eligible small businesses that would otherwise be unable to secure 
private financing, this crucial loan program fills the gap left by 
traditional private lenders and supplies the necessary capital for 
America's small businesses to expand and create jobs. The committee's 
funding level amounts to a 32 percent cut and would eliminate an 
estimated 14,000 critical loan guarantees.
  Just last year, the 7(a) program backed more than 43,000 loans worth 
over $10.5 billion to small firms nationwide. Since 1992, the program 
has provided almost $76 billion in capital to America's small 
entrepreneurs. In

[[Page 13660]]

fact, 7(a) loans make up nearly 30 percent of all long-term loans made 
to U.S. small businesses. This program is important to every small 
business in America, and it deserves the continued support of Congress.
  Another element of the 15 percent cut to SBA would end the New Market 
Venture Capital initiative, and the PRIME and BusinessLinc programs. 
The New Market Venture Capital Program, which was designed to spur 
investment in low-and moderate-income communities and passed with 
overwhelming bipartisan support last year, has been zeroed out in this 
year's bill. The funding for the PRIME program, which allows the SBA to 
award grants to non-profit micro-enterprise development organizations, 
has also been eliminated. Finally, BusinessLinc, which grants funding 
to local non-profit economic development organizations to assist them 
in bringing local businesses to the attention of large corporations, 
has been underfunded to the point that the program will effectively no 
longer exist. Discontinuing these vital programs will undoubtedly 
negatively affect economic development initiatives targeted to assist 
low-income and minority business communities. At a time when an 
economic downturn is threatening businesses, jobs and families across 
the country, these kinds of cuts pose more danger than ever.
  Small businesses are the backbone of Rhode Island's economy and 
account for more than 95 percent of the jobs in the state. They bring 
new and innovative services and products to the marketplace and provide 
business ownership opportunities to diverse and traditionally 
underrepresented groups. Many of these small businesses rely on the 
valuable loan assistance, technical training and grant programs offered 
by the SBA. These harsh budget cuts would severely impact Rhode 
Island's small business community, just when we need their 
contributions the most.
  In closing, Mr. Chairman, these unwarranted cuts to SBA's budget will 
seriously undermine the agency's ability to deliver services to small 
businesses. The small business community supplies over half of the 
nation's workforce, and in the last decade has shown the greatest 
growth in our economy. In order to continue this successful 
entrepreneurial trend, small businesses need the access to capital that 
SBA provides. I would strongly urge the appropriators to reconsider 
their decision to cut SBA's funding. The small business community 
deserves our full-fledged support and nothing less.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite 
number of words.
  I want to be heard and go on the record in support of my colleagues, 
the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) and the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. Kelly), with regard to this amendment.
  Particularly of importance to my community is the BusinessLINC 
program that would allow businesses and the community to work together 
in improving small business.
  Mr. Chairman, when Congress passed legislation to establish the New 
Markets Initiative last December, it did so in a spirit of 
bipartisanship, to ensure that all of our nation's communities have the 
opportunity to realize the American dream.
  BusinessLinc is an innovative partnership between the Small Business 
Administration, the Treasury Department, and the business community. 
The program encourages large businesses to work with small business 
owners and entrepreneurs to provide technical assistance and mentoring. 
This program will improve the economic competitiveness of smaller firms 
located in distressed areas, both urban and rural.
  In speaking with many small businesses in my community, the Eleventh 
District of Ohio, it is clear that business success is predicated on a 
number of factors, such as the quality of the product or service, its 
price, marketing, the financial stability of the business, and the 
owner's experience. But one factor which has been largely overlooked in 
legislation is a business person's contacts within the community. Some 
call this the effect of the ``old boy's club.''
  My constituents have conveyed their frustration at being left out of 
informal networks that form the basis for later business dealings. 
These informal networks have a decided effect on an owner's ability to 
plan and a small business' ability to grow. Simply stated--information 
and skills are key to success.
  BusinessLinc will provide much-needed access to mentoring and support 
for disadvantaged businesses. In developing the BusinessLinc program, 
local coalitions have taken creative approaches to assist small 
businesses to employ strategies that best respond to the needs of the 
community.
  My colleague, Nydia Velazquez, the Ranking Member of the Small 
Business Committee will offer an amendment to restore funding to this 
program. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment and demonstrate 
their support for business growth by funding BusinessLinc.
  Mr. RUSH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Velazquez-Kelly 
amendment to add $10 million to the Business Loans program account. In 
particular, I support $5 million for the ``Program for Investments in 
Microentrepreneurs'' or PRIME.
  PRIME, a bill that I sponsored in 1999, was authorized with broad 
bipartisan support as part of the Financial Services Modernization Act.
  Under PRIME, the Small Business Administration is authorized to award 
grants to non-profit microenterprise development organizations. These 
loans are vital to the initial success of start-up small businesses. 
Many of the minority or disadvantaged entrepreneurs in low income 
communities who depend on these funds have no other access to capital.
  However, PRIME no only provides desperately needed capital, it also 
provides the technical assistance necessary to ensure the ongoing 
viability of a new business. Thus, new small business developers will 
be able to access the expertise they need to operate their fledgling 
businesses.
  With the slowing economy and ever greater numbers of unemployed, it 
is critical that we continue to provide opportunities for self-
sufficiency through self-employment. There are approximately 400 
microenterprise providers in the US moving about $2 billion dollars in 
capital. The $10 million requested for the Business Loans program and 
PRIME in particular, will help expand these efforts and strengthen the 
overall economy.
  Congress appropriated $15 million in the Fiscal Year 2001 Commerce-
Justice-State Appropriations for PRIME Act implementation. The offsets 
necessary to pay for this amendment will have no impact on the ability 
of the agencies concerned to operate or fulfill their responsibilities.
  I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote in favor of 
this amendment.
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the 
Velazquez-Kelly amendment. First I would like to commend Ranking Member 
Velazquez and Congresswoman Kelly for their leadership in bringing this 
amendment to the floor.
  Mr. Chairman, the current Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations 
(CJS) Bill, particularly the SBA program funding levels, is perhaps the 
worst bill in this nation's history for small businesses. The CJS 
appropriations bill calls for several loan and technical assistance 
programs to be zeroed out in FY 2002. The total cuts from $860 million 
down to $728 million in SBA's overall budget would eliminate over 10 
critical programs, including the New Markets Venture Capital Companies, 
BusinessLINC, the HUBZone Program and the Small Business Investment 
Company Program. This bill, as it is currently written, essentially 
wipes out the small business programs that we fought for last Congress.
  The Velazquez-Kelly amendment is a bipartisan proposal that looks to 
restore a measure of funding to the 7(a), BusinessLINC and PRIME 
Programs. The 7(a) Program history of success is founded in over $76 
billion in loans to entrepreneurs since 1992. Last year alone, the 7(a) 
Program provided for 43,000 loans totaling $10.5 billion for small 
businesses. Unfortunately, the current bill calls the 7(a) Program to 
be slashed from $114 million in FY 2001 to $77 million in FY 2002. This 
would result in approximately 20,000 fewer loans being made. The 
BusinessLINC Program would promote mentor-protege relationships between 
small businesses in low-income and high unemployment areas and large 
companies. The CJS bill would eliminate the program by zeroing out 
appropriation for FY 2002. This amendment would add $2 million to the 
CJS appropriations bill. PRIME establishes a technical assistance 
program for disadvantaged Microloan participants. While the amendment 
would add $5 million back to the program, the program will be operating 
at a 66% cut from the previous year. However, some funding is better 
than no funding.
  Mr. Chairman, the offsets for these funding increases will come from 
three of the biggest agencies in the federal government. While these 
offsets come at the expense of other agency budgets, we believe these 
requests are not excessive. We are just attempting to obtain a fair 
distribution of funding. It is unfair that some agencies receive 100% 
increases, while programs that deliver key financial and technical 
assistance to small businesses--the engine for growth in our economy--
are zeroed out. We cannot afford to cut funding for small business 
development and assistance as the economy slows and mainstream capital

[[Page 13661]]

sources begin to tighten credit standards. We must continue to retain 
the services that the 7(a), BusinessLINC, and PRIME provide to 
businesses in low-income areas--companies that are too often frequently 
well removed or simply ignored by conventional lending sources.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. DeLay

  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment, and I ask unanimous 
consent to reach ahead in the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 17 offered by Mr. DeLay:
       Page 108, after line 22, insert the following:

               TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 801. None of the funds appropriated in this Act may be 
     used to negotiate or pay any request or claim by the 
     Government of the People's Republic of China for 
     reimbursement of the costs associated with the detention of 
     the crewmembers of the United States Navy EP-3 aircraft that 
     was forced to land on Hainan Island, China, on April 1, 2001, 
     or for reimbursement of any of the costs associated with the 
     return of the aircraft to the United States.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay).
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I rise to offer an amendment that will stop any payment from being 
sent from the United States Government to the Communist Chinese 
Government that is related to the downing of our Navy EP-3 aircraft and 
the detention of our crew members.
  I take this amendment, quite frankly, from a bill authored by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), a more extensive bill than this 
amendment; but I appreciate the fight that the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos) is putting up, and I appreciate him in this 
regard.
  I must say that in offering this amendment it must never be American 
policy to pay tribute to aggressive regimes. Such a payment would not 
only violate a hard-won tradition of confronting international 
aggression, it would force America to abdicate a role as the leading 
defender of free movement through the world's international skies and 
waters. And it is not a duty we are willing to duck.
  The brazen audacity of some demands can almost take on a kind of a 
comic grandeur. At first glimpse, the preposterous suggestion that the 
United States is somehow indebted to the Communist Chinese Government 
for the costs associated with downing our plane and detaining our air 
crew appears to fall into that camp. And for that reason, we are 
tempted to dismiss the Communist Chinese Government's demand for 
compensation as the deluded daydreams of a despotic regime.
  But as illogical and unbelievable as it may sound, today Communist 
leaders in Beijing are soberly demanding that the people of the United 
States pay them $1 million in compensation. The idea that American 
taxpayers should start rewarding Communist piracy is as contemptible as 
it is unlikely to happen. This Congress will never allow a single 
dollar to be used to compensate the perpetrators of an international 
aggression.
  This is simply the latest example of the reckless, ruthless, and 
irrational mindset of China's Communist Government. President Bush is 
standing firm for freedom. We need to support the administration by 
staking out a very clear position because, if history has taught us 
anything, it teaches that appeasement is nothing more than a 
downpayment on further trials and added hardships. To export our 
American values, we must always be prepared to defend our interests.

                              {time}  1445

  We must remain engaged with China. We owe it to the billion Chinese 
people who are victimized by an oppressive and abusive Communist 
government. We know that once the Chinese people begin to sense the 
opportunities and blessings of self-government they will soon shake off 
the shackles of communism. We look forward to that day.
  But until the Chinese people are liberated to determine their own 
destiny, we must stand firm in defense of our commitment to freedom. 
This amendment does just that. It will send a clear signal to the 
Communist rulers in China: If you thought intimidation would persuade 
the United States to abdicate the defense of freedom, it failed.
  We support open ties with all peoples, especially Chinese families 
struggling beneath communism. We seek the free exchange of goods, 
services and democratic ideals with men and women around the world. We 
wish to cultivate stronger ties between the Chinese people and the 
United States. But Jiang Zemin and his circle of apparatchiks will 
never deter America from flying patrols to the frontier of freedom.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask support for this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am not opposed to the amendment, but I 
ask unanimous consent that I may control the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
California?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  First, I want to commend my friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
DeLay), the distinguished Republican Whip, for bringing this matter to 
my attention, thereby expediting the process that several of us began 
some time ago.
  I introduced the free-standing bill, Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the distinguished chairman of the 
Committee on International Relations, and the distinguished chairman 
and ranking member of the Committee on Armed Services which seeks to 
achieve what the DeLay amendment seeks to achieve.
  On April 1, 2001, a Chinese F-8 fighter flew dangerously close to a 
United States Navy EP-3 aircraft which was on a routine reconnaissance 
mission in international air space off the coast of China; and it 
collided with it, resulting in structural damage to our aircraft.
  The crew of our aircraft transmitted a series of Mayday distress 
calls, and they were able to successfully land at the nearest air field 
due to the heroic actions of our pilot and of our crew to keep the 
plane in the air until it could land safely.
  The 24 crew members of the EP-3 aircraft were detained against their 
will, and I underscore this, Mr. Chairman. The 24 crew members of our 
aircraft were detained against their will for 11 days before being 
released, in clear violation of international rules governing the 
treatment of such personnel and despite repeated requests for their 
release by the United States government at the highest levels.
  The Chinese military authorities boarded the aircraft, removed 
equipment from our aircraft, notwithstanding its status under 
international law as the property of the United States of America. The 
Chinese government, Mr. Chairman, refused to allow the United States to 
repair the downed aircraft in Hainan. It refused to allow it to be 
flown back to the United States. It instead demanded that the United 
States cut the plane into pieces and return it to the United States on 
a leased transport aircraft.
  Now the Chinese government has presented us with a $1 million invoice 
which allegedly covers the expenses of the 24 crew members while held 
in captivity and related expenses.
  This, Mr. Chairman, is the ultimate arrogance on the part of this 
Communist regime. The accident was caused by reckless action by a 
Chinese

[[Page 13662]]

pilot with a long and documented history of taking overly aggressive 
actions in intercepting United States reconnaissance aircraft operating 
in international air space.
  The Chinese government failed to comply with its international 
obligations immediately to return our crew members.
  The United States government, Mr. Chairman, has already incurred 
significant costs associated with the recovery of our aircraft, 
including the dispatching of our personnel and other employees of our 
government to the Chinese island of Hainan to cut the aircraft into 
pieces and pack it aboard a cargo plane and leasing the cargo plane 
itself.
  We are currently evaluating, Mr. Chairman, whether this aircraft can 
be repaired to make it airworthy again or whether a new EP-3 aircraft 
must be purchased to replace it. The cost of that would be $80 million.
  Mr. Chairman, our resolution and the amendment of the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. DeLay) makes it clear that it is the sense of the Congress 
of the United States that we have to make a full accounting of all of 
the costs associated with this outrage, clearly precipitated by the 
action of the Chinese pilot, and that no payment, not one dime, may be 
paid to the Chinese government until the Chinese government reimburses 
us for the whole cost of this disgraceful episode. That may run well 
over $80 million.
  Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge all of my colleagues to support the 
amendment of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay).
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment and 
want to commend the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) for offering the 
amendment.
  The gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) can almost argue that we 
should be sending the Chinese government a bill if we look at the 
precedent that was set with regards to Serbia and the destruction of 
their embassy. But I think it is a great amendment, and I hope that it 
is passed by unanimous vote and that this sends a message to the 
Chinese government.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano).
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I support the gentleman's amendment. I am 
very strong on dealing with China and trading with China, but I think 
this particular incident was very unfortunate. It is pretty much an 
arrogant statement to try to charge us and to create more out of what 
clearly was a mistake on their part. I support the gentleman's 
amendment, and I hope there is bipartisan support for the amendment.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the support of the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Serrano), and I want to make it clear that this amendment does not 
go against the people of China. We all support the people of China. 
This is a statement against the Communist government of China and some 
of their outrageous actions.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) will 
be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:


                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 1-11, as amended by Public 
     Law 100-504), $21,176,000.

               General Provisions--Department of Commerce

       Sec. 201. During the current fiscal year, applicable 
     appropriations and funds made available to the Department of 
     Commerce by this Act shall be available for the activities 
     specified in the Act of October 26, 1949 (15 U.S.C. 1514), to 
     the extent and in the manner prescribed by the Act, and, 
     notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3324, may be used for advanced 
     payments not otherwise authorized only upon the certification 
     of officials designated by the Secretary of Commerce that 
     such payments are in the public interest.
       Sec. 202. During the current fiscal year, appropriations 
     made available to the Department of Commerce by this Act for 
     salaries and expenses shall be available for hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343 and 
     1344; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; and uniforms 
     or allowances therefore, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-
     5902).
       Sec. 203. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to support the hurricane reconnaissance aircraft and 
     activities that are under the control of the United States 
     Air Force or the United States Air Force Reserve.
       Sec. 204. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made 
     available for the current fiscal year for the Department of 
     Commerce in this Act may be transferred between such 
     appropriations, but no such appropriation shall be increased 
     by more than 10 percent by any such transfers: Provided, That 
     any transfer pursuant to this section shall be treated as a 
     reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this Act and 
     shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except 
     in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section.
       Sec. 205. Any costs incurred by a department or agency 
     funded under this title resulting from personnel actions 
     taken in response to funding reductions included in this 
     title or from actions taken for the care and protection of 
     loan collateral or grant property shall be absorbed within 
     the total budgetary resources available to such department or 
     agency: Provided, That the authority to transfer funds 
     between appropriations accounts as may be necessary to carry 
     out this section is provided in addition to authorities 
     included elsewhere in this Act: Provided further, That use of 
     funds to carry out this section shall be treated as a 
     reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this Act and 
     shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except 
     in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section.
       Sec. 206. The Secretary of Commerce may award contracts for 
     hydrographic, geodetic, and photogrammetric surveying and 
     mapping services in accordance with title IX of the Federal 
     Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 
     541 et seq.).
       Sec. 207. The Secretary of Commerce may use the Commerce 
     franchise fund for expenses and equipment necessary for the 
     maintenance and operation of such administrative services as 
     the Secretary determines may be performed more advantageously 
     as central services, pursuant to section 403 of Public Law 
     103-356: Provided, That any inventories, equipment, and other 
     assets pertaining to the services to be provided by such 
     fund, either on hand or on order, less the related 
     liabilities or unpaid obligations, and any appropriations 
     made for the purpose of providing capital shall be used to 
     capitalize such fund: Provided further, That such fund shall 
     be paid in advance from funds available to the Department and 
     other Federal agencies for which such centralized services 
     are performed, at rates which will return in full all 
     expenses of operation, including accrued leave, depreciation 
     of fund plant and equipment, amortization of automated data 
     processing (ADP) software and systems (either acquired or 
     donated), and an amount necessary to maintain a reasonable 
     operating reserve, as determined by the Secretary: Provided 
     further, That such fund shall provide services on a 
     competitive basis: Provided further, That an amount not to 
     exceed 4 percent of the total annual income to such fund may 
     be retained in the fund for fiscal year 2002 and each fiscal 
     year thereafter, to remain available until expended, to be 
     used for the acquisition of capital equipment, and for the 
     improvement and implementation of department financial 
     management, ADP, and other support systems: Provided further, 
     That such amounts retained in the fund for fiscal year 2002 
     and each fiscal year thereafter shall be available for 
     obligation and expenditure only in accordance with section 
     605 of this Act: Provided further, That no later than 30 days 
     after the end of each fiscal year, amounts in excess of this 
     reserve limitation shall be deposited as miscellaneous 
     receipts in the Treasury: Provided further, That such 
     franchise fund pilot program shall terminate pursuant to 
     section 403(f) of Public Law 103-356.
       This title may be cited as the ``Department of Commerce and 
     Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2002''.


                 Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Herger

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

       Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Herger:
       Page 63, after line 9, insert the following:

[[Page 13663]]



                    TITLE IIA--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

               Klamath Project Water Rights Compensation

       For just compensation for private property taken for public 
     use, as required by the 5th Amendment to the Constitution of 
     the United States, for payment by the Attorney General to the 
     water users of the Klamath Project for the Federal taking of 
     water rights pursuant to the Klamath Reclamation Project 2001 
     Annual Operations Plan, which provides for the delivery of no 
     water to most of the lands served by the Klamath Reclamation 
     Project, and instead implements an alternative plan developed 
     pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973; and the 
     amount otherwise provided in this Act for ``National Oceanic 
     And Atmospheric Administration--Operations, Research, and 
     Facilities'' (and the amounts specified under such heading 
     for direct obligations, appropriation from the General Fund, 
     and the National Marine Fisheries Service) are hereby reduced 
     by; $200,000,000.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Herger) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).


                             Point of Order

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment 
because it provides an appropriation for an unauthorized program; 
therefore, it violates clause 2 of rule XXI.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia makes a point of order.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California (Mr. Herger) is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HERGER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the hard work that the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the members of the Committee on Appropriations 
have put into this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I offer this important amendment today on an issue that 
is receiving national attention. Approximately 1,500 family farmers and 
scores of agriculture-dependent businesses and families along the 
northern California and southern Oregon border have had their 
livelihood stripped from them by the Federal Government. A community of 
70,000 could go bankrupt.
  On April 6 of this year, the Bureau of Reclamation announced that 
there will be no water, zero water for farming this year because, in 
the opinion of a select group of biologists and based on what many feel 
is flawed science, every drop of water was needed for the preservation 
of two species of fish. Based only on a best guess about these species 
and what is needed to sustain them, the National Marine Fishery Service 
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have deprived these communities 
of the use of their water rights and their land.
  Mr. Chairman, this is the poster child for the injustices that are 
occurring under the current implementation of the Endangered Species 
Act. Under this well-intentioned law, communities throughout the West 
are going broke, and in some cases human lives are being placed in 
jeopardy.
  Mr. Chairman, this need not happen. As a country that put a man on 
the moon three decades ago, I am convinced we can both protect fish and 
provide economic stability for our rural communities. Regrettably, 
under the current implementation of the ESA, it is an either/or 
proposition.
  My amendment explicitly recognizes that the Endangered Species Act 
also continues to come into direct conflict with fundamental U.S. 
constitutional rights and protections. It seeks simply to ensure that 
the government satisfies its mandate under the Fifth Amendment of the 
Constitution to provide just compensation for the taking of private 
property for a public use.
  We have a responsibility to uphold constitutional protections when 
they are compromised by the implementation of Federal laws. It is also 
a first step toward rectifying the financial harm that the government 
has caused in this area.
  As the agency partly responsible for this decision, NMFS, which is 
funded at more than $540 million in this bill, will be forced under my 
amendment to cover the cost of compensation. That is simple 
accountability. No amount of money can fully rectify the harm that has 
been done to these communities. A way of life is at risk. Ultimately, 
the Endangered Species Act must be updated and balance must be restored 
if we are to preserve this way of life and prevent future injustices 
here and in other parts of the country.

                              {time}  1500

  But as we speak, a select few individuals are bearing severe economic 
and social burdens. Fundamental principles of fairness and justice 
demand that they be compensated. These are public burdens which should 
rightfully be borne by the public as a whole.
  Moreover, Federal agencies that are responsible for harming Americans 
through their regulatory actions will be held accountable. Perhaps if 
we force them to share some of the pain, they will stop to consider the 
real consequences of reckless actions.
  That is also why I have introduced H.R. 2389. It recognizes that what 
has happened in the Klamath Basin is a government-caused disaster. As 
such, it requires the Federal Government to pay for the economic losses 
that have been sustained. I ask for the support and consideration of my 
colleagues on this bill. I also ask my colleagues to realize what is 
currently happening under the Endangered Species Act and join me in 
demanding that it be modernized because, Mr. Chairman, Americans are 
being needlessly hurt.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the point 
of order.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SERRANO. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I rise reluctantly in opposition to this 
amendment. As I understand the gentleman's amendment, it would take 
$200 million out of the National Marine Fisheries Service's budget. I 
think that would be devastating to their budget. The whole problem we 
have got in the Northwest is difficult, but we have got to work with 
the National Marine Fisheries Service because Congress gave them the 
responsibility of administering the Endangered Species Act. They are 
doing their best. In fact, I think we should be giving them additional 
support so that they can get the job done and deal with these 
regulatory problems.
  Also in these situations like this, the way to approach the problem 
is to do a habitat conservation plan, work with the regulators, and 
come up with a plan under which you can go forward. I know this is a 
tough problem, and if you want to deal with it, you have got to change 
the Endangered Species Act, which I do not favor, but to come here and 
to take $200 million out of the National Marine Fisheries Service would 
be a disaster.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time; and I agree with what he is saying in terms of the danger 
were this approach to be taken to penalize other areas throughout the 
Pacific Northwest that are dealing with problems with salmon recovery. 
But I fundamentally disagree with my friend from California's primary 
premise.
  If there were no Endangered Species Act, the people in the Klamath 
Basin would be in desperate straits. It is because the Federal 
Government has overcommitted over the course of the last century the 
water in the Klamath Basin. What we should be doing, rather than 
penalize people who are trying to deal with species recovery, is to go 
back and help the people in need.
  We should not have a series of temporary payments that they have to 
go

[[Page 13664]]

through legal hoops to obtain. It is very unlikely that it would occur. 
It is far better that we step up and provide money for a permanent 
solution which is to reduce the conflicting water demands in the 
Klamath Basin. We can do that by making generous payments to willing 
sellers who will sell their land. We can buy back at fair value 
conservation easements and water rights. If we do this, we will make 
these people whole, we will not penalize Native Americans and other 
people up and down the West Coast, and we will not be back here time 
after time after time.
  The gentleman from California is right, the Federal Government has 
made a mess, but it is not the Endangered Species Act, it is the fact 
that there are more demands on water in the Klamath Basin, for 
waterfowl, for agriculture, for endangered species. We need a 
comprehensive solution. I strongly urge rejecting this amendment and 
approaching it in a way that we can put in place a permanent solution 
which is to give them compensation and reduce the demands on water that 
the Federal Government has messed up.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Thompson).
  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to 
this amendment. However, I agree with my colleague from California that 
there is a serious problem in the Klamath Basin. This year a severe 
drought has further exacerbated the pressure on the fishing industry, 
tribal interests, the economic well-being of the farmers, and the 
waterfowl that use this very critical part of the Pacific Flyway.
  However, the underlying issue is an overcommitment of water in the 
Klamath Basin. The farmers in this region do need our assistance, and 
the Senate has already taken steps to provide immediate assistance to 
those farmers hurt by the drought this year. But we need to recognize 
that there is simply not enough water to meet all the current demand in 
the Klamath Basin. The answer to this problem is to work together 
across both State and party lines to using the best available science 
to come up with a solution that includes reducing water demands and at 
the same time helps farmers and tribes and conserves the region's fish 
and waterfowl habitat.
  These solutions would include enhancing the CRP, the WRP, and the 
WHIP programs in a way that promotes farming on a majority of the 
200,000 acres in that region that are currently being farmed. There is 
growing support for this type of solution. In fact, there are nearly 
100 farmers in the area that have already come forward and are willing 
to put up some 30,000 acres of their privately owned land to be able to 
achieve the success that we need to reach in that area.
  Mr. Chairman, let us turn to real, positive solutions in the Klamath 
and not decimate the National Marine Fisheries Service budget or the 
Endangered Species Act.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the point of order, and 
I move to strike the requisite number of words.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. 
Jones).
  Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I want to start my brief 
comments with a quote by Patrick Henry:

       The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to 
     restrain the people. It is an instrument for the people to 
     restrain the government, lest it come to dominate our lives 
     and interests.

  Mr. Chairman, the reason I am speaking in behalf of the gentleman 
from California's amendment is that I visited his district in June and 
I had a chance to meet these people. I can honestly tell Members that 
there is something wrong with the Federal Government when the Federal 
Government is trying to put people out of business who are trying to 
make a living and paying their taxes.
  Down in my district of North Carolina, we have an issue with the 
piping plover. The piping plover is a bird that the Federal Government 
is going to make a decision that will have a tremendous economic impact 
in a negative way on many States in the southeastern part of the United 
States.
  I wanted to say and the reason I want to be a small part of this 
debate is it is a shame when a suckerfish has more influence on the 
Federal Government than the people who have been promised land and 
promised water years and years ago.
  I want to say to my friends on the other side who are in opposition 
to the gentleman from California's amendment, I certainly understand 
their position and respect that. Again, this is your part of the United 
States of America, but when it comes to the Endangered Species Act, the 
ESA is having a very negative impact across this Nation. What we need 
to do is to reform the Endangered Species Act and find a balance so 
that nature and people can move forward.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the point of order.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Ose).
  Mr. OSE. I thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer a few remarks about the situation 
along the Klamath River. It is interesting sitting here considering 
what we are talking about.
  In the 1960s, the Bureau of Reclamation made an effort to actually 
poison the suckerfish in the Klamath. They thought it was a pest, and 
they attempted to remove it. Now 40 years later, we are here arguing 
about what to do to protect the suckerfish. The sad part of it, the 
sucker policy, if you will, here, is that there is a study by Oregon 
State University that shows the preferred action that Fish and Wildlife 
Service or NMFS is putting forward, that is, raising the lake level, 
will actually hurt the coho salmon which is also a listed species.
  The fact is this really is a sucker policy. Thankfully, one of our 
friends to the north, Senator Smith of Oregon, is no sucker. He has 
thoughtfully proposed that we follow the facts outlined in a plan from 
1993, much of which is still awaiting implementation. This 
comprehensive plan balances the needs of wildlife while providing 
sufficient water to our farms and communities.
  The plan basically says, if the government truly wants to save these 
suckerfish, why do they not improve the habitat in the current lake? 
Why have they not created suckerfish hatcheries or worked to restrict 
the growth of suckerfish predators as set forth in the plan? It is a 
real dilemma to me that this sucker punch policy on suckerfish is being 
jammed down our throat.
  Mr. Chairman, I hope that this body will follow the leadership of 
Senator Smith and the other Senator from Oregon, Senator Wyden, and my 
colleagues in the House, the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger), 
the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones), and the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Walden) when we consider how many people in California and 
Oregon will be punished because the Federal Government ignored its own 
1993 recommendations and is now acting on bad science to change the 
balanced policy that has existed but not been implemented for the past 
8 years.
  If we do not correct this egregious policy error, then our 
constituents will know us for the suckers we are.


                             Point of Order

  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Virginia insist on his point of 
order?
  Mr. WOLF. I do, Mr. Chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from California wish to be heard on 
the point of order?
  Mr. HERGER. Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California is recognized.
  Mr. HERGER. Mr. Chairman, this is a critically important amendment on 
an issue that has national implications. The bankrupting of family 
farmers and rural communities in the Klamath Basin of northern 
California and southern Oregon under a Federal regulatory decision is 
being discussed across the country. It is being written about 
nationally in publications such as The

[[Page 13665]]

New York Times, The Washington Post and The Washington Times. It has 
been covered on the national Fox News Network. That is because it sets 
a tragic precedent which must be addressed before more communities are 
lost.
  Again, I appreciate the hard work that the gentleman from Virginia 
and the members of the committee have put into this bill. This 
amendment is not in any way to take away from that good work. But an 
entire community of 70,000 people could go bankrupt. A way of life is 
at stake. And the Federal regulatory agency, the National Marine 
Fisheries Service, that is in part responsible for that decision is 
funded in this bill to the tune of approximately $540 million. Through 
the issuance of severely flawed biological opinions, NMFS, along with 
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, have taken the water rights of 
these communities for a public use. The fifth amendment to the U.S. 
Constitution not just authorizes but requires just compensation. And 
the Justice Department, as the final arbiter of such claims against the 
Federal Government, would be amply suited, I believe, to determine and 
make payment on the underlying takings that have occurred.
  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his point of order.
  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Chairman, I believe that my colleague 
was recognized to speak on the point of order, not the merits of the 
amendment.

                              {time}  1515

  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is correct. The Chair has given a bit of 
leeway, but the gentleman from California needs to speak on the point 
of order, and not on the underlying issue.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Herger) have 2 additional minutes to 
finish his thoughts, even if he is not speaking on the point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would advise the gentleman from Oregon that 
that request cannot be entertained while a point of order is pending.
  The Chair would ask the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger) to 
confine his remarks to the point of order. Otherwise, the Chair is 
prepared to rule.
  Mr. HERGER. Mr. Chairman, again, I understand that the gentleman has 
concerns that this bill is not a perfect fit, but I wish to underscore 
that this was caused at least in part by the National Marine Fisheries 
Service. It is a government-caused disaster.
  Mr. Chairman, fairness and justice demand that the Federal Government 
be accountable for the harm that it has caused. Perhaps this amendment 
is precedent-setting, but the bankrupting of entire farming communities 
at the stroke of a biologist's pen, to say the least, is a much more 
tragic precedent for the rural communities of this Nation.
  I urge that the Chair rule that this amendment is in order and allow 
for its debate and full consideration.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentleman from Virginia makes a point of order that the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from California proposes to appropriate funds 
for an expenditure not previously authorized by law in violation of 
clause 2 of rule XXI.
  The amendment offered by the gentleman from California proposes to 
provide an appropriation for certain water users of the Klamath Project 
``as required by the fifth amendment to the Constitution of the United 
States.'' The constitutional provisions cited provides, ``nor shall 
private property be taken for public use without just compensation.''
  The Chair finds that this provision does not support the specific 
appropriation for fiscal year 2002 proposed in the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.
  The Clerk will read.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of 
the bill through page 70, line 7, be considered as read, printed in the 
Record and open to amendment at any point.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the bill from page 63, line 10, through page 70, line 7, 
is as follows:

                        TITLE III--THE JUDICIARY

                   Supreme Court of the United States


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For expenses necessary for the operation of the Supreme 
     Court, as required by law, excluding care of the building and 
     grounds, including purchase or hire, driving, maintenance, 
     and operation of an automobile for the Chief Justice, not to 
     exceed $10,000 for the purpose of transporting Associate 
     Justices, and hire of passenger motor vehicles as authorized 
     by 31 U.S.C. 1343 and 1344; not to exceed $10,000 for 
     official reception and representation expenses; and for 
     miscellaneous expenses, to be expended as the Chief Justice 
     may approve; $42,066,000.


                    care of the building and grounds

       For such expenditures as may be necessary to enable the 
     Architect of the Capitol to carry out the duties imposed upon 
     the Architect by the Act approved May 7, 1934 (40 U.S.C. 13a-
     13b), $70,000,000, which shall remain available until 
     expended.

         United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit


                         salaries and expenses

       For salaries of the chief judge, judges, and other officers 
     and employees, and for necessary expenses of the court, as 
     authorized by law, $19,287,000.

               United States Court of International Trade


                         Salaries and expenses

       For salaries of the chief judge and eight judges, salaries 
     of the officers and employees of the court, services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, and necessary expenses of the 
     court, as authorized by law, $13,073,000.

    Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services


                         salaries and expenses

       For the salaries of circuit and district judges (including 
     judges of the territorial courts of the United States), 
     justices and judges retired from office or from regular 
     active service, judges of the United States Court of Federal 
     Claims, bankruptcy judges, magistrate judges, and all other 
     officers and employees of the Federal Judiciary not otherwise 
     specifically provided for, and necessary expenses of the 
     courts, as authorized by law, $3,631,940,000 (including the 
     purchase of firearms and ammunition); of which not to exceed 
     $27,817,000 shall remain available until expended for space 
     alteration projects and for furniture and furnishings related 
     to new space alteration and construction projects.

       In addition, for expenses of the United States Court of 
     Federal Claims associated with processing cases under the 
     National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, not to exceed 
     $2,692,000, to be appropriated from the Vaccine Injury 
     Compensation Trust Fund.


                           defender services

       For the operation of Federal Public Defender and Community 
     Defender organizations; the compensation and reimbursement of 
     expenses of attorneys appointed to represent persons under 
     the Criminal Justice Act of 1964, as amended; the 
     compensation and reimbursement of expenses of persons 
     furnishing investigative, expert and other services under the 
     Criminal Justice Act of 1964 (18 U.S.C. 3006A(e)); the 
     compensation (in accordance with Criminal Justice Act 
     maximums) and reimbursement of expenses of attorneys 
     appointed to assist the court in criminal cases where the 
     defendant has waived representation by counsel; the 
     compensation and reimbursement of travel expenses of 
     guardians ad litem acting on behalf of financially eligible 
     minor or incompetent offenders in connection with transfers 
     from the United States to foreign countries with which the 
     United States has a treaty for the execution of penal 
     sentences; the compensation of attorneys appointed to 
     represent jurors in civil actions for the protection of their 
     employment, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 1875(d); and for 
     necessary training and general administrative expenses, 
     $500,671,000, to remain available until expended as 
     authorized by 18 U.S.C. 3006A(i).


                    fees of jurors and commissioners

       For fees and expenses of jurors as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 
     1871 and 1876; compensation of jury commissioners as 
     authorized by 28 U.S.C. 1863; and compensation of 
     commissioners appointed in condemnation cases pursuant to 
     rule 71A(h) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (28 
     U.S.C. Appendix Rule 71A(h)), $48,131,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That the compensation of 
     land commissioners shall not exceed the daily equivalent of 
     the highest rate payable under section 5332 of title 5, 
     United States Code.


                             court security

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, 
     incident to providing protective

[[Page 13666]]

     guard services for United States courthouses and the 
     procurement, installation, and maintenance of security 
     equipment for United States courthouses and other facilities 
     housing federal court operations, including building ingress-
     egress control, inspection of mail and packages, directed 
     security patrols, and other similar activities as authorized 
     by section 1010 of the Judicial Improvement and Access to 
     Justice Act (Public Law 100-702), $224,433,000, of which not 
     to exceed $10,000,000 shall remain available until expended 
     for security systems or contract costs for court security 
     officers, to be expended directly or transferred to the 
     United States Marshals Service, which shall be responsible 
     for administering the Judicial Facility Security Program 
     consistent with standards or guidelines agreed to by the 
     Director of the Administrative Office of the United States 
     Courts and the Attorney General.

           Administrative Office of the United States Courts


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Administrative Office of the 
     United States Courts as authorized by law, including travel 
     as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1345, hire of a passenger motor 
     vehicle as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343(b), advertising and 
     rent in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, $60,029,000, 
     of which not to exceed $8,500 is authorized for official 
     reception and representation expenses.

                        Federal Judicial Center


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Judicial Center, as 
     authorized by Public Law 90-219, $20,235,000; of which 
     $1,800,000 shall remain available through September 30, 2003, 
     to provide education and training to Federal court personnel; 
     and of which not to exceed $1,000 is authorized for official 
     reception and representation expenses.

                       Judicial Retirement Funds


                    payment to judiciary trust funds

       For payment to the Judicial Officers' Retirement Fund, as 
     authorized by 28 U.S.C. 377(o), $26,700,000; to the Judicial 
     Survivors' Annuities Fund, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 376(c), 
     $8,400,000; and to the United States Court of Federal Claims 
     Judges' Retirement Fund, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 178(l), 
     $1,900,000.

                  United States Sentencing Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For the salaries and expenses necessary to carry out the 
     provisions of chapter 58 of title 28, United States Code, 
     $11,575,000, of which not to exceed $1,000 is authorized for 
     official reception and representation expenses.

                   General Provisions--the Judiciary

       Sec. 301. Appropriations and authorizations made in this 
     title which are available for salaries and expenses shall be 
     available for services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
       Sec. 302. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made 
     available for the current fiscal year for the Judiciary in 
     this Act may be transferred between such appropriations, but 
     no such appropriation, except ``Courts of Appeals, District 
     Courts, and Other Judicial Services, Defender Services'' and 
     ``Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial 
     Services, Fees of Jurors and Commissioners'', shall be 
     increased by more than 10 percent by any such transfers: 
     Provided, That any transfer pursuant to this section shall be 
     treated as a reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this 
     Act and shall not be available for obligation or expenditure 
     except in compliance with the procedures set forth in that 
     section.
       Sec. 303. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     salaries and expenses appropriation for district courts, 
     courts of appeals, and other judicial services shall be 
     available for official reception and representation expenses 
     of the Judicial Conference of the United States: Provided, 
     That such available funds shall not exceed $11,000 and shall 
     be administered by the Director of the Administrative Office 
     of the United States Courts in the capacity as Secretary of 
     the Judicial Conference.
       Sec. 304. Of the unexpended balances transferred to the 
     Commission on Structural Alternatives in Federal Appellate 
     Courts, up to $400,000 may be expended on court operations 
     under the ``Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and other 
     Judicial Services, Salaries and Expenses''.


                 Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Roemer

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

       Amendment No. 8 offered by Mr. Roemer:
       Page 70, after line 7, insert the following:
       Sec. 305. (a) The Federal building located at 10th Street 
     and Constitution Avenue, NW, in Washington, DC, and known as 
     the Department of Justice Building, shall be designated and 
     known as the ``Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice 
     Building''.
       (b) Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
     paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal 
     building referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be 
     a reference to the ``Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice 
     Building''.

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the 
amendment and claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House today, the gentleman 
from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) 
each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer).
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, first of all, I am going to concede the point of order. 
I realize and recognize that this would be authorizing on an 
appropriations bill. While I concede the point of order, I am even more 
determined on the merits of the amendment to continue to pursue the 
naming of the Justice Department building after Robert F. Kennedy.
  Mr. Chairman, we have 100 cosponsors of this legislation, Democrats 
and Republicans. We have very, very helpful and influential Members on 
the other side of the aisle, including the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Wolf); and I thank the gentleman for his cosponsorship of this bill. We 
have the gentleman from New York (Mr. Quinn) and the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Scarborough). We have the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom 
Davis) and many other Republicans.
  I also have engaged in conversation and negotiation with the 
administration and the White House, and we are hopeful that the White 
House will also be supportive and enthusiastic of this effort to get 
this Justice Department building named after an Attorney General who 
served with honor and integrity and dignity in that office from 1961 to 
1964.
  Mr. Chairman, one of my favorite quotes of Robert Kennedy was as 
follows: ``We will never be able to completely eliminate children being 
tortured in the world, but we can reduce the number of those children 
being tortured.''
  In fact, what he is saying is that we can work, and we have an 
obligation to work, especially for the most vulnerable people in 
society, our children, to in noble and civil ways have government 
effectively help them. And, as Attorney General, he worked in a 
plethora of ways to achieve these noble and virtuous objectives.
  Convictions against organized crime figures rose 800 percent while he 
was Attorney General. He enforced Federal Court orders to integrate 
schools and universities across our country, particularly in 1962, when 
he fought and sent troops down to the University of Mississippi to help 
James Meredith enter that school.
  He and Lyndon Johnson, the President at that time, fought for the 
1964 Civil Rights Act, and there are some scholars that say that that 
Civil Rights Act, that is one of the glories of this country, may not 
have come along for another 10 years without those two individuals 
working hard to pass it.
  He was particularly helpful and informative and insightful on the 
foreign policy realm for President Kennedy, helping negotiate the 
strategy on the Cuban missile crisis. He also traveled the world on 
human rights.
  So here we have an Attorney General on fighting organized crime, on 
fighting for civil rights, on promoting human rights across the world, 
on fighting to make sure that racketeering and RICO charges were 
brought forward, enforcing the laws of this country. We have a very 
talented and skillful and honorable Attorney General. It is time, it is 
time, Mr. Chairman, that we name this building after Robert F. Kennedy.
  Now, yesterday in this House of Representatives we passed legislation 
to name the Peace Corps building after Paul Coverdell, and this body 
authorized $10 million to pursue some objectives along those lines. We 
have named trade buildings, airports, CIA centers and aircraft 
carriers. It is time in fairness, it is time in justice, it is time in 
a bipartisan way, to name this building after Robert F. Kennedy.
  I would hope that we could do this soon, although maybe not on this 
piece of legislation today, but soon. So let us do justice and reward 
nobility and hard

[[Page 13667]]

work, and let us name this Justice Department building downtown after 
Mr. Kennedy.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the point of order; but let me 
just say that I am a cosponsor of the gentleman's amendment, and I 
think it makes a lot of sense. I am reminded of the quote by Bobby 
Kennedy that says: ``Some men see things as they are and ask why; I 
dream things that never were and ask why not.''
  I am also reminded one of the famous quotes that he gave to a group 
of students in South Africa in 1966, which I use many times when I 
speak to high school kids. He said: ``A third danger,'' and this is a 
great recommendation to this body and to anyone, ``a third danger is 
timidity. Few men or women are willing to brave the disapproval of 
their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of their 
society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or 
great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality of those 
who seek to change a world which yields most painfully to change. 
Aristotle tells us that `at the Olympic games it is not the finest and 
the strongest men who are crowned, but they who enter the lists.' So 
too in the life of the honorable and the good it is they who act 
rightly who win the prize.''
  He goes on to say, ``I believe that in this generation,'' and hopeful 
in the generation that we are in, particularly when we think of China 
and Sudan and the persecution of believers around the world, ``that in 
this generation those with the courage to enter the moral conflict will 
find themselves with companions in every corner of the world.''
  So I think the gentleman's amendment is a great idea. The gentleman 
understands why we are objecting. But as he knows, I am a cosponsor and 
have been very appreciative of the work the gentleman has done, and 
that also his family has done in the area of human rights in China and 
around the world.
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his support of 
the amendment. I look forward to working with the distinguished 
gentleman, who has also worked so hard around the world for human 
rights, for justice, for honorable public service. I would hope that 
the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) would continue to work, as he 
already has, with me and with others. As I mentioned, we have 100 
cosponsors on this legislation to send forth, as the gentleman 
mentioned Bobby Kennedy's quote from South Africa, this type of ripple 
of hope that helps sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and 
resistance.
  There should be no resistance to this idea, and I do not think there 
is much; and I would hope, working with the administration and the 
White House and the gentleman from Virginia and the 100 cosponsors of 
this bill, that we can soon see this happen. I look forward to working 
with the gentleman, and I appreciate his strong support for this 
legislation.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I want to thank the 
gentleman for his sponsorship and efforts with regard to a memorial 
here in this city for the Adams family; not only John Adams, but John 
Quincy Adams, who, when he left the Presidency, served in this body, in 
the House of Representatives, for 17 years, and died just 50 or 60 
yards down the hallway. So I appreciate his efforts, and hopefully we 
can be part of doing both of them.
  Mr. Chairman, with that, I insist on my point of order.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief. I just wanted to rise in support 
of the gentleman's idea. On my wall here in my Washington office I have 
two pictures in one special section. There is a picture of Dr. Martin 
Luther King and another one, a photograph of Bobby Kennedy.
  It was those two individuals that invited my generation into public 
service and into activism at the community level; Dr. King obviously 
through his work on the civil rights movement and bringing us all 
together, and it was Bobby Kennedy who taught my generation that 
politics and government service were in fact an honorable profession.
  I remember the time he came to the South Bronx and campaigned there 
when he was running for Senator of New York, how excited everybody was 
at his excitement about public service, to a generation of Americans, 
many from the minority community, who were turned off to the system and 
turned off to politics.
  Bobby Kennedy continues to be that figure in my life that I look to 
as one who paid the ultimate price for asking all of us to come 
together to stand up for what we believed in. So I think at a minimum 
the gentleman's idea is one that we should fulfill.
  I would hope as we move along we pay attention to this idea and that 
we do rename the Justice Department building in honor of Bobby Kennedy. 
So I support the gentleman, and I commend the gentleman for the work he 
does on this.
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds.
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, let me say there are scores of pictures 
throughout Capitol Hill of Bobby Kennedy and in homes everywhere in 
America about Bobby Kennedy, his quotes, his dedication to public 
service, and with these two statements from these two distinguished 
Members, I will continue to pursue this. I am hopeful and optimistic 
that we will do the same.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:
       This title may be cited as the ``Judiciary Appropriations 
     Act, 2002''.

            TITLE IV--DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND RELATED AGENCY

                          DEPARTMENT OF STATE

                   Administration of Foreign Affairs


                    diplomatic and consular programs

       For necessary expenses of the Department of State and the 
     Foreign Service not otherwise provided for, including 
     employment, without regard to civil service and 
     classification laws, of persons on a temporary basis (not to 
     exceed $700,000 of this appropriation), as authorized by 
     section 801 of the United States Information and Educational 
     Exchange Act of 1948, as amended; representation to certain 
     international organizations in which the United States 
     participates pursuant to treaties ratified pursuant to the 
     advice and consent of the Senate or specific Acts of 
     Congress; arms control, nonproliferation and disarmament 
     activities as authorized; acquisition by exchange or purchase 
     of passenger motor vehicles as authorized by law; and for 
     expenses of general administration, $3,166,000,000: Provided, 
     That, of the amount made available under this heading, not to 
     exceed $4,000,000 may be transferred to, and merged with, 
     funds in the ``Emergencies in the Diplomatic and Consular 
     Service'' appropriations account, to be available only for 
     emergency evacuations and terrorism rewards: Provided 
     further, That, of the amount made available under this 
     heading, $270,259,000 shall be available only for public 
     diplomacy international information programs: Provided 
     further, That, notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     not to exceed $323,000,000 of offsetting collections derived 
     from fees collected under the authority of section 140(a)(1) 
     of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 
     and 1995 (Public Law 103-236) during fiscal year 2002 shall 
     be retained and used for authorized expenses in this 
     appropriation and shall remain available until expended: 
     Provided further, That any fees received in excess of 
     $323,000,000 in fiscal year 2002 shall remain available until 
     expended, but shall not be available for obligation until 
     October 1, 2002: Provided further, That no funds may be 
     obligated or expended for processing licenses for the export 
     of satellites of United States origin (including commercial 
     satellites and satellite components) to the People's Republic 
     of China unless, at least 15 days in advance, the Committees 
     on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate are notified of such proposed action.


          Amendment No. 19 Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

[[Page 13668]]

  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 19 offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
       Page 72, line 5, immediately before the period insert the 
     following:
     : Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, of the amount made available under this heading, 
     $7,800,000 shall be available to provide funds for legal 
     representation for parents who are seeking the return of 
     children abducted to or from the United States under the 
     Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child 
     Abduction

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the 
amendment and claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Wolf) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

                              {time}  1530

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) very much for his 
kindness, and I appreciate the fact that this is a very difficult 
issue.
  I rise today to address how we in Congress can help in a small way to 
ease the suffering of families whose children have been abducted to 
other countries, usually by a parent of the very child taken. That 
creates a very large wall that would keep these parents, American 
citizens on American soil, from helping their children.
  International parental kidnapping is a complex crime and takes an 
enormous toll, both emotionally and financially, on the searching 
parents left behind. The Hague Convention on the civil aspects of 
international child abduction is the primary legal tool to remedy 
international child abductions.
  Currently, at least 480 Americans are seeking access to a return of 
their children abducted in foreign countries who are signatories to The 
Hague Convention. At any given time, an estimated 300 families are 
searching for their children abducted from the United States. Often, 
these families must incur thousands of dollars in legal fees to try to 
obtain the return of their children.
  Legal representation is frequently beyond the financial reach of most 
families seeking the return of their children, sometimes costing 
between $20,000 and $40,000 per case in this country. Mr. Chairman, 75 
percent of the families who seek return of their children from the 
United States qualify for pro bono or reduced legal assistance.
  Mr. Chairman, this is an important legislative initiative because of 
the reason of being a parent, loving one's child, being able to see 
one's child and, many times, these children are abducted to lifestyles 
and conditions that do damage to them and prevent them from seeing 
another loving parent.
  Mr. Chairman, let me, first of all, thank the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Serrano) for his kindness on this amendment and also the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), the chairman of the subcommittee. The 
chairman's history in fighting human rights abuses is world renowned.
  I come to this floor not wanting to concede the point of order, but 
asking for the point of order to be waived, because I have seen in my 
office the pain of parents who cannot find their children, as I chair 
the Congressional Children's Caucus.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to address how we in Congress can help in 
a small way to help ease the suffering of families whose children have 
been abducted to other countries, usually by a parent of the very child 
taken.
  International parental kidnapping is a complex crime, and takes an 
enormous toll, both emotionally and financially, on the searching 
parents left behind. The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of 
International Child Abduction is the primary legal tool to remedy 
international child abductions. Currently, at least 480 Americans are 
seeking access to or return of their children abducted to foreign 
countries who are signatories to the Hague Convention. At any given 
time, an estimated three hundred families are searching for their 
children abducted to the United States.
  Often these families must incur thousands of dollars in legal fees to 
try to obtain the return of their children. Legal representation is 
frequently beyond the financial reach of most families seeking their 
return of their children, sometimes costing between $20,000 and $40,000 
per case in this country. Seventy-five percent of families who seek 
return of their children from the United States qualify for pro bono or 
reduced fee legal assistance.
  Because the United States, through the concurrent jurisdiction of 
federal district courts and state courts provided for in our 
implementing legislation, has thousands of judges who may hear a given 
case, our system is even more dependent than others on the knowledge of 
the attorneys and their ability to educate the court on the issues 
involved.
  The cost of bringing a Hague Convention case in court varies from 
state to state, but we typically private attorneys charge a retainer 
between $5,000 and $10,000. The hourly rate, of course, depends upon 
the attorney involved, but $150 or $200/hour is typical. Applicant 
parents also pay court filing fees and other expenses associated with 
the case.
  Nearly every country signatory to the Hague Convention provides free 
legal assistance to parents seeking the return of internationally 
abducted children. The Convention requires that if a country takes an 
exception to the specific provision of legal aid in these cases, as 
does the United States, then they must provide the same legal aid 
services to the foreign applicant parents that are available to citizen 
parents. The U.S. is not currently meeting even this obligation to 
parents who seek legal aid for children abducted to this country and, 
coupled with residency requirements and other restrictions, the 
existing options for legal aid in this country are unreachable even for 
those foreign citizens who might qualify financially.
  The U.S. Department of Justice has a list of attorneys willing to 
handle cases on a pro bono basis, often as a learning experience. And 
while some do very well, it can be difficult to find experienced help 
in every case. We must do more for these searching parents, and aid 
them in obtaining the proper legal representation to facilitate the 
return of their children.
  In countries where legal aid is unavailable, a resource bank of low-
fee or pro bono attorneys should be developed. Furthermore, all 
countries should take steps to establish a travel fund and a counseling 
and psychological treatment center for victim families. The work of 
Central Authorities and non-governmental organizations with regard to 
helping and supporting victim families needs to be recognized and 
funded.
  We in Congress have expressed a keen interest in requiring the 
Department of State to report on the shortcomings of treaty-partner 
countries. Although the United States' leadership in this field is 
appropriate, we must make sure that we address our own shortcomings as 
we point out those of others.
  This amendment will provide a source of funds to help pay for the 
legal representation that parents of abducted children desperately need 
when seeking the return of their children from countries who are 
signatories to the Hague Convention. Although the $7.8 million will not 
fully fund all legal fees for those who seek, it will help those who 
have the most need.
  Please join me and Congressman Lampson in supporting this budget 
neutral amendment to the Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations bill 
to assist these families as they search for their children--and help 
them to resolve their cases more quickly with the best legal 
representation they require and deserve. This bill earmarks the money 
from the State Department's funds for Administration of Foreign 
Affairs, Diplomatic and Consular programs and would be funds well 
spent.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Lampson), who chairs the Missing and Exploited 
Children's Caucus. We both serve in each other's caucus. The gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Lampson) has been to The Hague on this very important 
issue.
  Mr. LAMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
this time.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to support the Jackson-Lee-Lampson 
amendment that would appropriate $7.8 million to the Department of 
State to provide funds for legal representation for parents who are 
seeking the return of children abducted to or from the United States 
under The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child 
Abduction. I am chairman and founder of the Congressional Caucus on 
Missing and Exploited Children, and I have been active on this issue 
for over 3 years.
  Last year, this body passed H. Con. Res. 293, a resolution that 
called on

[[Page 13669]]

signatories to The Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International 
Child Abduction to abide by the provisions of The Hague and also 
recognized some weaknesses in certain provisions.
  What I hear over and over again from both American parents and non-
American parents is that the financial burden of legal expenses is 
overwhelming. One father with whom I have spoken has spent over several 
million dollars in travel expenses, attorneys' fees and court fees in 
Italy, and I have heard from numerous parents who have spent over 
$200,000 in their fights for the return of their children or just the 
opportunity to see their children. Nearly every country signatory to 
The Hague Convention provides free legal assistance to parents seeking 
the return of internationally abducted children. The United States does 
not.
  Mr. Chairman, we must do more for these searching parents and aid 
them in obtaining the proper legal representation to facilitate the 
return of their children. In countries where legal aid is unavailable, 
a resource bank of low-fee, pro bono attorney's fees should be 
developed, and that is what this amendment does.
  Again, I urge my colleagues to support the Jackson-Lee-Lampson 
amendment to appropriate $7.8 million for our Nation's searching 
parents.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, a list of 
pro bono attorneys at the Department of Justice is a nice idea, but 
those attorneys are just learning; and they cannot provide the legal 
expertise for these terrible fights that these parents have, $20,000, 
$40,000, $60,000 to psychologically break the bond between parent and 
child. I would hope that we would have the opportunity to pursue this 
amendment and work with the very distinguished chairman and ranking 
member.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly rise in opposition, and I 
reserve a point of order on the amendment. I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Let me say I do think the gentlewoman is onto something that is very 
important. I have worked on a couple of these cases, one dealing with 
two young children in Serbia. My administrative assistant, Charlie 
White, who has since died, and myself met with Milosevic on this issue. 
The mother was from California, was very articulate and was very able 
to get CBS and ABC to do news stories, but what about someone who 
really cannot?
  Perhaps we could put some report language in also asking Legal 
Services to also look at something like this. There may be somewhere in 
Legal Services that someone could become an expert, could give some 
guidance to a mom or dad that is faced with this.
  I also did not see the story, but my kids did, of the Sally Fields 
movie, ``Not Without My Daughter.'' I think is the name of that movie.
  So I think the gentlewoman is onto something very important. We will 
work with the gentlewoman to do some language or do something to see if 
we can push the ball a little farther forward so that if a mom or a dad 
is in some situation that there is some place to go or some help or 
some guidance. So we will be glad to work with the gentlewoman.


                             Point of Order

  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) insist on 
his point of order?
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I insist on a point of order and make a point 
of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing 
law and constitutes legislation in the appropriations bill and, 
therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI.
  The CHAIRMAN. Would the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) like 
to be heard on the point of order?
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
  First of all, let me say that, because of the nature of this issue, I 
had hoped that we could waive the point of order and allow some help 
for these desperate families. But I must say to the gentleman from 
Virginia, I want to thank him, and I think the ultimate goal is to work 
this through. Let me thank the gentleman for his offer, and let me say 
that I would like to work with him on this matter.
  Mr. LAMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I concur; and I look forward to working 
with both of my colleagues on this.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule.
  The Chair finds that this amendment explicitly supersedes existing 
law. The amendment, therefore, constitutes legislation in violation of 
clause 2 of rule XXI.
  The point of order is sustained, and the amendment is not in order.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to at this time 
offer out of order my ``Buy American'' amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Ohio?
  There was no objection.


               Amendment No. 38 Offered by Mr. Traficant

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

       Amendment No. 38 offered by Mr. Traficant:
       Page 108, after line 7, insert the following new section:
       Sec. __. No funds appropriated or otherwise made available 
     under this Act shall be made available to any person or 
     entity that has been convicted of violating the Buy American 
     Act (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c).

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  As my colleagues know, I had two amendments at the desk. At the 
request of both the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), the fine 
chairman in his first term of this subcommittee, and the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Serrano), our outstanding ranking member, I will not 
offer the second amendment that deals with overcrowding of Federal 
prisons, except to say when there were great headlines of one murder 
and killing in a private prison, that same year there were nine 
murders, killings in Federal prisons. I am advising both of these 
Members to take a look at the conditions of overcrowding, rape and 
serious problems in the Federal Prison System that have been swept 
under the rug.
  Mr. Chairman, back to my specific amendment here that is being 
offered, and I would like the chairman's attention.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TRAFICANT. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I am confused as to which amendment we are 
discussing. Is this the Buy American?
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Yes, it is, Mr. Chairman. I will not offer the other 
amendment. I have advised both the chairman and ranking member to look 
seriously at overcrowding and rape and serious problems in the Federal 
Bureau of Prisons.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TRAFICANT. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, that is why we opposed the Hinchey amendment 
last night that proposed to take $73 million out of the Bureau of 
Prisons for that very reason. I think the gentleman is right.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I want to reflect 
briefly on my amendment on the floor.
  Over the July 4 holiday when Americans celebrate Independence Day, 
the National Symphony Orchestra on the mall was performing, Mr. 
Chairman, and vendors were passing out on the mall to all those who 
came from throughout the United States to be a part of the Washington 
celebration of our freedom, they were passing out small plastic flags 
that were made in China. It may not seem like much, but I think we are 
giving away the farm. I think our trade policy sucks more than the 
suckerfish, and I think it is time we get a grip on this.

[[Page 13670]]

  The amendment simply says, anybody who has a prior conviction of 
having violated the Buy American law in this country is not eligible 
for any monies in this bill. It has been attached to every other bill, 
and it should be approved without great debate.
  But I am saying to Congress, we have a massive $300 billion-plus 
trade deficit in America; 20,000 American jobs lost per billion of 
trade deficit. Now, one does not have to be a rocket scientist to 
figure out what is happening in this country.
  So, with that, I would hope for his approval of this amendment; and I 
yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), the chairman of the 
subcommittee.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, we accept the amendment.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the distinguished ranking 
member, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano).
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, we are in support of the gentleman's 
amendment; and we congratulate him on his work.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I ask for an ``aye'' vote. I thank both 
the chairman and ranking member for allowing me to go out of order 
under the circumstances.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of 
the bill through page 83, line 22, be considered as read, printed in 
the Record and open for amendment at any point.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the bill from page 72, line 6, through page 83, line 22 
is as follows:
       In addition, not to exceed $1,343,000 shall be derived from 
     fees collected from other executive agencies for lease or use 
     of facilities located at the International Center in 
     accordance with section 4 of the International Center Act, as 
     amended; in addition, as authorized by section 5 of such Act, 
     $490,000, to be derived from the reserve authorized by that 
     section, to be used for the purposes set out in that section; 
     in addition, as authorized by section 810 of the United 
     States Information and Educational Exchange Act, not to 
     exceed $6,000,000, to remain available until expended, may be 
     credited to this appropriation from fees or other payments 
     received from English teaching, library, motion pictures, and 
     publication programs and from fees from educational advising 
     and counseling and exchange visitor programs; and, in 
     addition, not to exceed $15,000, which shall be derived from 
     reimbursements, surcharges, and fees for use of Blair House 
     facilities.
       In addition, for the costs of worldwide security upgrades, 
     $487,735,000, to remain available until expended.


                        capital investment fund

       For necessary expenses of the Capital Investment Fund, 
     $210,000,000, to remain available until expended, as 
     authorized: Provided, That section 135(e) of Public Law 103-
     236 shall not apply to funds available under this heading.


                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General, 
     $29,264,000, notwithstanding section 209(a)(1) of the Foreign 
     Service Act of 1980, as amended (Public Law 96-465), as it 
     relates to post inspections.


               educational and cultural exchange programs

       For expenses of educational and cultural exchange programs, 
     as authorized, $237,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That not to exceed $2,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended, may be credited to this 
     appropriation from fees or other payments received from or in 
     connection with English teaching, educational advising and 
     counseling programs, and exchange visitor programs as 
     authorized.


                       representation allowances

       For representation allowances as authorized, $6,485,000.


              protection of foreign missions and officials

       For expenses, not otherwise provided, to enable the 
     Secretary of State to provide for extraordinary protective 
     services, as authorized, $9,400,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2003.


            embassy security, construction, and maintenance

       For necessary expenses for carrying out the Foreign Service 
     Buildings Act of 1926, as amended (22 U.S.C. 292-300), 
     preserving, maintaining, repairing, and planning for 
     buildings that are owned or directly leased by the Department 
     of State, renovating, in addition to funds otherwise 
     available, the Harry S Truman Building, and carrying out the 
     Diplomatic Security Construction Program as authorized, 
     $470,000,000, to remain available until expended as 
     authorized, of which not to exceed $25,000 may be used for 
     domestic and overseas representation as authorized: Provided, 
     That none of the funds appropriated in this paragraph shall 
     be available for acquisition of furniture, furnishings, or 
     generators for other departments and agencies.
       In addition, for the costs of worldwide security upgrades, 
     acquisition, and construction as authorized, $815,960,000, to 
     remain available until expended.


           emergencies in the diplomatic and consular service

       For expenses necessary to enable the Secretary of State to 
     meet unforeseen emergencies arising in the Diplomatic and 
     Consular Service, $10,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended as authorized, of which not to exceed $1,000,000 may 
     be transferred to and merged with the Repatriation Loans 
     Program Account, subject to the same terms and conditions.


                   repatriation loans program account

       For the cost of direct loans, $612,000, as authorized: 
     Provided, That such costs, including the cost of modifying 
     such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974. In addition, for 
     administrative expenses necessary to carry out the direct 
     loan program, $607,000, which may be transferred to and 
     merged with the Diplomatic and Consular Programs account 
     under Administration of Foreign Affairs.


              payment to the american institute in taiwan

       For necessary expenses to carry out the Taiwan Relations 
     Act, Public Law 96-8, $17,044,000.


     payment to the foreign service retirement and disability fund

       For payment to the Foreign Service Retirement and 
     Disability Fund, as authorized by law, $135,629,000.

              International Organizations and Conferences


              contributions to international organizations

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary to meet 
     annual obligations of membership in international 
     multilateral organizations, pursuant to treaties ratified 
     pursuant to the advice and consent of the Senate, conventions 
     or specific Acts of Congress, $850,000,000: Provided, That 
     any payment of arrearages under this title shall be directed 
     toward special activities that are mutually agreed upon by 
     the United States and the respective international 
     organization: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated in this paragraph shall be available for a 
     United States contribution to an international organization 
     for the United States share of interest costs made known to 
     the United States Government by such organization for loans 
     incurred on or after October 1, 1984, through external 
     borrowings: Provided further, That, of the funds appropriated 
     in this paragraph, $100,000,000 may be made available only 
     pursuant to a certification by the Secretary of State that 
     the United Nations has taken no action in calendar year 2001 
     prior to the date of enactment of this Act to increase 
     funding for any United Nations program without identifying an 
     offsetting decrease elsewhere in the United Nations budget 
     and cause the United Nations to exceed the budget for the 
     biennium 2000-2001 of $2,535,700,000: Provided further, That 
     if the Secretary of State is unable to make the 
     aforementioned certification, the $100,000,000 is to be 
     applied to paying the current year assessment for other 
     international organizations for which the assessment has not 
     been paid in full or to paying the assessment due in the next 
     fiscal year for such organizations, subject to the 
     reprogramming procedures contained in Section 605 of this 
     Act: Provided further, That funds appropriated under this 
     paragraph may be obligated and expended to pay the full 
     United States assessment to the civil budget of the North 
     Atlantic Treaty Organization.


        contributions for international peacekeeping activities

       For necessary expenses to pay assessed and other expenses 
     of international peacekeeping activities directed to the 
     maintenance or restoration of international peace and 
     security, $844,139,000: Provided, That none of the funds made 
     available under this Act shall be obligated or expended for 
     any new or expanded United Nations peacekeeping mission 
     unless, at least 15 days in advance of voting for the new or 
     expanded mission in the United Nations Security Council (or 
     in an emergency as far in advance as is practicable): (1) the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and the Senate and other appropriate committees of the 
     Congress are notified of the estimated cost and length of the 
     mission, the vital national interest to be served, and the 
     planned exit strategy; and (2) a reprogramming of funds 
     pursuant to section 605 of this Act is submitted, and the 
     procedures therein

[[Page 13671]]

     followed, setting forth the source of funds that will be used 
     to pay for the cost of the new or expanded mission: Provided 
     further, That funds shall be available for peacekeeping 
     expenses only upon a certification by the Secretary of State 
     to the appropriate committees of the Congress that American 
     manufacturers and suppliers are being given opportunities to 
     provide equipment, services, and material for United Nations 
     peacekeeping activities equal to those being given to foreign 
     manufacturers and suppliers: Provided further, That none of 
     the funds made available under this heading are available to 
     pay the United States share of the cost of court monitoring 
     that is part of any United Nations peacekeeping mission.


                       international commissions

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, to meet 
     obligations of the United States arising under treaties, or 
     specific Acts of Congress, as follows:

 international boundary and water commission, united states and mexico

       For necessary expenses for the United States Section of the 
     International Boundary and Water Commission, United States 
     and Mexico, and to comply with laws applicable to the United 
     States Section, including not to exceed $6,000 for 
     representation; as follows:

                         salaries and expenses

       For salaries and expenses, not otherwise provided for, 
     $24,705,000.


                              construction

       For detailed plan preparation and construction of 
     authorized projects, $5,520,000, to remain available until 
     expended, as authorized.


              american sections, international commissions

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided, for the 
     International Joint Commission and the International Boundary 
     Commission, United States and Canada, as authorized by 
     treaties between the United States and Canada or Great 
     Britain, and for the Border Environment Cooperation 
     Commission as authorized by Public Law 103-182, $10,311,000, 
     of which not to exceed $9,000 shall be available for 
     representation expenses incurred by the International Joint 
     Commission.


                  international fisheries commissions

       For necessary expenses for international fisheries 
     commissions, not otherwise provided for, as authorized by 
     law, $19,780,000: Provided, That the United States' share of 
     such expenses may be advanced to the respective commissions 
     pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3324.

                                 Other


                     payment to the asia foundation

       For a grant to the Asia Foundation, as authorized by the 
     Asia Foundation Act (22 U.S.C. 4402), as amended, $9,250,000, 
     to remain available until expended, as authorized.


           eisenhower exchange fellowship program trust fund

       For necessary expenses of Eisenhower Exchange Fellowships, 
     Incorporated, as authorized by sections 4 and 5 of the 
     Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship Act of 1990 (20 U.S.C. 5204-
     5205), all interest and earnings accruing to the Eisenhower 
     Exchange Fellowship Program Trust Fund on or before September 
     30, 2002, to remain available until expended: Provided, That 
     none of the funds appropriated herein shall be used to pay 
     any salary or other compensation, or to enter into any 
     contract providing for the payment thereof, in excess of the 
     rate authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5376; or for purposes which are 
     not in accordance with OMB Circulars A-110 (Uniform 
     Administrative Requirements) and A-122 (Cost Principles for 
     Non-profit Organizations), including the restrictions on 
     compensation for personal services.


                    israeli arab scholarship program

       For necessary expenses of the Israeli Arab Scholarship 
     Program as authorized by section 214 of the Foreign Relations 
     Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993 (22 U.S.C. 
     2452), all interest and earnings accruing to the Israeli Arab 
     Scholarship Fund on or before September 30, 2002, to remain 
     available until expended.


                            east-west center

       To enable the Secretary of State to provide for carrying 
     out the provisions of the Center for Cultural and Technical 
     Interchange Between East and West Act of 1960, by grant to 
     the Center for Cultural and Technical Interchange Between 
     East and West in the State of Hawaii, $9,400,000: Provided, 
     That none of the funds appropriated herein shall be used to 
     pay any salary, or enter into any contract providing for the 
     payment thereof, in excess of the rate authorized by 5 U.S.C. 
     5376.


                    national endowment for democracy

       For grants made by the Department of State to the National 
     Endowment for Democracy as authorized by the National 
     Endowment for Democracy Act, $33,500,000, to remain available 
     until expended.

                             RELATED AGENCY

                    Broadcasting Board of Governors


                 international broadcasting operations

       For expenses necessary to enable the Broadcasting Board of 
     Governors, as authorized, to carry out international 
     communication activities, including the purchase, 
     installation, rent, construction, and improvement of 
     facilities for radio and television transmission and 
     reception to Cuba, $453,106,000, of which not to exceed 
     $16,000 may be used for official receptions within the United 
     States as authorized, not to exceed $35,000 may be used for 
     representation abroad as authorized, and not to exceed 
     $39,000 may be used for official reception and representation 
     expenses of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty; and in addition, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, not to exceed 
     $2,000,000 in receipts from advertising and revenue from 
     business ventures, not to exceed $500,000 in receipts from 
     cooperating international organizations, and not to exceed 
     $1,000,000 in receipts from privatization efforts of the 
     Voice of America and the International Broadcasting Bureau, 
     to remain available until expended for carrying out 
     authorized purposes.


                   broadcasting capital improvements

       For the purchase, rent, construction, and improvement of 
     facilities for radio transmission and reception, and purchase 
     and installation of necessary equipment for radio and 
     television transmission and reception as authorized, 
     $25,900,000, to remain available until expended, as 
     authorized.

       General Provisions--Department of State and Related Agency

       Sec. 401. Funds appropriated under this title shall be 
     available, except as otherwise provided, for allowances and 
     differentials as authorized by subchapter 59 of title 5, 
     United States Code; for services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 
     3109; and for hire of passenger transportation pursuant to 31 
     U.S.C. 1343(b).
       Sec. 402. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made 
     available for the current fiscal year for the Department of 
     State in this Act may be transferred between such 
     appropriations, but no such appropriation, except as 
     otherwise specifically provided, shall be increased by more 
     than 10 percent by any such transfers: Provided, That not to 
     exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made available for the 
     current fiscal year for the Broadcasting Board of Governors 
     in this Act may be transferred between such appropriations, 
     but no such appropriation, except as otherwise specifically 
     provided, shall be increased by more than 10 percent by any 
     such transfers: Provided further, That any transfer pursuant 
     to this section shall be treated as a reprogramming of funds 
     under section 605 of this Act and shall not be available for 
     obligation or expenditure except in compliance with the 
     procedures set forth in that section.
       Sec. 403. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used by the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board 
     of Governors to provide equipment, technical support, 
     consulting services, or any other form of assistance to the 
     Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Are there amendments to that portion of the 
bill?
  If not, the Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       This title may be cited as the ``Department of State and 
     Related Agency Appropriations Act, 2002''.

                       TITLE V--RELATED AGENCIES

                      DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                        Maritime Administration


                       maritime security program

       For necessary expenses to maintain and preserve a U.S.-flag 
     merchant fleet to serve the national security needs of the 
     United States, $98,700,000, to remain available until 
     expended.


                        operations and training

       For necessary expenses of operations and training 
     activities authorized by law, $89,054,000, of which 
     $13,000,000 shall remain available until expended for capital 
     improvements at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy.


                             ship disposal

       For necessary expenses related to the disposal of obsolete 
     vessels in the National Defense Reserve Fleet of the Maritime 
     Administration, $10,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended.


          maritime guaranteed loan (title xi) program account

       For the cost of guaranteed loans, as authorized by the 
     Merchant Marine Act, 1936, $30,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That such costs, including the cost 
     of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 
     of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided 
     further, That during fiscal year 2002, commitments to 
     subsidize loans authorized under this heading shall not 
     exceed $1,000,000,000 without prior notification of the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and Senate in accordance with section 605 of this Act.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     guaranteed loan program, not to exceed $3,978,000, which 
     shall be transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     Operations and Training.


           administrative provisions--maritime administration

       Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the 
     Maritime Administration is authorized to furnish utilities 
     and services and

[[Page 13672]]

     make necessary repairs in connection with any lease, 
     contract, or occupancy involving Government property under 
     control of the Maritime Administration, and payments received 
     therefore shall be credited to the appropriation charged with 
     the cost thereof: Provided, That rental payments under any 
     such lease, contract, or occupancy for items other than such 
     utilities, services, or repairs shall be covered into the 
     Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.
       No obligations shall be incurred during the current fiscal 
     year from the construction fund established by the Merchant 
     Marine Act, 1936, or otherwise, in excess of the 
     appropriations and limitations contained in this Act or in 
     any prior Appropriations Act.

      Commission for the Preservation of America's Heritage Abroad


                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses for the Commission for the Preservation of 
     America's Heritage Abroad, $489,000, as authorized by section 
     1303 of Public Law 99-83.

                       Commission on Civil Rights


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Commission on Civil Rights, 
     including hire of passenger motor vehicles, $9,096,000: 
     Provided, That not to exceed $50,000 may be used to employ 
     consultants: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated in this paragraph shall be used to employ in 
     excess of four full-time individuals under Schedule C of the 
     Excepted Service exclusive of one special assistant for each 
     Commissioner: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated in this paragraph shall be used to reimburse 
     Commissioners for more than 75 billable days, with the 
     exception of the chairperson, who is permitted 125 billable 
     days.

             Commission on International Religious Freedom


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for the United States Commission on 
     International Religious Freedom, as authorized by title II of 
     the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (Public Law 
     105-292), $3,000,000, to remain available until expended.

            Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Commission on Security and 
     Cooperation in Europe, as authorized by Public Law 94-304, 
     $1,499,000, to remain available until expended as authorized 
     by section 3 of Public Law 99-7.

  Congressional-Executive Commission on the People's Republic of China


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Congressional-Executive 
     Commission on the People's Republic of China, as authorized, 
     $500,000, to remain available until expended.

                Equal Employment Opportunity Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission as authorized by title VII of the Civil Rights Act 
     of 1964, as amended (29 U.S.C. 206(d) and 621-634), the 
     Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Civil Rights 
     Act of 1991, including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 
     3109; hire of passenger motor vehicles as authorized by 31 
     U.S.C. 1343(b); non-monetary awards to private citizens; and 
     not to exceed $30,000,000 for payments to State and local 
     enforcement agencies for services to the Commission pursuant 
     to title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 
     sections 6 and 14 of the Age Discrimination in Employment 
     Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the 
     Civil Rights Act of 1991, $310,406,000: Provided, That the 
     Commission is authorized to make available for official 
     reception and representation expenses not to exceed $2,500 
     from available funds.

                   Federal Communications Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Communications 
     Commission, as authorized by law, including uniforms and 
     allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; not 
     to exceed $600,000 for land and structure; not to exceed 
     $500,000 for improvement and care of grounds and repair to 
     buildings; not to exceed $4,000 for official reception and 
     representation expenses; purchase (not to exceed 16) and hire 
     of motor vehicles; special counsel fees; and services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $238,597,000, of which not to 
     exceed $300,000 shall remain available until September 30, 
     2003, for research and policy studies: Provided, That 
     $218,757,000 of offsetting collections shall be assessed and 
     collected pursuant to section 9 of title I of the 
     Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and shall be retained 
     and used for necessary expenses in this appropriation, and 
     shall remain available until expended: Provided further, That 
     the sum herein appropriated shall be reduced as such 
     offsetting collections are received during fiscal year 2002 
     so as to result in a final fiscal year 2002 appropriation 
     estimated at $19,840,000: Provided further, That any 
     offsetting collections received in excess of $218,757,000 in 
     fiscal year 2002 shall remain available until expended, but 
     shall not be available for obligation until October 1, 2002.

                      Federal Maritime Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Maritime Commission 
     as authorized by section 201(d) of the Merchant Marine Act, 
     1936, as amended (46 U.S.C. App. 1111), including services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; hire of passenger motor vehicles 
     as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343(b); and uniforms or 
     allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902, 
     $15,466,000: Provided, That not to exceed $2,000 shall be 
     available for official reception and representation expenses.

                        Federal Trade Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Trade Commission, 
     including uniforms or allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 5901-5902; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles; not to exceed $2,000 for 
     official reception and representation expenses, $155,982,000: 
     Provided, That not to exceed $300,000 shall be available for 
     use to contract with a person or persons for collection 
     services in accordance with the terms of 31 U.S.C. 3718, as 
     amended: Provided further, That, notwithstanding section 
     3302(b) of title 31, United States Code, not to exceed 
     $155,982,000 of offsetting collections derived from fees 
     collected for premerger notification filings under the Hart-
     Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (15 U.S.C. 
     18a) shall be retained and used for necessary expenses in 
     this appropriation, and shall remain available until 
     expended: Provided further, That the sum herein appropriated 
     from the general fund shall be reduced as such offsetting 
     collections are received during fiscal year 2002, so as to 
     result in a final fiscal year 2002 appropriation from the 
     general fund estimated at not more than $0, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided further, That none of the 
     funds made available to the Federal Trade Commission shall be 
     available for obligation for expenses authorized by section 
     151 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement 
     Act of 1991 (Public Law 102-242; 105 Stat. 2282-2285).

                       Legal Services Corporation


               payment to the legal services corporation

       For payment to the Legal Services Corporation to carry out 
     the purposes of the Legal Services Corporation Act of 1974, 
     as amended, $329,300,000, of which $310,000,000 is for basic 
     field programs and required independent audits; $2,500,000 is 
     for the Office of Inspector General, of which such amounts as 
     may be necessary may be used to conduct additional audits of 
     recipients; $12,400,000 is for management and administration; 
     and $4,400,000 is for client self-help and information 
     technology.


          administrative provision--legal services corporation

       None of the funds appropriated in this Act to the Legal 
     Services Corporation shall be expended for any purpose 
     prohibited or limited by, or contrary to any of the 
     provisions of, sections 501, 502, 503, 504, 505, and 506 of 
     Public Law 105-119, and all funds appropriated in this Act to 
     the Legal Services Corporation shall be subject to the same 
     terms and conditions set forth in such sections, except that 
     all references in sections 502 and 503 to 1997 and 1998 shall 
     be deemed to refer instead to 2001 and 2002, respectively.
       Section 504(a)(16) of Public Law 104-134 is hereafter 
     amended by striking ``if such relief does not involve'' and 
     all that follows through ``representation''.

                        Marine Mammal Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Marine Mammal Commission as 
     authorized by title II of Public Law 92-522, as amended, 
     $1,732,000.

           National Veterans Business Development Corporation

       For necessary expenses of the National Veterans Business 
     Development Corporation as authorized under section 33(a) of 
     the Small Business Act, as amended, $4,000,000.

                       Pacific Charter Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for the Pacific Charter Commission, 
     as authorized by the Pacific Charter Commission Act of 2000 
     (Public Law 106-570), $2,500,000, to remain available until 
     expended.

                   Securities and Exchange Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for the Securities and Exchange 
     Commission, including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 
     3109, the rental of space (to include multiple year leases) 
     in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, and not to exceed 
     $3,000 for official reception and representation expenses, 
     $109,500,000 from fees collected in fiscal year 2002 to 
     remain available until expended, and from fees collected in 
     previous fiscal years, $328,400,000, to remain available 
     until expended; of which not to exceed $10,000 may be used 
     toward funding a permanent secretariat for the International 
     Organization of Securities Commissions; and of which not to 
     exceed $100,000 shall be available for expenses for 
     consultations and meetings hosted by the

[[Page 13673]]

     Commission with foreign governmental and other regulatory 
     officials, members of their delegations, appropriate 
     representatives and staff to exchange views concerning 
     developments relating to securities matters, development and 
     implementation of cooperation agreements concerning 
     securities matters and provision of technical assistance for 
     the development of foreign securities markets, such expenses 
     to include necessary logistic and administrative expenses and 
     the expenses of Commission staff and foreign invitees in 
     attendance at such consultations and meetings including: (1) 
     such incidental expenses as meals taken in the course of such 
     attendance; (2) any travel and transportation to or from such 
     meetings; and (3) any other related lodging or subsistence: 
     Provided, That fees and charges authorized by sections 
     6(b)(4) of the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77f(b)(4)) 
     and 31(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 
     78ee(d)) shall be credited to this account as offsetting 
     collections: Provided further, That fees collected as 
     authorized by section 31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 
     1934 (15 U.S.C. 78ee) for sales transacted on, and with 
     respect to securities registered solely on, an exchange that 
     is initially granted registration as a national securities 
     exchange after February 24, 2000 shall be credited to this 
     account as offsetting collections: Provided further, That for 
     purposes of collections under section 31, a security shall 
     not be deemed registered on a national securities exchange 
     solely because that national securities exchange continues or 
     extends unlisted trading privileges to that security.

                              {time}  1545


                 Amendment No. 34 Offered by Mr. Oxley

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

       Amendment No. 34 offered by Mr. Oxley:
       Page 94, beginning on line 9, strike ``: Provided further, 
     That fees'' and all that follows through line 20 and insert a 
     period.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley).
  Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment to the Commerce-Justice-State 
appropriations bill to strike language that would amend the Federal 
securities laws with respect to the treatment of certain SEC fees.
  The provisions that my amendment would strike pertain to an issue 
that has already been addressed in much more comprehensive form in the 
form of H.R. 1088, the Investor and Capital Markets Fee Relief Act.
  That bill, which was approved in the House with a resounding 
bipartisan vote of 404 to 22, reduces the excess fees that investors 
are currently paying in connection with securities transactions, IPOs, 
and other securities activities.
  My amendment strikes language that would change the treatment of 
certain exchange-traded transactions for purposes of allocating fees 
charged under section 31 of the Securities and Exchange Act for 
budgetary purposes.
  Rather than addressing this issue in a piecemeal fashion and outside 
the consideration of the committee of jurisdiction, and that would be 
the Committee on Financial Services, it should be addressed, as it 
already has been, in H.R. 1088.
  I want to thank my good friend, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Wolf), the chairman of the subcommittee, for his cooperation on this 
matter, as well as for his support of H.R. 1088, and urge all Members 
of the body to support my amendment to reduce SEC fees in a 
comprehensive manner, rather than in the appropriations process. I urge 
support for the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, we will accept the amendment. We have spoken with the 
gentleman from the class of 1980, and we have no objection to the 
amendment.
  We want to assure the gentleman that these provisions were not 
intended to infringe upon the gentleman's jurisdiction in any way.
  Lastly, if there are any unforeseen circumstances, as we mentioned to 
the gentleman, in which the gentleman's legislation is not enacted, the 
committee will need to reconsider the inclusion of this language in the 
conference report.
  But it is a good amendment, and we strongly accept it.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief. I just want to reiterate what the 
chairman just said. We, of course, support the gentleman's amendment; 
but if we run into this problem that the gentleman's bill is not 
passed, we would hope that he will join us in making sure that this 
language is put back in. He is shaking his head.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                     Small Business Administration


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, of the 
     Small Business Administration as authorized by Public Law 
     105-135, including hire of passenger motor vehicles as 
     authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343 and 1344, and not to exceed 
     $3,500 for official reception and representation expenses, 
     $303,581,000: Provided, That the Administrator is authorized 
     to charge fees to cover the cost of publications developed by 
     the Small Business Administration, and certain loan servicing 
     activities: Provided further, That, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 
     3302, revenues received from all such activities shall be 
     credited to this account, to be available for carrying out 
     these purposes without further appropriations.


                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), $11,927,000.


                     business loans program account

       For the cost of direct loans, $1,500,000, to be available 
     until expended; and for the cost of guaranteed loans, 
     $77,000,000, as authorized by 15 U.S.C. 631 note, of which 
     $45,000,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2003: 
     Provided, That such costs, including the cost of modifying 
     such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided 
     further, That during fiscal year 2002 commitments to 
     guarantee loans under section 503 of the Small Business 
     Investment Act of 1958, as amended, shall not exceed 
     $3,750,000,000: Provided further, That during fiscal year 
     2002 commitments for general business loans authorized under 
     section 7(a) of the Small Business Act, as amended, shall not 
     exceed $10,000,000,000 without prior notification of the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and Senate in accordance with section 605 of this Act: 
     Provided further, That during fiscal year 2002 guarantee 
     commitments under section 303(b) of the Small Business 
     Investment Act of 1958, as amended, shall not exceed 
     $4,100,000,000.


                Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Manzullo

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

       Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Manzullo:
       Page 96, line 10, strike ``$4,100,000,000'' and insert the 
     following:

     the levels established by section 20(h)(1)(C) of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 note)

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I bring this amendment, along with my colleague, the 
ranking minority member on the Committee on Small Business, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), and thank her for her help.
  This amendment is very simple. It increases the guaranteed commitment 
levels for the Small Business Administration's two Small Business 
Investment Company programs to reflect the levels established by 
Congress in the SBA Reauthorization Act. It does not call for any 
increased spending.
  Mr. Chairman, I understand that the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Wolf) is going to accept the amendment.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

[[Page 13674]]


  Mr. MANZULLO. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, we accept the amendment. The gentleman has 
worked with us in developing this amendment. We have no objection to 
it.
  However, I would note that we have assumed a zero subsidy rate for 
the SBIC programs based on anticipated authorization changes.
  I am sure the gentleman is aware that in the event those changes are 
not enacted, that both the SBIC programs do not operate with a zero 
subsidy rate, we will certainly not be in a position to maintain such a 
generous program level limitation.
  With that, we accept the amendment and congratulate the gentleman.
  Mr. MANZULLO. The gentleman is correct in his assumption.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of 
the bill through page 107, line 20, be considered as read, printed in 
the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the bill from page 96, line 11, through page 107, line 
20, is as follows:
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     direct and guaranteed loan programs, $129,000,000, which may 
     be transferred to and merged with the appropriations for 
     Salaries and Expenses.


                     disaster loans program account

       For the cost of direct loans authorized by section 7(b) of 
     the Small Business Act, as amended, $84,510,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That such costs, 
     including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as 
     defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, as amended.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     direct loan program, $120,354,000, which may be transferred 
     to and merged with appropriations for Salaries and Expenses, 
     of which $500,000 is for the Office of Inspector General of 
     the Small Business Administration for audits and reviews of 
     disaster loans and the disaster loan program and shall be 
     transferred to and merged with appropriations for the Office 
     of Inspector General; of which $110,000,000 is for direct 
     administrative expenses of loan making and servicing to carry 
     out the direct loan program; and of which $9,854,000 is for 
     indirect administrative expenses: Provided, That any amount 
     in excess of $9,854,000 to be transferred to and merged with 
     appropriations for Salaries and Expenses for indirect 
     administrative expenses shall be treated as a reprogramming 
     of funds under section 605 of this Act and shall not be 
     available for obligation or expenditure except in compliance 
     with the procedures set forth in that section.


        administrative provision--small business administration

       Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made available 
     for the current fiscal year for the Small Business 
     Administration in this Act may be transferred between such 
     appropriations, but no such appropriation shall be increased 
     by more than 10 percent by any such transfers: Provided, That 
     any transfer pursuant to this paragraph shall be treated as a 
     reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this Act and 
     shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except 
     in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section.

                        State Justice Institute


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the State Justice Institute, as 
     authorized by the State Justice Institute Authorization Act 
     of 1992 (Public Law 102-572; 106 Stat. 4515-4516), 
     $6,835,000, to remain available until expended: Provided,  
     That not to exceed $2,500 shall be available for official 
     reception and representation expenses.

                      TITLE VI--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 601. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not 
     authorized by the Congress.
       Sec. 602. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current 
     fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 603. The expenditure of any appropriation under this 
     Act for any consulting service through procurement contract, 
     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109, shall be limited to those 
     contracts where such expenditures are a matter of public 
     record and available for public inspection, except where 
     otherwise provided under existing law, or under existing 
     Executive order issued pursuant to existing law.
       Sec. 604. If any provision of this Act or the application 
     of such provision to any person or circumstances shall be 
     held invalid, the remainder of the Act and the application of 
     each provision to persons or circumstances other than those 
     as to which it is held invalid shall not be affected thereby.
       Sec. 605. (a) None of the funds provided under this Act, or 
     provided under previous appropriations Acts to the agencies 
     funded by this Act that remain available for obligation or 
     expenditure in fiscal year 2002, or provided from any 
     accounts in the Treasury of the United States derived by the 
     collection of fees available to the agencies funded by this 
     Act, shall be available for obligation or expenditure through 
     a reprogramming of funds which: (1) creates new programs; (2) 
     eliminates a program, project, or activity; (3) increases 
     funds or personnel by any means for any project or activity 
     for which funds have been denied or restricted; (4) relocates 
     an office or employees; (5) reorganizes offices, programs, or 
     activities; or (6) contracts out or privatizes any functions 
     or activities presently performed by Federal employees; 
     unless the Appropriations Committees of both Houses of 
     Congress are notified 15 days in advance of such 
     reprogramming of funds.
       (b) None of the funds provided under this Act, or provided 
     under previous appropriations Acts to the agencies funded by 
     this Act that remain available for obligation or expenditure 
     in fiscal year 2002, or provided from any accounts in the 
     Treasury of the United States derived by the collection of 
     fees available to the agencies funded by this Act, shall be 
     available for obligation or expenditure for activities, 
     programs, or projects through a reprogramming of funds in 
     excess of $500,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less, that: 
     (1) augments existing programs, projects, or activities; (2) 
     reduces by 10 percent funding for any existing program, 
     project, or activity, or numbers of personnel by 10 percent 
     as approved by Congress; or (3) results from any general 
     savings from a reduction in personnel which would result in a 
     change in existing programs, activities, or projects as 
     approved by Congress; unless the Appropriations Committees of 
     both Houses of Congress are notified 15 days in advance of 
     such reprogramming of funds.
       Sec. 606. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used for the construction, repair (other than emergency 
     repair), overhaul, conversion, or modernization of vessels 
     for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in 
     shipyards located outside of the United States.
       Sec. 607. (a) Purchase of American-Made Equipment and 
     Products.--It is the sense of the Congress that, to the 
     greatest extent practicable, all equipment and products 
     purchased with funds made available in this Act should be 
     American-made.
       (b) Notice Requirement.--In providing financial assistance 
     to, or entering into any contract with, any entity using 
     funds made available in this Act, the head of each Federal 
     agency, to the greatest extent practicable, shall provide to 
     such entity a notice describing the statement made in 
     subsection (a) by the Congress.
       (c) Prohibition of Contracts With Persons Falsely Labeling 
     Products as Made in America.--If it has been finally 
     determined by a court or Federal agency that any person 
     intentionally affixed a label bearing a ``Made in America'' 
     inscription, or any inscription with the same meaning, to any 
     product sold in or shipped to the United States that is not 
     made in the United States, the person shall be ineligible to 
     receive any contract or subcontract made with funds made 
     available in this Act, pursuant to the debarment, suspension, 
     and ineligibility procedures described in sections 9.400 
     through 9.409 of title 48, Code of Federal Regulations.
       Sec. 608. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to implement, administer, or enforce any guidelines 
     of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission covering 
     harassment based on religion, when it is made known to the 
     Federal entity or official to which such funds are made 
     available that such guidelines do not differ in any respect 
     from the proposed guidelines published by the Commission on 
     October 1, 1993 (58 Fed. Reg. 51266).
       Sec. 609. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used for any United Nations undertaking when it is made 
     known to the Federal official having authority to obligate or 
     expend such funds: (1) that the United Nations undertaking is 
     a peacekeeping mission; (2) that such undertaking will 
     involve United States Armed Forces under the command or 
     operational control of a foreign national; and (3) that the 
     President's military advisors have not submitted to the 
     President a recommendation that such involvement is in the 
     national security interests of the United States and the 
     President has not submitted to the Congress such a 
     recommendation.
       Sec. 610. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available by this Act shall be expended for any purpose 
     for which appropriations are prohibited by section 609 of the 
     Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, 
     and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999.
       (b) The requirements in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of 
     section 609 of that Act shall continue to apply during fiscal 
     year 2002.

[[Page 13675]]

       Sec. 611. None of the funds made available in this Act 
     shall be used to provide the following amenities or personal 
     comforts in the Federal prison system--
       (1) in-cell television viewing except for prisoners who are 
     segregated from the general prison population for their own 
     safety;
       (2) the viewing of R, X, and NC-17 rated movies, through 
     whatever medium presented;
       (3) any instruction (live or through broadcasts) or 
     training equipment for boxing, wrestling, judo, karate, or 
     other martial art, or any bodybuilding or weightlifting 
     equipment of any sort;
       (4) possession of in-cell coffee pots, hot plates or 
     heating elements; or
       (5) the use or possession of any electric or electronic 
     musical instrument.
       Sec. 612. None of the funds made available in title II for 
     the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 
     under the headings ``Operations, Research, and Facilities'' 
     and ``Procurement, Acquisition and Construction'' may be used 
     to implement sections 603, 604, and 605 of Public Law 102-
     567: Provided, That NOAA may develop a modernization plan for 
     its fisheries research vessels that takes fully into account 
     opportunities for contracting for fisheries surveys.
       Sec. 613. Any costs incurred by a department or agency 
     funded under this Act resulting from personnel actions taken 
     in response to funding reductions included in this Act shall 
     be absorbed within the total budgetary resources available to 
     such department or agency: Provided, That the authority to 
     transfer funds between appropriations accounts as may be 
     necessary to carry out this section is provided in addition 
     to authorities included elsewhere in this Act: Provided 
     further, That use of funds to carry out this section shall be 
     treated as a reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this 
     Act and shall not be available for obligation or expenditure 
     except in compliance with the procedures set forth in that 
     section.
       Sec. 614. Hereafter, none of the funds made available in 
     this Act to the Federal Bureau of Prisons may be used to 
     distribute or make available any commercially published 
     information or material to a prisoner when it is made known 
     to the Federal official having authority to obligate or 
     expend such funds that such information or material is 
     sexually explicit or features nudity.
       Sec. 615. Of the funds appropriated in this Act under the 
     heading ``Office of Justice Programs--State and Local Law 
     Enforcement Assistance'', not more than 90 percent of the 
     amount to be awarded to an entity under the Local Law 
     Enforcement Block Grant shall be made available to such an 
     entity when it is made known to the Federal official having 
     authority to obligate or expend such funds that the entity 
     that employs a public safety officer (as such term is defined 
     in section 1204 of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and 
     Safe Streets Act of 1968) does not provide such a public 
     safety officer who retires or is separated from service due 
     to injury suffered as the direct and proximate result of a 
     personal injury sustained in the line of duty while 
     responding to an emergency situation or a hot pursuit (as 
     such terms are defined by State law) with the same or better 
     level of health insurance benefits at the time of retirement 
     or separation as they received while on duty.
       Sec. 616. None of the funds provided by this Act shall be 
     available to promote the sale or export of tobacco or tobacco 
     products, or to seek the reduction or removal by any foreign 
     country of restrictions on the marketing of tobacco or 
     tobacco products, except for restrictions which are not 
     applied equally to all tobacco or tobacco products of the 
     same type.
       Sec. 617. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available by this Act shall be expended for any purpose 
     for which appropriations are prohibited by section 616 of the 
     Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, 
     and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, as amended.
       (b) Subsection (a)(1) of section 616 of that Act, as 
     amended, is further amended--
       (1) by striking ``Claudy Myrthil,''.
       (c) The requirements in subsections (b) and (c) of section 
     616 of that Act shall continue to apply during fiscal year 
     2002.
       Sec. 618. None of the funds appropriated pursuant to this 
     Act or any other provision of law may be used for: (1) the 
     implementation of any tax or fee in connection with the 
     implementation of 18 U.S.C. 922(t); and (2) any system to 
     implement 18 U.S.C. 922(t) that does not require and result 
     in the destruction of any identifying information submitted 
     by or on behalf of any person who has been determined not to 
     be prohibited from owning a firearm.
       Sec. 619. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     amounts deposited or available in the Fund established under 
     42 U.S.C. 10601 in any fiscal year in excess of $575,000,000 
     shall not be available for obligation until the following 
     fiscal year.
       Sec. 620. None of the funds made available to the 
     Department of Justice in this Act may be used to discriminate 
     against or denigrate the religious or moral beliefs of 
     students who participate in programs for which financial 
     assistance is provided from those funds, or of the parents or 
     legal guardians of such students.
       Sec. 621. None of the funds appropriated in this Act shall 
     be available for the purpose of granting either immigrant or 
     nonimmigrant visas, or both, consistent with the Secretary's 
     determination under section 243(d) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act, to citizens, subjects, nationals, or 
     residents of countries that the Attorney General has 
     determined deny or unreasonably delay accepting the return of 
     citizens, subjects, nationals, or residents under that 
     section.
       Sec. 622. None of the funds made available to the 
     Department of Justice in this Act may be used for the purpose 
     of transporting an individual who is a prisoner pursuant to 
     conviction for crime under State or Federal law and is 
     classified as a maximum or high security prisoner, other than 
     to a prison or other facility certified by the Federal Bureau 
     of Prisons as appropriately secure for housing such a 
     prisoner.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to this section of the bill?
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:
       Sec. 623. None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall 
     be used to propose or issue rules, regulations, decrees, or 
     orders for the purpose of implementation, or in preparation 
     for implementation, of the Kyoto Protocol which was adopted 
     on December 11, 1997, in Kyoto, Japan, at the Third 
     Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework 
     Convention on Climate Change, which has not been submitted to 
     the Senate for advice and consent to ratification pursuant to 
     article II, section 2, clause 2, of the United States 
     Constitution, and which has not entered into force pursuant 
     to article 25 of the Protocol.


                 Amendment No. 33 Offered by Mr. Olver

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

       Amendment No. 33 offered by Mr. Olver:
       Page 107, beginning on line 21, strike section 623 
     (relating to Kyoto Protocol).

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver).
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment that I have is a simple one. It detracts 
nothing from the respect that I have for the chairman, who has done 
such a good job with this bill, nor of the ranking member, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), who has joined him in presenting 
what I think is, in whole, an excellent bill.
  But I rise to strike section 623 from this legislation, which, as 
indicated, would be a provision on any funding used for anything, 
really, related to global warming. I hope that this amendment would be 
accepted.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OLVER. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, we accept the amendment.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, for the most part, this bill is an excellent bill, and 
I greatly respect the outstanding work of the chairman of the 
subcommittee, the gentleman from Virginia, and of the ranking member on 
the subcommittee, the gentleman from New York.
  I rise to strike section 623, an anti-environmental rider, which is 
meant to prevent any and all action to address the climate change 
caused by global warming.
  Last week, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest) and I offered 
this same amendment on the Agriculture appropriations bill which was 
graciously accepted by the Chair and adopted by voice vote. Less than 2 
months ago, this House adopted a sense of the Congress relating to 
global warming, in the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, and that 
sense of Congress pointed out that global climate change poses a 
significant threat to national security. And just this morning, the 
Chairman of the VA-HUD Appropriations Subcommittee, the gentleman from 
New York, removed this egregious language from that bill. I am 
extremely pleased to see that the debate on global warming, in the 
House of Representatives, is moving in the right direction.
  Regardless of the fate of the Kyoto Protocol, there is overwhelming, 
peer reviewed, sound scientific evidence that global warming is 
occurring, and substantially due to human influence--the National 
Academy of Science has very recently reaffirmed that fact. Placing a 
gag order on federal agencies can only stifle our ability to address 
this critical environmental issue--at a time when carefully considered, 
but comprehensive action is needed.

[[Page 13676]]

  As I explained last week, this rider is not new. It dates back to the 
Clinton Administration, when the majority believed with good reason 
that President Clinton would have acted to implement Kyoto.
  But President Bush has made it clear that he has no intention of 
implementing the Kyoto Protocol. He has even declared the Kyoto 
protocol ``dead.''
  So, if this Administration isn't even remotely thinking about 
implementing the Kyoto Protocol, what is the language that this 
amendment would strike really about?
  It is really about preventing any serious progress at all on global 
warming--our most serious environmental issue for the 21st century. The 
rider is used to badger federal agencies and to demand repeated 
explanations for their environmental activities. The Inspector General 
was recently forced to investigate alleged violations of the rider by 
the EPA, Department of Energy, and the State Department and found no 
instances of violation.
  This rider jeopardizes executive agency work on any and every issue 
related to climate change--which the U.S. is obligated to address as 
part of the United Nations framework Convention on climate change. 
Remember that the UN Framework Convention on climate change was 
proposed for ratification by then President George Herbert Walker Bush 
in September 1992, ratified by the Senate in October 1992, and took 
force in 1994.
  Mr. Chairman, the United States has an obligation to be an 
international leader on global warming. We owe it to our children who 
deserve to inherit a healthy planet. The consequences of global warming 
will not be mild and we must being to act soon.
  The American public wants this Congress and this Administration to 
find a way to address global warming. How we do that, is NOT the 
subject of today's debate. This vote has nothing to do with 
implementing or even liking the Kyoto Protocol.
  I urge this body to pass this and all remaining Appropriation bills, 
free of this ill-conceived and unneeded rider. Allow our agencies to 
search for ways and measures authorized by the already ratified UN 
Framework to begin addressing greenhouse gases.
  I urge a yes vote on the Gilchrest/Olver amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                         TITLE VII--RESCISSIONS

                         DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

                        Departmental Management


         emergency oil and gas guaranteed loan program account

                              (Rescission)

       Of the unobligated balances available under this heading 
     from prior year appropriations, $115,000,000 are rescinded.


            emergency steel guaranteed loan program account

                              (Rescission)

       Of the unobligated balances available under this heading 
     from prior year appropriations, $10,000,000 are rescinded.


          Amendment No. 25 Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 25 offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
       Page 108, after line 22, insert the following:

               TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 801. Of the amounts made available under the heading 
     ``Immigration and Naturalization Service, Enforcement and 
     Border Affairs'', $20,000,000 may be used for a program of 
     alternatives to detention for aliens who are not a danger to 
     the community and are not likely to abscond.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order against the 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia will state his point of 
order.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment 
because it provides for an appropriation for an unauthorized program, 
and it therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would like to be heard on 
the point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is 
recognized.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I serve on the Committee on 
the Judiciary, the authorizing subcommittee, the Subcommittee on 
Immigration and Claims. In that capacity, I am seeing on a regular 
basis the impact that this amendment tries to address.
  This amendment would earmark a relatively small amount of INS 
detention funds, $20 million, for the implementation of alternatives to 
detention for those persons who are not a danger to society and are not 
in danger of absconding.
  The financial and human costs of detaining foreign nationals in the 
United States has increased exponentially in recent years. INS 
detention costs now total more than $1 billion a year. More than 22,000 
aliens are currently detained by the INS, and the number is growing.
  Sixty percent of detained aliens are held in local and county jails. 
The rest are detained in INS-owned and operated facilities. Many of 
these detained are neither a danger to themselves or their communities, 
and they are not in danger of absconding. Detaining these people wastes 
valuable Federal resources that could be put to better use.
  Detention is not only costly in dollars, it is costly, as well, in 
terms of human suffering, as people are needlessly separated from loved 
ones. Often the person in the detention is the breadwinner.
  Asylum seekers, children, and other people with strong community ties 
should not be detained. The INS should support alternatives to 
detention nationwide. Faith-based and other organizations are willing 
to work with the INS to make such projects work.
  I urge the committee to adopt this amendment that will be allowed to 
utilize alternative detention, particularly for those who are not 
prepared to abscond, are not dangerous to society, and are simply 
seeking the opportunity to be free in this country, away from 
persecution.
  I believe this is a right direction and a response to those who are 
not in any way endangering the lives and conditions of Americans, like 
children, like families, and like those who simply want to be free.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman insists on his point of order.
  Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order? If not, the 
Chair is prepared to rule.
  The amendment proposes to earmark certain funds in the bill under 
Clause 2(a) of rule XXI. Such an earmarking must be specifically 
authorized by law. The burden of establishing the authorization in law 
rests with the proponent of the amendment.
  Finding that this burden has not been carried, the point of order is 
sustained and the amendment is not in order.


          Amendment No. 21 Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 21 offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
       At the end of the bill, insert after the last section 
     (preceding the short title) the following:

               TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 801. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to remove, deport, or exclude any alien from the 
     United States under the Immigration and Nationality Act for 
     conviction of a crime if the alien--
       (1) before April 1, 1997, entered into a plea agreement 
     under which the alien pled guilty to the crime that renders 
     the alien inadmissible or deportable; and
       (2) after June 25, 2001--
       (A) requests discretionary relief under section 212(c) of 
     the Immigration and Nationality Act (as in effect at the time 
     of the alien's plea agreement) on the ground that the opinion 
     of the Supreme Court of the

[[Page 13677]]

     United States rendered in Immigration and Naturalization 
     Service v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. __ (2001) renders the alien 
     eligible to seek such relief; and
       (B) has not received a final order of removal, deportation, 
     or exclusion upon denial of such request.

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia will be recognized in 
opposition to the amendment.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

                              {time}  1600

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member 
and the chairman, and I hope that by the time I conclude we will have 
an opportunity to agree on this amendment because it seeks to comply 
with a recent decision by the United States Supreme Court that aliens 
who came to a plea agreement prior to the enactment of the 1996 Anti-
terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act and Illegal Immigration 
Reform and Responsibility Act be afforded their due process rights by 
enabling them to seek relief from removal under the same circumstances 
that existed prior to the effective date of these 1996 acts.
  In essence, this is simply to allow due process, which certainly is, 
I believe, an important remedy on the floor of this House. 
Specifically, my amendment would amend H.R. 2500 to specify that none 
of the funds in the bill may be used to remove, deport, or exclude an 
alien for a conviction of a crime if the alien entered into a plea 
agreement before April 1, 1997, or who, after June 25, 2001, requested 
212(c) relief, which gives the Attorney General discretion to waive 
deportation of resident aliens under the Immigration and Naturalization 
Act, pursuant to the recent Supreme Court decision in INS v. St. Cyr, 
or who has not received a final deportation removal order.
  On June 25, 2001, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision 
in the case of INS v. St. Cyr that people who had pleaded guilty to a 
deportable offense at a time when they may have been eligible for 
relief from removal under then section 212(c) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act remain eligible for the 212(c) waiver. Under the 
Supreme Court ruling, so long as an immigrant was eligible for 212(c) 
waiver at the time of his or her guilty plea under the law as it 
existed at that time, they remain eligible for the waiver regardless of 
when the INS started deportation or removal proceedings.
  There have been reports by some attorneys who represent clients who 
have become eligible for relief pursuant to the Supreme Court's St. Cyr 
decision that the INS is moving to remove them from the United States, 
despite their possible eligibility for a waiver and to be able to apply 
due process under the Supreme Court case.
  I would suggest that if aliens who are represented by attorneys are 
being removed despite the decision of the Supreme Court, it is almost 
certain there are some individuals who are not represented who are also 
eligible for relief. Because there is no procedure to allow a person 
who has been removed from the United States to pursue 212(c) relief 
from outside the country, an individual who is removed from the United 
States would therefore be ineligible for the very relief which the 
Supreme Court has said they are now entitled to.
  My amendment would not provide relief legislatively to any 
individuals. The decision on whether to grant relief would be up to the 
immigration judges. I do not interfere with that process. Those judges 
will be required to weigh the individual circumstances with the 
requirements of the law as the law existed prior to the enactment of 
AEDPA and the IIRIRA. Removal of these individuals prior to 
ascertaining the eligibility for 212(c) relief would constitute an 
unconscionable violation of their due process rights, in contravention 
of the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.
  I urge my colleagues to consider this correction, which is without a 
request for funding. It is, in essence, budget-neutral. It is simply to 
reinforce the due process that is necessary to provide anyone with 
their right to access justice.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, we really should not be going here. We should not be 
doing this. We are not the authorizers. This is so complex. It is my 
understanding that the INS is still trying to interpret this case and 
its subsequent impact on the INS.
  We understand the gentlewoman is seeking to ensure that aliens 
qualified under the St. Cyr decision benefit from the decision, but I 
am not sure if the amendment does that or goes farther. The Committee 
on the Judiciary has concerns. We have been trying to reach the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gekas), who is chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims; but he is not available.
  This is a very complicated case. There are legions of lawyers at the 
INS still trying to figure this out, and I would not want, nor do I 
think the Congress would want, to impose another layer that would only 
complicate this issue. So this is just not a place we should go, and I 
strongly urge that we oppose the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-
Lee) will be postponed.


          Amendment No. 20 Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 20 offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
       Page 108, after line 22, insert the following:

               TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 801. None of the funds appropriated in title I of this 
     Act may be used to prohibit states from participating in 
     voluntary child safety gun lock programs.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for 
5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume, and I thank my colleagues for their indulgence.
  We have found over the course of this debate dealing with safety and 
guns, and I want to remove this from being a divisive debate, that we 
have a lot that we can agree upon. In fact, the President of the United 
States himself, while the Governor of the State of Texas, supported 
voluntary trigger lock programs. This particular amendment is a 
limitation and does not have a budget impact. It simply asks that we 
not allow any funds to be utilized to prohibit the utilization or the 
implementation of voluntary safety lock programs in the States 
throughout the Nation.
  Each year, teenagers and children are involved in more than 10,000 
accidental shootings in which close to 800 people die. In addition, 
every year 1,300 children use firearms to commit suicide. In 1998, the 
year for which the most recent total statistics are available, there 
were 1,971 juvenile deaths attributable to firearms. Of the juvenile 
total, 1,062 were homicides or due to legal interventions; 648 were 
suicides; 207 were unintentional; and 54 were of unknown causes. From 
1993 to 1998, firearm-related deaths for juveniles have decreased by an 
average rate of 10 percent annually, for an overall decrease of 40 
percent.
  However, even one child who dies from a gun death is one too many. 
And I am sure that we all can come to an agreement that we have had a 
meeting of the minds on the value of voluntary trigger lock programs, 
safety programs that, one, can be taught in the school; and, two, can 
engage parents and communities to be able to assist us in working 
together. I also have had hearings on the issue of bullying in the

[[Page 13678]]

schools, so I recognize that there are many elements to violence among 
children. But if we can do anything that would ensure that we have a 
common agreement, it is to be able to support safety locks and the 
technology behind them.
  I would also just say to my colleagues that safety locks have been 
tested. The committee has reported that no funds shall be obligated for 
the purchase and distribution of gun safety locks until the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology develops national standards for 
the locks, but we are also asking that they not prevent individual 
jurisdictions from participating in a gun safety lock program.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to join in supporting 
this amendment, which has no statement on a Member's support or 
nonsupport on guns. It only says we want to make sure that our children 
are safe.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment to Title I of the appropriations bill, 
which provides spending for the Department of Justice, states that no 
federal funds can be used to prohibit states from participating in 
voluntary gun child safety-lock programs.
  As a parent and chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, the 
safety of children is of utmost concern to me. For example, this year I 
have introduced H.R. 70, a bill which would prohibit keeping a loaded 
firearm or an unloaded firearm and ammunition within any premises 
knowingly or recklessly disregarding the risk that a child is capable 
of gaining access to it and will use the firearm to cause death or 
serious bodily injury.
  Even more alarming, is the fact that the number of homicides 
committed annually with a firearm by persons in the 14- to 24-year-old 
age group increased sharply from 1985 to 1993; they have declined since 
then, but not to the 1985 level. According to the Bureau of Justice 
Statistics, from 1985 to 1993, the number of firearm-related homicides 
committed by 14- to 17-year-olds increased by 294%, from 855 to 3,371. 
From 1993 to 1999, the number of firearm-related homicides committed by 
persons in this age group decreased by 65%, from 3,371 to 1,165. A 
Department of Justice survey indicated that 12.7% of students age 12 to 
19 reported knowing a student who brought a firearm to school. We have 
made valuable strides in protecting our youth from gun violence, but we 
have not done enough.
  This Congress and the Administration have taken an important step in 
this bill by requesting $75 million for Program ChildSafe. According 
the majority Committee's report on this program, it will help make sure 
that gun safety locks are available for every handgun in America. 
Although this legislation does not require gun safety locks, as should 
be done, its intent is commendable.
  However, by offering this amendment, I want to make sure that there 
is no other ``back door'' legislation that will act to discourage 
states from participating in this or any other federally funded program 
that provides gun safety locks.
  Gun safety locks will not save all our children from death from a 
gun. However, they do play an important role in protecting children who 
get access to a gun. It is important that at both the state and federal 
levels our government supports these efforts, not hampers them.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I rise to simply say that we accept the gentlewoman's amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.


          Sequential Votes Postponed in Committee of the Whole

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will 
now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were 
postponed in the following order: amendment No. 29 offered by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), amendment No. 28 offered by 
the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), amendment No. 17 offered 
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), and amendment No. 21 offered 
by the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas).
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


          Amendment No. 29 Offered by Mrs. Maloney of New York

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on amendment No. 29 offered by the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. 
Maloney) 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. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 209, 
noes 217, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 239]

                               AYES--209

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barrett
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Ford
     Frank
     Frost
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green (TX)
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hill
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     John
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Phelps
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Shows
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watson (CA)
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NOES--217

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bereuter
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kerns
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood

[[Page 13679]]


     Nussle
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Oxley
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Schrock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Traficant
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Gilman
     Hutchinson
     Jefferson
     Paul
     Riley
     Spence
     Weldon (FL)

                              {time}  1634

  Mr. TERRY changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. RANGEL, TOWNS, TURNER, BOSWELL, and FLETCHER changed their 
vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 239 I was inadvertently 
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, 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.
  (By unanimous consent, Mr. Armey was allowed to speak out of order.)


                          Legislative Program

  Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Chairman, let me begin by appreciating the members of 
the committee, the floor managers, and the Members with amendments for 
their cooperative work today. We are making fine progress on this bill. 
There is every reason for us to understand that we can complete our 
work on this bill this evening. So after this series of votes, I am 
going to ask the committee to go back to this bill. We would expect to 
complete our work on this bill this evening. We would then probably 
find it late in the evening, too late, to pick up H.R. 7 tonight, so we 
would turn our attention to H.R. 7 in the morning as the first order of 
business following the rule.
  I want to again thank everybody for their cooperation and say, let us 
go back to work and get this bill done.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ARMEY. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. OBEY. Let me simply say, I agree with the gentleman that the 
committee is making good progress. There are still a number of hurdles 
that we are going to have to get over tonight if we are going to be 
finished. It will require the cooperation of every Member in terms of 
limiting time on amendments which we will try to get done. We are not 
there yet, but I hope that we can get there if we have a reasonable 
sense of flexibility on Members' part.
  Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Chairman, I may just remind all the Members, unless 
you had a particular fire burning in your heart, you would always find 
it an attractive option to put it in the Record.


          Amendment No. 28 Offered by Mrs. Maloney of New York

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. 
Maloney) 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. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, this will be a 5-minute vote.
  There was no objection.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 215, 
noes 215, not voting 3, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 240]

                               AYES--215

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barrett
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank
     Frost
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green (TX)
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hill
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     John
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Phelps
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Shows
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watson (CA)
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Wilson
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NOES--215

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bereuter
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutknecht
     Hansen
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kerns
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Schrock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw

[[Page 13680]]


     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Stump
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Traficant
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Hutchinson
     Riley
     Spence

                              {time}  1646

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


                 Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. DeLay

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) 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. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 424, 
noes 6, not voting 3, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 241]

                               AYES--424

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frank
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E.B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     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
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins (OK)
     Watson (CA)
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--6

     Ackerman
     Clay
     Hastings (FL)
     McDermott
     Mink
     Stark

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Riley
     Shows
     Spence

                              {time}  1654

  Mr. STARK changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


          Amendment No. 21 Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-
Lee) 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. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 189, 
noes 242, not voting 2, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 242]

                               AYES--189

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barrett
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank
     Frost
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Green (TX)
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Hall (TX)
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hoeffel
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (NY)
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan

[[Page 13681]]


     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Scarborough
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Solis
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Tauscher
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Velazquez
     Waters
     Watson (CA)
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NOES--242

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bereuter
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hansen
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kerns
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Maloney (CT)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ross
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schrock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Riley
     Spence
       

                              {time}  1704

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, during rollcall vote No. 242 on H.R. 2500 I 
mistakenly recorded my vote as a ``no'' when I should have voted 
``yes.''
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Serrano), I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, it has been my intent to offer today an amendment to 
this bill that would have been a straight limitation on the Federal 
Communications Commission prohibiting the Commission from implementing 
any change in the current rules related to media cross-ownership and 
concentration of media ownership issues.
  I am concerned with the current level of concentration in media 
markets. I think there are too few media outlets in many markets across 
the country. A concentration of media power into the hands of a few 
media companies is an issue I think every one of us in this body ought 
to be concerned about, and I think we need to take a closer look at 
this issue. That was the purpose of my amendment.
  I am concerned that the current group of commissioners on the FCC, 
particularly the chairman, does not share this concern and may even be 
laying the groundwork for relaxing or even eliminating some of the 
media ownership limitations on the books at the FCC.
  My amendment would not have tied the agency's hands in considering 
proposed changes. I just wanted to make sure that the Congress had an 
opportunity to review the proposals in the appropriate forum before the 
FCC could implement any changes to those rules. My amendment, 
therefore, would have delayed until the end of the year the 
implementation of any proposed changes to the rules addressed in media 
cross-ownership and concentration.
  I know the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the ranking member 
of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, shares many of my concerns; 
and I know he also had concerns about the amendment I was considering 
because he feared it would tie the hands of the Commission to respond 
to any court order challenging the current rules, if there is such a 
court order, during the fiscal year.
  So I would like to engage in a colloquy with the gentleman. Knowing 
of the gentleman's concerns regarding the issue of diversity in the 
media and maintaining the voice of local broadcasting, I would urge him 
to keep this issue at the front of the debate on the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce, and I would ask the gentleman one question: Can he 
tell us if the authorizing committee intends to hold hearings on the 
issue of media ownership?
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to commend the 
gentleman for his position.
  Second of all, I want to thank him for yielding.
  Third of all, I want to tell the gentleman that I strongly agree with 
him. I assure the gentleman that I share his concerns about excessive 
concentration of ownership in media markets. In fact, I think there is 
too much concentration at this time. In fact, I just recently wrote the 
chairman of the FCC, as the gentleman knows, and expressed my strong 
belief that the current broadcast ownership cap should be retained and 
that the public interest requires that that be done. However, I also 
believe that the amendment originally proposed by my friend might have 
had some unintended consequences; and I want to thank him for deciding 
not to offer it today.
  I will assure the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) that I will 
work with him in all kinds of ways and on all occasions to try and see 
to it that his view and my view prevail on the matter of increasing 
concentration in the media.
  There are several court cases pending that many believe will remand 
certain media ownership rules back to the FCC for further consideration 
and revision. Unless and until the FCC acts pursuant to a court order, 
there would be no ownership limitations in place if the amendment 
carried. That is an outcome that I believe neither of us would like to 
see.
  I will assure the gentleman from Wisconsin that I will continue to 
work within the legislative committee. It will be my intent to work 
with my good friend from Wisconsin to assure that existing constraints 
on excessive media concentration are maintained. To that end, I am 
going to be requesting the chairman of the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce to hold hearings on that topic so that we can make better 
informed judgment as to how we might best protect the American public 
from the very real dangers that media concentration and media ownership 
concentration issues present.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding to me, and I 
want to commend him for what he has

[[Page 13682]]

had to say today, and I wish to say to him again, I agree with him.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman. 
Let me simply say that I think that is a very helpful comment from him.
  I think Members need to understand that we are in danger of seeing 
news outlets in this country virtually homogenized. We are in danger of 
seeing many local voices stilled by these constant mergers and mega-
mergers between media corporations. We need a diversity of media 
expression in this country, and I hope that the FCC does not contribute 
to the exact opposite, as I fear they may be planning, and I thank the 
gentleman.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Reynolds) having assumed the chair, Mr. Hastings of Washington, 
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. 2500) making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, 
Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes, had come to no 
resolution thereon.

                          ____________________