[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 11]
[House]
[Pages 14988-15006]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2002

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ose). Pursuant to House Resolution 210 
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. 2620.

                              {time}  1846


                     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. 2620) making appropriations for the Departments of 
Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry 
independent agencies, boards, commissions, corporations and offices for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes, with 
Mr. Shimkus in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole House rose on Friday, 
July 27, 2001, amendment No. 46 offered by the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Menendez) had been disposed of and the bill was open for 
amendment from page 33 line 5 through page 37 line 9.
  Are there any amendments to this portion of the bill?
  If not, the Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:


                       homeless assistance grants

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the emergency shelter grants program as authorized 
     under subtitle B of title IV of the McKinney-Vento Homeless 
     Assistance Act, as amended; the supportive housing program as 
     authorized under subtitle C of title IV of such Act; the 
     section 8 moderate rehabilitation single room occupancy 
     program as authorized under the United States Housing Act of 
     1937, as amended, to assist homeless individuals pursuant to 
     section 441 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act; 
     and the shelter plus care program as authorized under 
     subtitle F of title IV of such Act, $1,027,745,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2003: Provided, That not less 
     than 35 percent of these funds shall be used for permanent 
     housing, and all funding for services must be matched by 25 
     percent in funding by each grantee: Provided further, That 
     all awards of assistance under this heading shall be required 
     to coordinate and integrate homeless programs with other 
     mainstream health, social services, and employment programs 
     for which homeless populations may be eligible, including 
     Medicaid, State Children's Health Insurance Program, 
     Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Food Stamps, and 
     services funding through the Mental Health and Substance 
     Abuse Block Grant, Workforce Investment Act, and the Welfare-
     to-Work grant program: Provided further, That no less than 
     $14,200,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading is 
     transferred to the Working Capital Fund to be used for 
     technical assistance for management information systems and 
     to develop an automated, client-level Annual Performance 
     Report System: Provided further, That $500,000 shall be made 
     available to the Interagency Council on the Homeless for 
     administrative needs.

                            Housing Programs


                    housing for special populations

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For assistance for the purchase, construction, acquisition, 
     or development of additional public and subsidized housing 
     units for low income families not otherwise provided for, 
     $1,024,151,000, to remain available until September 30, 2003: 
     Provided, That $783,286,000 shall be for capital advances, 
     including amendments to capital advance contracts, for 
     housing for the elderly, as authorized by section 202 of the 
     Housing Act of 1959, as amended, and for project rental 
     assistance for the elderly under such section 202(c)(2), 
     including amendments to contracts for such assistance and 
     renewal of expiring contracts for such assistance for up to a 
     one-year term, and for supportive services associated with 
     the housing, of which amount $49,890,000 shall be for service 
     coordinators and the continuation of existing congregate 
     service grants for residents of assisted housing projects, 
     and of which amount $49,890,000 shall be for grants under 
     section 202b of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q-2) 
     for conversion of eligible projects under such section to 
     assisted living or related use: Provided further, That of the 
     amount under this heading, $240,865,000 shall be for capital 
     advances, including amendments to capital advance contracts, 
     for supportive housing for persons with disabilities, as 
     authorized by section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act, for project rental assistance for 
     supportive housing for persons with disabilities under such 
     section 811(d)(2), including amendments to contracts for such 
     assistance and renewal of expiring contracts for such 
     assistance for up to a one-year term, and for supportive 
     services associated with the housing for persons with 
     disabilities as authorized by section 811 of such Act, and 
     for tenant-based rental assistance contracts entered into 
     pursuant to section 811 of such Act: Provided further, That 
     no less than $1,000,000, to be divided evenly between the 
     appropriations for the section 202 and section 811 programs, 
     shall be transferred to the Working Capital Fund for the 
     development and maintenance of information technology 
     systems: Provided further, That, in addition to amounts made 
     available for renewal of tenant-based rental assistance 
     contracts pursuant to the second proviso of this paragraph, 
     the Secretary may designate up to 25 percent of the amounts 
     earmarked

[[Page 14989]]

     under this paragraph for section 811 of such Act for tenant-
     based assistance, as authorized under that section, including 
     such authority as may be waived under the next proviso, which 
     assistance is five years in duration: Provided further, That 
     the Secretary may waive any provision of such section 202 and 
     such section 811 (including the provisions governing the 
     terms and conditions of project rental assistance and tenant-
     based assistance) that the Secretary determines is not 
     necessary to achieve the objectives of these programs, or 
     that otherwise impedes the ability to develop, operate, or 
     administer projects assisted under these programs, and may 
     make provision for alternative conditions or terms where 
     appropriate.


                         flexible subsidy fund

                          (transfer of funds)

       From the Rental Housing Assistance Fund, all uncommitted 
     balances of excess rental charges as of September 30, 2001, 
     and any collections made during fiscal year 2002, shall be 
     transferred to the Flexible Subsidy Fund, as authorized by 
     section 236(g) of the National Housing Act, as amended.


                  manufactured housing fees trust fund

       For necessary expenses as authorized by the National 
     Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 
     1974, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.), $13,566,000, to 
     remain available until expended, to be derived from the 
     Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund: Provided, That the 
     total amount appropriated under this heading shall be 
     available from the general fund of the Treasury to the extent 
     necessary to incur obligations and make expenditures pending 
     the receipt of collections to the Fund pursuant to section 
     620 of such Act: Provided further, That the amount made 
     available under this heading from the general fund shall be 
     reduced as such 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 and fees pursuant to such section 620 shall be 
     modified as necessary to ensure such a final fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation.

                     Federal Housing Administration


               mutual mortgage insurance program account

                     (including transfers of funds)

       During fiscal year 2002, commitments to guarantee loans to 
     carry out the purposes of section 203(b) of the National 
     Housing Act, as amended, shall not exceed a loan principal of 
     $160,000,000,000.
       During fiscal year 2002, obligations to make direct loans 
     to carry out the purposes of section 204(g) of the National 
     Housing Act, as amended, shall not exceed $250,000,000: 
     Provided, That the foregoing amount shall be for loans to 
     nonprofit and governmental entities in connection with sales 
     of single family real properties owned by the Secretary and 
     formerly insured under the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund.
       For administrative expenses necessary to carry out the 
     guaranteed and direct loan program, $330,888,000, of which 
     not to exceed $326,866,000 shall be transferred to the 
     appropriation for ``Salaries and expenses''; and not to 
     exceed $4,022,000 shall be transferred to the appropriation 
     for ``Office of Inspector General''. In addition, for 
     administrative contract expenses, $145,000,000, of which not 
     less than $96,500,000 shall be transferred to the Working 
     Capital Fund for the development and maintenance of 
     information technology systems.


                general and special risk program account

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For the cost of guaranteed loans, as authorized by sections 
     238 and 519 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-3 
     and 1735c), including the cost of loan guarantee 
     modifications as that term is defined in section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, $15,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended: Provided, That these funds 
     are available to subsidize total loan principal, any part of 
     which is to be guaranteed, of up to $21,000,000,000: Provided 
     further, That any amounts made available in any prior 
     appropriations Act for the cost (as such term is defined in 
     section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974) of 
     guaranteed loans that are obligations of the funds 
     established under section 238 or 519 of the National Housing 
     Act that have not been obligated or that are deobligated 
     shall be available to the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development in connection with the making of such guarantees 
     and shall remain available until expended, notwithstanding 
     the expiration of any period of availability otherwise 
     applicable to such amounts.
       Gross obligations for the principal amount of direct loans, 
     as authorized by sections 204(g), 207(l), 238, and 519(a) of 
     the National Housing Act, shall not exceed $50,000,000, of 
     which not to exceed $30,000,000 shall be for bridge financing 
     in connection with the sale of multifamily real properties 
     owned by the Secretary and formerly insured under such Act; 
     and of which not to exceed $20,000,000 shall be for loans to 
     nonprofit and governmental entities in connection with the 
     sale of single-family real properties owned by the Secretary 
     and formerly insured under such Act.
       In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry 
     out the guaranteed and direct loan programs, $211,455,000, of 
     which $193,134,000, shall be transferred to the appropriation 
     for ``Salaries and expenses''; and of which $18,321,000 shall 
     be transferred to the appropriation for ``Office of Inspector 
     General''. In addition, for administrative contract expenses 
     necessary to carry out the guaranteed and direct loan 
     programs, $139,000,000, of which no less than $33,500,000 
     shall be transferred to the Working Capital Fund for the 
     development and maintenance of information technology 
     systems.

            Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA)


Guarantees of mortgage-backed securities loan guarantee program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       New commitments to issue guarantees to carry out the 
     purposes of section 306 of the National Housing Act, as 
     amended (12 U.S.C. 1721(g)), shall not exceed 
     $200,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2003.
       For administrative expenses necessary to carry out the 
     guaranteed mortgage-backed securities program, $9,383,000 to 
     be derived from the GNMA guarantees of mortgage-backed 
     securities guaranteed loan receipt account, of which not to 
     exceed $9,383,000 shall be transferred to the appropriation 
     for ``Salaries and expenses''.

                    Policy Development and Research


                        research and technology

       For contracts, grants, and necessary expenses of programs 
     of research and studies relating to housing and urban 
     problems, not otherwise provided for, as authorized by title 
     V of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970, as 
     amended (12 U.S.C. 1701z-1 et seq.), including carrying out 
     the functions of the Secretary under section 1(a)(1)(i) of 
     Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1968, $46,900,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2003: Provided, That $1,500,000 
     shall be for necessary expenses of the Millennial Housing 
     Commission, as authorized by section 206 of Public Law 106-
     74: Provided further, That of the total amount provided under 
     this heading, $7,500,000 shall be for the Partnership for 
     Advancing Technology in Housing (PATH) Initiative.

                   Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity


                        fair housing activities

       For contracts, grants, and other assistance, not otherwise 
     provided for, as authorized by title VIII of the Civil Rights 
     Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 
     1988, and section 561 of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1987, as amended, $45,899,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2003, of which $19,449,000 
     shall be to carry out activities pursuant to such section 
     561: Provided, That no funds made available under this 
     heading shall be used to lobby the executive or legislative 
     branches of the Federal Government in connection with a 
     specific contract, grant or loan.

                     Office of Lead Hazard Control


                         lead hazard reduction

       For the Lead Hazard Reduction Program, as authorized by 
     sections 1011 and 1053 of the Residential Lead-Based Hazard 
     Reduction Act of 1992, $109,758,000 to remain available until 
     September 30, 2003, of which $10,000,000 shall be for the 
     Healthy Homes Initiative, pursuant to sections 501 and 502 of 
     the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 that shall 
     include research, studies, testing, and demonstration 
     efforts, including education and outreach concerning lead-
     based paint poisoning and other housing-related environmental 
     childhood diseases and hazards.

                     Management and Administration


                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary administrative and non-administrative 
     expenses of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
     not otherwise provided for, including not to exceed $7,000 
     for official reception and representation expenses, 
     $1,086,800,000, of which $520,000,000 shall be provided from 
     the various funds of the Federal Housing Administration, 
     $9,383,000 shall be provided from funds of the Government 
     National Mortgage Association, $1,000,000 shall be provided 
     from the ``Community development fund'' account, $150,000 
     shall be provided by transfer from the ``Title VI Indian 
     federal guarantees program'' account, and $200,000 shall be 
     provided by transfer from the ``Indian housing loan guarantee 
     fund program'' account: Provided, That no less than 
     $85,000,000 shall be transferred to the Working Capital Fund 
     for the development and maintenance of Information Technology 
     Systems: Provided further, That the Secretary shall fill 7 
     out of 10 vacancies at the GS-14 and GS-15 levels until the 
     total number of GS-14 and GS-15 positions in the Department 
     has been reduced from the number of GS-14 and GS-15 positions 
     on the date of enactment of Public Law 106-377 by two and 
     one-half percent: Provided further, That the Secretary shall 
     submit a staffing plan for the Department by November 1, 
     2001.


         Amendment No. 42 Offered by Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania

  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

[[Page 14990]]

  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Amendment No. 42 offered by Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania:
       Page 47, line 10, after the first dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $50,000,000)''.
       Page 72, line 5, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $50,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) is 
recognized for 10 minutes in support of his amendment.
  Does the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) claim the time in 
opposition?
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I am not in opposition. I do not know that 
there is going to be opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Weldon), and then the gentleman from Maryland will have the right 
to claim the time.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment on behalf of myself, the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Burton), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), and the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Gilman). I offer this amendment in full support and adulation for the 
chairman and ranking members of the subcommittee, recognizing their 
ongoing cooperation in this effort. And I offer this in complete 
support of the full committee chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Young), without whose efforts last year would not allow us to be here 
today.
  Mr. Chairman, the number is 102, and the number in 1999 was 112. That 
was the number of U.S. citizens, most of them volunteers, who were 
killed in the line of duty in protecting our towns. If we lost that 
many soldiers, it would be a national scandal. If we lost that many 
teachers, it would be a national disgrace. Yet every year, on average, 
America loses over 100 men and women who are simply protecting their 
towns.
  Last year, for the first time, with the leadership of the good 
chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), we 
appropriated $100 million on the competitive grant program to help our 
Nation's 32,000 fire and EMS departments leverage their money to help 
them better train and better equip themselves.
  The response was overwhelming. Thirty thousand applications came in 
within 1 month. Twenty thousand individual fire and EMS departments in 
every district in America applied. And now it is time for us to 
increase that funding.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Young), chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations, without 
whose efforts this would not have happened.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise to thank the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) for his determined dedication to this 
issue of providing support for those men and women who serve on the 
front line in guaranteeing the safety and security of our communities, 
along with police officers. Without our firefighters, I am not sure 
where we would be going as a Nation or as a community.
  I would say the gentleman was very kind in his remarks directed to 
this chairman, but I must tell my colleagues that he, in fact, is the 
most dedicated, most persistent, most determined Member of this House 
to see that this type of assistance is made available for those brave 
men and women who do support the security of our Nation in fighting the 
fires, protecting our properties, and protecting our lives.
  Again, I would say thanks to him for the determination and the strong 
effort that he has made in this respect.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) is 
recognized for 10 minutes.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I am in no way in opposition to this 
account being funded at the amount designated in the amendment, $150 
million, however, there is a better place to do that; and we will 
certainly, at that time, look as favorably as we can upon the request.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. 
Hoyer) will control the balance of the time.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I rise in support of the Weldon amendment.
  The Weldon amendment is carrying out what I think is a very 
worthwhile and important objective. It would increase the $100 million 
provided in the bill for the fire grant program by $50 million.
  Before I speak on the substance, I want to thank the chairman and 
ranking members of the subcommittee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Walsh) and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan). As the 
ranking member of the Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service and 
General Government of the Committee on Appropriations, I understand the 
constraints they are under. I also understand their support of this 
program.
  I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Andrews), the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson), and the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith), as well as so many others who have 
been supportive, and I want to thank the chairman of the full 
committee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), for rising to speak 
on behalf of this amendment. All of them have been tireless in their 
support of this program.
  The response, Mr. Chairman, from the fire services to the Fire Act, 
which authorized $300 million and to which we appropriated $100 million 
last year, has been nothing short of astonishing and has exceeded 
everyone's expectations. In this first year of the program, the U.S. 
fire administration received over 30,000 requests from local 
departments, totaling more than $3 billion.
  To put this in perspective, there are 32,000 departments in this 
country. Our first responders respond to fire, flood, hurricane, and 
other crises. In the first year, the departments were limited to 
applying for only 6 of the authorized 14 categories. That gives us, I 
think, Mr. Chairman, a sense of the need that is out there that fire 
departments throughout this country have.
  The $100 million in this bill is insufficient. The chairman and the 
ranking member know that. Hopefully, in conference, we will be able to 
get that figure up to the figure that the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
seeks and, indeed, if there are additional funds, they would be 
warranted as well.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), a cosponsor of this amendment and 
one who has been a real leader in this effort.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to rise in support of the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), 
which I was pleased to cosponsor. I also thank the chairman of the full 
committee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young); the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer); the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton); the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews) and the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pascrell) for their support.
  The Weldon amendment allocates an additional $50 million in funding 
for the Firefighters Assistance Grant Program, which is one of our 
Nation's most vitally important programs. In fiscal year 2001, 
approximately two out of three fire departments in our Nation applied 
for funds, totaling nearly $3 billion in requests. Regrettably, the 
majority of those requests could not be granted because funding for the 
program was not sufficient to meet the overwhelming demands of our 
Nation's fire departments.

[[Page 14991]]

  As the popularity of this program increases, it falls upon all of us 
in the Congress to meet the demand with adequate funding. We must make 
sure our Nation's firefighters have the resources to perform their 
dedicated work in our communities, saving lives and property.
  Accordingly, I urge our colleagues to show their support for our 
Nation's firefighters by voting in support of the Weldon firefighter 
amendment.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), who has been such a hard fighter on behalf of 
this program for the firefighters and first responders of our Nation.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time, and I rise in support of the Weldon amendment to increase 
funding for the Firefighters Assistance Grant Program.
  There are a million firefighters in America, one million, and 32,000 
fire departments. The number of applications for the first year is just 
overwhelming. This is a replica of the COPS program, which proved to be 
so successful. And I want to congratulate folks from both sides of the 
aisle. The amount of applications is an indication, Mr. Chairman, of 
how serious the need is in our Nation's fire departments.
  I totally support this amendment. We are all going to be hearing from 
the fire departments in our own districts, because there is only so 
much money to go around for so many applications.

                              {time}  1900

  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith), who is a senior 
member of the Committee on Science and who has been an advocate for the 
fire service.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the committee 
that oversees the Federal Fire Administration, I would like to suggest 
that it is about time we really started helping communities across 
America by helping firemen.
  Today in the United States there are over 1 million fire fighters and 
77 percent are volunteers. If we had to pay all of these volunteers, we 
would be spending billions of dollars more in property tax coming out 
of taxpayers' pockets.
  Last year I worked with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) 
and others to get $100 million into this program. This amendment is 
going to increase that by $50 million to $150 million.
  I think it is important to mention that in 1999 there were 45,000 
fire fighters injured and 112 fire fighters killed in duty-related 
incidents. These men and women are American heroes. They are truly our 
first responders. They are the ones that are at the scene when there is 
natural disasters. They are the ones at the scene when there is 
shootings in school, chemical spills, terrorism, looking for lost kids, 
or getting the kitten out of a tree.
  We give billions of dollars to law enforcement in this country. It is 
time we gave a few dollars to help local communities and help the first 
responders of this Nation.
  This amendment would increase the funding allocation to help local 
fire departments hire new firefighters, purchase new safety equipment, 
and provide improved training.
  These men and women are American heroes. They are truly first 
responders. They are part of national security.
  Mr. Chairman, this seems to me to be an easy choice to make. Either 
we fund more bureaucracy or fund more help for firefighters. The 
increased funding for the fire grants program could be used for new 
equipment to fight fires, new training so that our firefighters are 
brought up to speed on the latest firefighting techniques, advanced 
safety equipment that can help prevent firefighter injury or death. 
This type of support is especially critical for volunteer fire 
departments that often must supplement their sources of funding with 
bake sales and the like.
  Despite the risks, the million men and women of the fire services 
continue to guard against fires, accidents, disasters, and terrorism. 
We in this body must continue to get them the support they need.
  It may come as a surprise to many of the people viewing tonight, but 
the United States has one of the highest fire death rates in the 
industrialized world at 13.1 deaths per million population. In 1999, 
3,570 Americans lost their lives and another 21,875 were injured as the 
result of fire--more Americans than were killed in all natural 
disasters combined. The National Safety Council ranks fires as the 
fifth leading cause of accidental deaths, behind only vehicle 
accidents, falls, poisonings, and drownings.
  The total cost of fire to society is staggering--estimated over $100 
billion per year. This includes the cost of adding fire protection to 
buildings, the cost of paid fire departments, the equivalent cost of 
volunteer fire departments ($20 billion annually), the cost of 
insurance overhead, the direct cost of fire-related losses, the medical 
cost of fire injuries, and other direct and indirect costs. Direct 
property losses due to fire was estimated at $10 billion in 1999.
  The top three causes of fires in the U.S. are smoking (22 percent), 
incendiary and suspicious (or arson) (21 percent), and heating (11 
percent). The leading cause of injuries is cooking (22 percent), 
followed by arson (13 percent), and children playing (11 percent).
  On the front lines, protecting the public from fire, are the Nation's 
over one million firefighters, three-quarters of whom serve as 
volunteers. Every day, these men and women place their lives on the 
line to protect their neighbors. Every 17.3 seconds, a firefighter in 
this country responds to a fire.
  In my State of Michigan volunteer firefighters are very important. 
Between 1995-2000, eleven Michigan firefighters--both volunteer and 
professional--lost their lives fighting fires.
  Last year alone, four Michigan firefighters lost their lives--Ronald 
Haner of Portage, David Maisano of Mio, David Sutton of Fraser, and 
Gail VanAuken of Holland. Firefighter Sutton was killed by an arsonist 
who ignited combustibles on the first and second floors of a Fraser 
apartment building. Mr. Sutton had sought to save a resident of that 
apartment building, who was trapped on the second floor, and was also 
killed by that fire. This fire was one of six arson fires that occurred 
in the same general area over a two day period of last year.
  For their bravery and sacrifice, we owe first responders and their 
families a debt of gratitude. Our Nation's founders were deeply 
committed to the idea that the individual had an obligation to serve 
the community and the country. Those who serve as first responders 
exemplify these ideals every day.
  It is unfortunate that today many now consider duty and honor relics 
of a bygone age. While our society lavishes praise on athletes and rock 
stars, we tend to forget about those who stand ready at a moment's 
notice to risk their lives to keep our communities safe. It is only 
after disaster strikes that we appreciate fully the contributions they 
make.
  They have kept faith with us, and we in this body must continue to 
keep faith with them by getting them the support they need. As chairman 
of the Subcommittee on Research, which has jurisdiction over the U.S. 
Fire Administration, I am pleased that last year we were able to pass 
legislation reauthorizing USFA. This legislation is helping get USFA 
back on the right track so that it can provide the training and 
research our firefighters need.
  In addition, last year, many of us worked to get more help to 
firefighters. These efforts led to the passage of unprecedented 
legislation to benefit America's fire service, much of which was 
reflected in my Help Emergency Responders Operate--HERO--Act.
  This type of support is particularly important to volunteer fire 
departments that often do not have adequate funding. Many volunteer 
departments have to supplement their local funding with bake sales and 
other activities just to keep themselves afloat.
  The VA/HUD appropriations bill for fiscal year 2002 provides another 
$100 million for this purpose. Like the gentleman from Pennsylvania, I 
was hoping that we can increase that amount to $150 million, and I am 
still hopeful that we can get some more funding as the bill moves 
through conference. Remember that each year fire results in $10 billion 
in property loss and more than 3,500 deaths in the U.S. I have also 
cosponsored legislation offered by the gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. 
Larson, that would set up special tax-free retirement accounts, similar 
to IRA's, for volunteer firefighters.
  Increasingly, we are asking firefighters to take on expanded 
responsibilities--to respond to terrorist attacks or to help stem 
environmental disasters, for example. It is important that as we ask 
them to take on more, we stay committed to insuring we support them as 
best we can.
  I thank the gentleman for his efforts on behalf of firefighters and 
thank him for bringing this issue before the House tonight. I urge my 
colleagues to support this amendemnt.

[[Page 14992]]


  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Moran).
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend and colleague, 
the distinguished gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), and thank him 
for all he has done for the fire fighters of the State of Maryland and 
of the District of Columbia. I have witnessed firsthand what he has 
done to beef up the capability of fire stations, not just within these 
two jurisdictions, but across the country. I thank the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), the head of the Fire Caucus.
  The fact is that fire fighters today do so much more than fight 
fires. They respond to medical emergencies, crises, catastrophes. They 
are the first line of defense when we have emergencies that occur 
across the country. So I support the intent of this amendment very 
strongly.
  I do have some reticence about the fact that it would be taken from 
salaries and expenses in HUD, as I know the gentleman from Maryland 
(Mr. Hoyer) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) do. But I 
suspect that when we sit down with the Senate, that the fire fighters 
will be recipients of the kind of financial support and political 
support that they need and deserve.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Grucci), one of our freshmen Members who 
was a leader of the fire service in Brookhaven in Long Island.
  Mr. GRUCCI. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Weldon 
amendment, which would increase the Fire Assistance Grant Program by 
$50 million.
  Last Monday it was my honor to announce the awarding of a Federal 
grant to the Davis Park Fire Department in my district. This grant was 
one of only 108 that were awarded to the fire departments across this 
country under FEMA's Fire Assistance Grant Program.
  The Davis Park Fire Department along with nearly 20,000 other fire 
companies applied for grants. That is almost two-thirds of all fire 
companies in America. In the coming months, more than $100 million in 
grants will be rewarded to fire companies for vehicles, fire prevention 
programs, equipment and training.
  The Davis Park Fire Department will use its $30,000 in funds to train 
its fire fighters in the most recent fire fighting and rescue 
techniques. When I spoke with the department's chief, he expressed his 
excitement over how the grant would help to strengthen the safety of 
not just the citizens of Davis Park, but also the brave men and women 
who serve them.
  By supporting the Weldon amendment we can guarantee that fire 
departments, like Davis Park, will be able to benefit from this vital 
program next year.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Weldon amendment which 
would increase the Fire Assistance Grant Program by $50 million.
  Last Monday, it was my honor to announce the awarding of a Federal 
grant to the Davis Park Fire Department in my district. This grant was 
one of only 108 that were awarded to fire departments across this 
country under FEMA's Fire Assistance Grant Program.
  The Davis Park Fire Department along with nearly 20,000 other fire 
companies applied for grants--that is almost two-thirds of all fire 
companies in America. In the coming months, more than $100 million in 
grants will be rewarded to fire companies for vehicles, fire prevention 
programs, equipment and training.
  The Davis Park Fire Department will use its $30,000 in funds to train 
its firefighters in the most recent firefighting and rescue techniques. 
When I spoke with the department's chief he expressed his excitement 
over how the grant would help to strengthen the safety of not just the 
citizens of Davis Park but also the brave men and women who serve them.
  By supporting the Weldon amendment we can guarantee that Fire 
Departments like the Davis Park will be able to benefit from this vital 
program next year. In doing so we can increase the safety of countless 
communities throughout our nation.
  I call upon all of my colleagues to join me in providing our nations 
local fire departments with the opportunity to improve the quality of 
both services they offer and safety standards under which they serve.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Andrews), one of the co-chairs of the Fire Service Caucus 
who does an outstanding job on behalf of the fire fighters of America.
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment.
  In the new century the front line of America's defense is not the 
battlefields of Europe or the high seas around the globe or even the 
skies above us. The front line is the domestic battle against 
terrorism.
  The first line of defense in that battle is the fire fighters, EMS, 
and public safety personnel of our country. They certainly deserve the 
amount that is suggested by this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Walsh) and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) for making 
sure that $100 million is already in this bill.
  I know we can all work together in the conference with the other body 
to try to increase that amount to $150 million by trying to find the 
appropriate place in the bill from which the money may be taken.
  We are going to spend $300 billion on defending this country by the 
Armed Services this year. I support that. This is a small fraction and 
an important element of our fight or national defense. I 
enthusiastically support this amendment. I thank its authors.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), one of the champions of our 
national security and one of the champions of the fire service in 
America, who along with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) and the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) has been there, along with the 
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan).
  Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, this is the first time I have ever spoken 
on an amendment which I am not sure is going any place, but I will say 
this: I can remember when it was first introduced they were talking 
about $1 billion. Most people thought there would not be that kind of a 
need or application. But in my district this has been one of the most 
popular things we have done in this Congress.
  We are having trouble getting volunteers. They are having trouble 
getting equipment. So this is the type of thing we will have to get 
involved in. I predict that in the end there will be a lot more money 
in this program. It is going to be just like defense. It is going to 
increase more and more. So I support the program and enthusiastically 
endorse what the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell) are trying to do.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) has 4\1/2\ 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) has 4 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, the group of people we are talking about are our 
domestic defenders. People ask why we should fund the fire service, are 
we trying to federalize the Nation's fire service? The answer is 
absolutely no. But in today's climate we are asking these domestic 
defenders to deal more with weapons of mass destruction and terrorist 
incidents.
  In fact, for every major disaster in America, floods, tornadoes, 
earthquakes, they are the first responder. It is not the FEMA 
bureaucrat, it is not the National Guard, it is not the Marine Corps 
CBIRF teams, it is the men and women of the American Fire Service.
  We have responsibility to help them. We spend over $300 billion on 
our international defenders, and I support that and more. We spend $4 
billion a year on our police officers, and I support that. Imagine 
asking our police officers to go out and have a chicken dinner or tag 
day to raise the funds to buy their police car or their crime incident 
vehicle.
  Every day across this country our paid and volunteer fire EMS people 
are

[[Page 14993]]

asked to do more with less. This is a small effort for us to assist 
them, to give them seed money, to help them use their very limited 
dollars to help leverage that money to buy the equipment they need.
  Is this program a success? The first round of grants are now going 
out. Let me read just one. The smallest grant award to date was $757 to 
buy a smoke machine for training fire fighters in the Paisley Volunteer 
Fire Department in southeastern Oregon. That may save one life, and if 
we save one life out of those hundreds that are killed each year, it is 
well worth the funding.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleagues for working together on 
this effort. It would not have happened without the bipartisan support 
of the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), along with the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Young), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), and all 
of the others who have spoken, are the reason we are here today.
  Mr. Chairman, to our fire and EMS leaders, we are only just 
beginning. I thank my colleagues and ask them to support this 
amendment.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment is going to take a short time, and this 
amendment is going to be I think withdrawn. It is going to be withdrawn 
because we understand that we ought not to take $50 million out of the 
salary and expense money of HUD. HUD needs that money.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise really to say that this committee's 302(b) 
allocation is insufficient to meet the unbelievable demands that it 
confronts. I think the chairman and ranking member are going to say 
that in just a minute. But I empathize with that because this is a 
critical need. We have talked about the need being manifested in the 
grant applications that have been submitted: Over $3 billion with $100 
million available. Those grant applications are not for some objective 
which somebody would make fun of.
  We talk about fires, and that is what we think about our fire service 
and emergency response teams as doing; but we have also talked about 
natural disasters. There are also unnatural disasters; for instance, 
automobile accidents. The first people usually on the scene are the 
fire service and/or the EMS, emergency medical service. They are there. 
They need equipment and training. That means more lives saved.
  Just as it has been said that we spend a lot of money on people that 
we send overseas to defend our security, that is why the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and I and others on this floor refer to our 
fire service and EMS personnel as our domestic defenders; because, 
indeed, they are the persons, along with our police department, that we 
ask to defend us here at home to make sure that we not only have law 
and order, but that we have security at time of crisis, whether it is 
natural disaster or fire or accident or some other calamity.
  Mr. Chairman, the fire service was one of the first on the scene when 
Timothy McVeigh set that awful explosion that killed 168 people. They 
were there in that building climbing those stairs bringing children 
out, bringing women and visitors from that building.
  They take risks every day, and we lose on an average one every 3 days 
in America. It is important, and I think America believes it to be a 
priority, that we give to them the training, the equipment, so that 
they cannot only respond effectively to save our lives, but they can do 
so in the safest possible manner that we can give to them.
  In conclusion, let me thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) 
and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan). I know that they 
care deeply about this program and I know the constraints on them. The 
good news is when we go to conference I hope we can get to this number.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes to 
enter into a colloquy with the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) and 
with the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan).
  Mr. Chairman, first of all, I thank the gentleman from New York for 
his leadership last year, and ask the gentleman if he can work with us 
in conference to help move toward this goal?
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, this is as good an idea that has come along 
in a long time. It has broad support. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania is as consistent as Old Faithful regarding fire fighters. 
The gentleman is their hero; and there are many others in this room who 
have made this happen.
  The gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) and I have an 
allocation that would force us to go into HUD that would cut salaries 
and expenses. Nobody wants to do that. Give us a chance to work with 
the gentleman as we move towards conference, and I think we probably 
will have a positive result.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. I yield to the gentleman from West 
Virginia.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Weldon) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) for their 
leadership on this issue.
  This amendment is less about a desire in this body of getting 
resources to fire fighters than it is about the scarcity about the 
resources that we have to appropriate here.
  As the chairman indicated, we need a larger allocation to do justice 
to this amendment. We need more money to do justice to this amendment. 
We hope as this process moves forward, it will be available. It will be 
very difficult in the context of the tax cut we had earlier in the 
year. We are going to work hard to honor both gentlemen's request here 
as it moves forward. I will support the chairman in that process.

                              {time}  1915

  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank our 
colleagues for their comments. The gentleman from Maryland has an 
additional comment to make, and then I will make my unanimous-consent 
request.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I think everybody here that 
has spoken says this is something we ought to do. Hopefully between now 
and when we adjourn, we will be able to get this accomplished, not just 
for the fire service of America but for the people of our Nation and 
safer communities.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I thank all of my 
colleagues for speaking. It is pretty evident that this is something we 
want to do. Working with the other body, hopefully we can get there.
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Weldon-
Pascrell-Andrews amendment which would increase the FY02 budget for the 
Fire Assistance Grant Program from $100 million to $150 million.
  Mr. Chairman, there is such a great need for this program in this 
country that while it has been funded at $100 million for FY01, there 
has been $2.9 billion in requests from across the country for this 
vital program.
  Mr. Chairman, new and advancing technologies are constantly requiring 
expensive purchase and upgrading of equipment to enable our 
firefighting units to provide the very best in services to our 
communities. My own district of the U.S. Virgin Islands, is one such 
community in need. They have put in a request for this assistance and 
support to ensure that they have the right equipment, vehicles and 
other tools necessary to meet the important need of keeping our 
community safe in times of fire disaster.
  Mr. Chairman, our firefighters, across the country, put their lives 
on the line day after day--for us! Let us appreciate their service, and 
improve their safety as well, by passing the Weldon-Pascrell-Andrews 
amendment today.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to 
withdraw the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania?

[[Page 14994]]

  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. 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 Inspector General Act of 1978, as 
     amended, $93,898,000, of which $22,343,000 shall be provided 
     from the various funds of the Federal Housing Administration 
     and $10,000,000 shall be provided from the amount earmarked 
     for Operation Safe Home in the appropriation for the ``Public 
     housing operating fund'': Provided, That the Inspector 
     General shall have independent authority over all personnel 
     issues within the Office of Inspector General.


                         consolidated fee fund

                              (rescission)

       Of the balances remaining available from fees and charges 
     under section 7(j) of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development Act, $6,700,000 is rescinded.

             Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight

                         salaries and expenses


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For carrying out the Federal Housing Enterprise Financial 
     Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, including not to exceed 
     $500 for official reception and representation expenses, 
     $23,000,000, to remain available until expended, to be 
     derived from the Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Fund: 
     Provided, That not to exceed such amount shall be available 
     from the general fund of the Treasury to the extent necessary 
     to incur obligations and make expenditures pending the 
     receipt of collections to the Fund: Provided further, That 
     the general fund amount shall be reduced as collections are 
     received during the fiscal year so as to result in a final 
     appropriation from the general fund estimated at not more 
     than $0.

                       Administrative Provisions

       Sec. 201. Fifty percent of the amounts of budget authority, 
     or in lieu thereof 50 percent of the cash amounts associated 
     with such budget authority, that are recaptured from projects 
     described in section 1012(a) of the Stuart B. McKinney 
     Homeless Assistance Amendments Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 1437 
     note) shall be rescinded, or in the case of cash, shall be 
     remitted to the Treasury, and such amounts of budget 
     authority or cash recaptured and not rescinded or remitted to 
     the Treasury shall be used by State housing finance agencies 
     or local governments or local housing agencies with projects 
     approved by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     for which settlement occurred after January 1, 1992, in 
     accordance with such section. Notwithstanding the previous 
     sentence, the Secretary may award up to 15 percent of the 
     budget authority or cash recaptured and not rescinded or 
     remitted to the Treasury to provide project owners with 
     incentives to refinance their project at a lower interest 
     rate.
       Sec. 202. None of the amounts made available under this Act 
     may be used during fiscal year 2002 to investigate or 
     prosecute under the Fair Housing Act any otherwise lawful 
     activity engaged in by one or more persons, including the 
     filing or maintaining of a non-frivolous legal action, that 
     is engaged in solely for the purpose of achieving or 
     preventing action by a Government official or entity, or a 
     court of competent jurisdiction.
       Sec. 203. (a) Notwithstanding section 854(c)(1)(A) of the 
     AIDS Housing Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. 12903(c)(1)(A)), from 
     any amounts made available under this title for fiscal year 
     2002 that are allocated under such section, the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development shall allocate and make a 
     grant, in the amount determined under subsection (b), for any 
     State that--
       (1) received an allocation in a prior fiscal year under 
     clause (ii) of such section; and
       (2) is not otherwise eligible for an allocation for fiscal 
     year 2002 under such clause (ii) because the areas in the 
     State outside of the metropolitan statistical areas that 
     qualify under clause (i) in fiscal year 2002 do not have the 
     number of cases of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) 
     required under such clause.
       (b) The amount of the allocation and grant for any State 
     described in subsection (a) shall be an amount based on the 
     cumulative number of AIDS cases in the areas of that State 
     that are outside of metropolitan statistical areas that 
     qualify under clause (i) of such section 854(c)(1)(A) in 
     fiscal year 2002, in proportion to AIDS cases among cities 
     and States that qualify under clauses (i) and (ii) of such 
     section and States deemed eligible under subsection (a).
       Sec. 204. Section 225(a) of the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 2000, Public Law 106-74 (113 
     Stat. 1076), is amended by inserting ``and fiscal year 2002'' 
     after ``fiscal year 2001''.
       Sec. 205. Section 251 of the National Housing Act (12 
     U.S.C. 1715z-16) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by striking ``issue regulations'' 
     and all that follows and inserting the following: ``require 
     that the mortgagee make available to the mortgagor, at the 
     time of loan application, a written explanation of the 
     features of an adjustable rate mortgage consistent with the 
     disclosure requirements applicable to variable rate mortgages 
     secured by a principal dwelling under the Truth in Lending 
     Act.''; and
       (2) by adding the following new subsection at the end:
       ``(d)(1) The Secretary may insure under this subsection a 
     mortgage that meets the requirements of subsection (a), 
     except that the effective rate of interest--
       ``(A) shall be fixed for a period of not less than the 
     first 3 years of the mortgage term;
       ``(B) shall be adjusted by the mortgagee initially upon the 
     expiration of such period and annually thereafter; and
       ``(C) in the case of the initial interest rate adjustment, 
     is subject to the one percent limitation only if the interest 
     rate remained fixed for five or fewer years.
       ``(2) The disclosure required under subsection (b) shall be 
     required for a mortgage insured under this subsection.''.
       Sec. 206. (a) Section 203(c) of the National Housing Act 
     (12 U.S.C. 1709(c)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and (k)'' and ``or 
     (k)''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) by inserting immediately after ``subsection (v),'' the 
     following: ``and each mortgage that is insured under 
     subsection (k) or section 234(c),''; and
       (B) by striking ``and executed on or after October 1, 
     1994,''.
       (b) The amendments made by subsection (a) shall--
       (1) apply only to mortgages that are executed on or after 
     the date of enactment of this Act; and
       (2) be implemented in advance of any necessary conforming 
     changes to regulations.
       Sec. 207. (a) During fiscal year 2002, in the provision of 
     rental assistance under section 8(o) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)) in connection with a 
     program to demonstrate the economy and effectiveness of 
     providing such assistance for use in assisted living 
     facilities that is carried out in the counties of the State 
     of Michigan specified in subsection (b) of this section, 
     notwithstanding paragraphs (3) and (18)(B)(iii) of such 
     section 8(o), a family residing in an assisted living 
     facility in any such county, on behalf of which a public 
     housing agency provides assistance pursuant to section 
     8(o)(18) of such Act, may be required, at the time the family 
     initially receives such assistance, to pay rent in an amount 
     exceeding 40 percent of the monthly adjusted income of the 
     family by such a percentage or amount as the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development determines to be appropriate.
       (b) The counties specified in this subsection are Oakland 
     County, Macomb County, Wayne County, and Washtenaw County, in 
     the State of Michigan.


         Amendments En Bloc Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

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

       Amendments en bloc offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas, 
     consisting of amendment No. 31, amendment No. 33, amendment 
     No. 34, and amendment No. 35:

                           Amendment No. 31:

       At the end of title II, insert the following new section:
       Sec. 2__. For an additional amount for providing public 
     housing agencies with tenant-based housing assistance under 
     section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437f) to provide amounts for incremental assistance under 
     such section 8, and the amount otherwise provided by this 
     title for ``Public and Indian Housing--public housing capital 
     fund'' is hereby reduced by, $100,000,000.
                                  ____


                           Amendment No. 33:

       In title III, at the end of the matter relating to 
     ``National Aeronautics and Space Administration-science, 
     aeronautics and technology'' insert the following: 
     ``Additionally, for the Space Grant program, to promote 
     science, mathematics, and technology education for young 
     people, undergraduate students, women, underrepresented 
     minorities, and persons with disabilities in the State of 
     Texas, for careers in aerospace science and technology, 
     $8,900,000.''.
                                  ____


                           Amendment No. 34:

       In title III, at the end of the matter relating to 
     ``National Aeronautics and Space Administration-science, 
     aeronautics and technology'' insert the following: 
     ``Additionally, for the Minority University Research and 
     Education Program to emphasize partnership awards that 
     leverage the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's 
     investment by encouraging collaboration among the National 
     Aeronautics and Space Administration, Historically Black 
     Colleges and Universities, Other Minority Universities, and 
     other university researchers and educators, $58,000,000.''.
                                  ____


                           Amendment No. 35:

       In title III, at the end of the matter relating to 
     ``National Science Foundation-education and human resources'' 
     insert the following: ``Additionally, for training young

[[Page 14995]]

     scientists and engineers, creating new knowledge, and 
     developing cutting-edge tools that together will fuel 
     economic prosperity and increase social well-being in the 
     years ahead, $662,000,000.''.

  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentlewoman's amendments.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman reserves a point of order.
  Pursuant to the order of the House of July 27, 2001, the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Walsh) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I thank the chairman and the ranking member for giving me the 
opportunity to engage in debate on these important issues on the floor 
of the House.
  First let me say that I want to add my support for the Weldon 
amendment that was debated just previously and would hope to be one of 
those supporting the concept of public safety and the appreciation of 
our Federal fire service and all of our firefighters.
  The issues I want to discuss this evening I believe warrant 
consideration; and I would hope, with good will, I would be able to 
have the point of order waived. But let me describe the reason for 
offering first of all amendment No. 31, which has to do with more 
funding for section 8. Realizing that there were funds that were not 
utilized under the section 8 program, my concern is that in various 
jurisdictions there are still long waiting lists for the section 8 
certificates. It seems to me that with that in mind, we need to either 
revise the program or work with the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
Development to make sure that this program actually utilizes all the 
dollars and gets to all the regional areas where there is a definitive 
need.
  In my community, the waiting list has been extensive. I believe it is 
extremely important to assure that there is affordable housing to 
disperse to the hardworking poor in areas throughout the community for 
them to have a better quality of life.
  My other amendments, 33, 34 and 35, deal with an important issue. I 
am on the Committee on Science and am well aware of the opportunity for 
dealing with these issues in the Committee on Science. I would say that 
we have done a very good job of that, but I have found that there is a 
great importance and great need for engaging our Historically Black 
Colleges and our Hispanic Serving Institutions in the important work 
that NASA does. The NASA space grant program is a program authorized by 
Congress in 1987 designed to increase the understanding, assessment, 
development and use of aeronautics and space resources. My interest is 
ensuring that this program has the dollars to be able to collaborate 
with those colleges.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer an amendment to this section of 
the bill H.R. 2620, VA-HUD-Independent Agencies appropriations for FY 
2002.
  I am requesting an increase in NASA Space Grant Progam. The NASA 
Space Grant program is a program, authorized by Congress in 1987, 
designed to increase the understanding, assessment, development, and 
use of aeronautics and space resources. All 50 states, Puerto Rico, and 
the District of Columbia have Space Grant Consortium programs in which 
more than 700 affiliates participate. These consortia form a network of 
colleges and universities, industry, state/local governments, and 
nonprofit organizations with interests in aerospace research, training, 
and education. This amendment is for an increase of $8.9 million to the 
existing FY 2002 budget request. This increase would bring the existing 
budget from $19.1 million to $28 million.
  I ask that my colleagues support me in this amendment.
  In addition, I am particularly interested in the minority university 
research and education program that emphasizes the partnership awards 
with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's investment in 
collaboration with Historically Black Colleges and other minority 
universities. Even today we find that there is a dearth of trained 
minorities in the sciences. We have always talked about the importance 
of math and science in our elementary and secondary schools. It is 
equally important to establish criteria and curricula in our colleges 
to be able to network, if you will, with the kind of disciplines and 
employment needs that we have in the particular industry. These 
research grants that I would have asked for more money for would have 
provided that increased opportunity.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer an amendment to this section of 
the bill H.R. 2620, VA-HUD-Independent Agencies appropriations for FY 
2002.
  I am requesting an increase in the NASA Minority University Research 
and Education Program (MUREP). MUREP is a program that focuses 
primarily on expanding and advancing NASA's scientific and 
technological base through collaborative efforts with Historically 
Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Other Minority Universities 
(OMUs), including Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI) and Tribal 
Colleges and Universities (TCU).
  NASA's outreach to Minority Institutions (MI) in FY 2002 will build 
upon the prior years' investments in MI research and academia 
infrastructure by expanding NASA's research base; contributing to the 
science, engineering and technology pipeline; and promoting educational 
excellence in all MUREP. These contributions include the education of a 
more diverse resource proof of scientific and technical personnel who 
will be well prepared to confront the technological challenges to 
benefit NASA and the Nation.
  The strategic goals of this program are to (1) Foster research and 
development activities at MI's which contribute substantially to NASA's 
mission; (2) to create systemic and sustainable change at MI's through 
partnerships and programs that enhance research and education outcomes 
in NASA-related fields; (3) to prepare faculty and students at MI's to 
successfully participate in the conventional, competitive research and 
education process; and (4) To increase the number of students served by 
MI's to enter college and successfully pursue and complete degrees in 
NASA-related fields.
  This amendment is for an increase of $58 million to the existing FY 
2002 budget request. This increase would bring the budget up from $82.1 
million to $140.1 million.
  I ask my colleagues support me in this amendment.
  Finally, Mr. Chairman, might I say in amendment 35, that amendment 
has to do with the National Science Foundation education and human 
resources which goes, again, to the point of training young scientists 
and engineers, creating new knowledge and developing cutting-edge 
technology that would fuel the economic prosperity.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer an amendment to this section of 
the bill H.R. 2620, VA-HUD-Independent Agencies appropriations for FY 
2002.
  I am requesting an increase in the National Science Foundation (NSF). 
NSF supports the nation's future and trains young scientists and 
engineers, creates new knowledge, and develop cutting-edge tools that 
together will fuel economic prosperity and increase social well-being 
in the years ahead. NSF will provide leadership in the President's Math 
and Science Partnership, and sustained investments in NSF's core 
programming will contribute to progress across science and engineering. 
The productivity of the U.S. scientific and engineering community--the 
fruits of which can be seen in the information technology, 
communications, and biotechnology industries--depends critically on NSF 
support of fundamental research.
  This amendment proposes a 15 percent increase in NSF's budget over FY 
2001, rather than the administration's proposed 1 percent. This 
amendment is for an increase of $662 million. This increase would bring 
the FY 2002 budget up to $5.1 billion.
  I ask that my colleagues support me in this amendment.
  The more people we have in this Nation from all walks of life 
understanding science, understanding technology, being able to create 
the new leverage for energy technology, space technology, health 
technology, I believe this Nation is better off. My amendments have 
that intent, and certainly I would hope that the chairman would see the 
interest that I have in science and particularly the interest that I 
have in, if nothing else, revising or looking at the section 8 program 
so that those individuals, as I move to housing, those individuals that 
want to get into section 8, that is a voucher to allow you to live in 
rental property,

[[Page 14996]]

dispersed around the community, not necessarily in one area, enhancing 
your quality of life would do so.
  I thank the chairman for allowing me to present this argument on the 
floor of the House, and I thank the ranking member as well.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve my point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman continues to reserve a point of order.
  The gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman has time reserved. I think 
we best allow her to close before I insist on my point of order.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Let me simply say that what I would like to say, Mr. Chairman, is to 
have the opportunity to withdraw these amendments. I would like to be 
able to have the gentleman from New York speak and yield to me to ask a 
question.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. WALSH. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Is the gentlewoman 
prepared to withdraw the amendments?
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I am interested in withdrawing the 
amendments, yes. What my general question is, as the gentleman knows, 
one of my amendments deals with section 8 housing which I know this 
committee has worked very hard on. The other amendments have to do with 
technology and Historically Black Colleges and minority colleges and 
the importance of those institutions having access to technical 
training. My simple question would be is that this subcommittee on 
appropriations, VA, HUD and other agencies, has in its mind and in its 
focus that these issues will remain important issues as we move toward 
finalizing this bill and that these issues are important in the 
committee and will not be forgotten, if you will.
  Mr. WALSH. I thank the gentlewoman for continuing to yield. I think 
in this bill, we have really made an effort to make sure that 
Historically Black Colleges, Hispanic Serving Institutions and other 
minority programs are part of the focus of the National Science 
Foundation. I think there has been some criticism, and it is somewhat 
due, that the larger, better established research institutions around 
the country, the colleges, have benefited substantially. Certainly the 
country has benefited from that research, also.
  But there has been a tradition on this subcommittee, beginning with 
Chairman Lou Stokes, to make sure that some of these resources are 
provided, that we encourage those institutions that I mentioned to 
expand their research capacity. I know the gentleman from West Virginia 
(Mr. Mollohan) has been a strong and consistent voice for these, also. 
We will always do that, and we would always welcome the gentlewoman's 
input as to whether or not we are meeting the goals that we have set.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman's time has expired. The remaining time 
is controlled by the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I yield 
to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman very 
much for yielding. I believe we can all work together for these 
important issues. Training of our young people; providing funding for 
these colleges is very important; housing is very important. With that 
as I had asked, I hoped that we would waive the point of order, but I 
think it is more important for us to find common ground.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my 
colleague's amendment to appropriate an additional $662 million for the 
National Science Foundation's education and human resources account, to 
be used for training young scientists and engineers.
  There is a pressing need for this level of funding, particularly as 
it relates to minority scientists and engineers. Recent reports have 
cited the ``brain drain'' as our current pool of scientists and 
engineers prepare to retire. Furthermore, it is clear that America's 
youth are not being prepared to pursue the rigorous disciplines 
associated with the hard sciences. American students perform comparably 
to other children in foreign countries in math and science until they 
reach the fourth grade level. However, there is a serious drop-off in 
their achievement and competitiveness in later years.
  For minority students the case is even worse. Funding the NSF with 
increased resources will prepare communities and our nation to respond 
to the intellectual and real world challenges that await the engineers 
and scientists of the future. I urge my House colleagues to vote yes on 
this amendment.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to 
withdraw these four amendments.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendments are withdrawn.
  There was no objection.


          Amendment No. 36 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. 36 offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
       Page 54, after line 6, insert the following new section:
       Sec. 208. The amounts otherwise provided by this title are 
     revised by increasing the aggregate amount made available for 
     ``Public and Indian Housing--housing certificate fund'', 
     increasing the amount specified under such item for 
     incremental vouchers under section 8 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, reducing the amount specified under such 
     item for rescission from unobligated balances remaining from 
     funds previously appropriated to the Department of Housing 
     and Urban Development, increasing the amount made available 
     for ``Community Planning and Development--community 
     development fund'', and increasing the amount specified under 
     such item for the community development block grant program, 
     by $100,000,000, $100,000,000, $324,000,000, $224,000,000, 
     and $224,000,000, respectively.

  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the 
gentlewoman's amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman reserves a point of order.
  Pursuant to the order of the House of July 27, 2001, the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Walsh) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume. Let me explain the purpose of this amendment, which is to 
add dollars, $100 million, to increase the community block grant 
programs. This goes to a continuing issue that we are confronted with 
in Houston, Texas, based upon the devastation of Tropical Storm 
Allison.
  First of all, let me rise in support of the $1.3 billion that the 
committee has put in for additional funds for FEMA. Let me thank the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) and the gentleman from West 
Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) for protecting those dollars. We are in 
desperate need around the country. There are 31 disaster sites around 
the country. We do not know how many more may come about, because we 
are in hurricane season. I thank them particularly for the recovery 
that Houston is going through.
  What we are beginning to face is a shortage of housing because many 
people are facing the determination or the assessment of the condition 
of their homes as to whether or not they can be built or rebuilt or 
not. We are in what we call the ``buyout program'' that FEMA has which 
requires a complicated process of percentages of whether or not your 
house has been damaged or not damaged and whether or not you can have 
the opportunity to rebuild your house. In many instances, there is a 
need for down payment dollars or dollars to initiate the program. The 
programs are being designed at this point by Harris County government, 
and the city of Houston is assessing their status as to whether or not 
they will be participating in the buyout program. I simply wanted to 
have enough dollars for flexibility in

[[Page 14997]]

this community development block grant program that if the city were to 
engage in participating in these programs, it would have the dollars to 
do so, any cities, to do so.
  My amendment provides for funding so that the many disaster areas 
that may have lost housing and have to participate in a buyout program 
would have the resources through the flexibility of the community 
development and buyout program.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment that provides $50 million 
in funding for the Housing and Urban Development's Community Block 
Grant program from the HUD Section 8 Housing Certificate Fund.
  As many of you know, last month Tropical Storm Allison ravaged our 
nation from Texas to the Northeast. This storm has been particularly 
hard on the residents of Harris County and the city of Houston. 
Although words cannot even begin to describe adequately the destruction 
of Houston and its surrounding areas, I will attempt to describe for 
you some of the havoc that the storm has wreaked.
  The more than three feet of rain that fell on the Houston area 
beginning June 6 has caused at least 23 deaths in the Houston area and 
as many as fifty deaths in six states. Over 10,000 people have been 
left at least temporarily homeless during the flooding, many with no 
immediate hope of returning to their homes. More than 56,000 residents 
in 30 counties have registered for federal disaster assistance. The 
damage estimates in Harris County, Texas alone are $4.88 billion and 
may yet increase.
  Some of the most hard hit areas include the University of Houston, 
Texas Southern University, and the Kashmere Gardens neighborhood, a 
Houston enclave that is predominantly low income and possesses the 
fewest resources needed to bounce back from this once in a lifetime 
event.
  The devastation of single family, mobile homes and multi family homes 
is almost unbelievable. It is estimated that in the city of Houston, 
1,067 were destroyed, 5,098 need major repairs and 24,182 need minor 
repairs, for a total of 30,347 homes affected. In Harris County, it is 
estimated that 2,429 homes were destroyed, 4,545 need major repairs and 
6,826 need minor repairs, for a total of 13,800.
  Of the multi-family housing units in the city, 56 units were utterly 
destroyed, 150 need major repair and 672 need minor repairs. All 
totaled, over 3,500 homes were destroyed and nearly 10,000 need major 
repairs.
  FEMA is bringing in trailers as temporary housing for some of those 
who are now homeless. A new staging site for travel trailers has been 
secured, and FEMA has received 441 travel trailers. There are currently 
138 travel trailers occupied. I met with FEMA several weeks ago to 
request this relief for the multitudes of Houstonians that have been 
left temporarily homeless. These temporary housing trailers, which will 
be an integral part of FEMA's temporary housing program, are being 
located at either the severely damaged homes of flood victims or at 
commercial mobile home parks in and around Houston. The city of Houston 
will ease permit provisions for these trailers.
  The city and county are working diligently with FEMA and SBA to 
provide grants and loans for home buyout and repair. However, these 
funds fall short of what the county and city need to help its 
residents.
  For example, through its buyout program, called the Hazard Mitigation 
Grant Program, FEMA provides only government entities 75 percent of the 
buyout expense. Harris County and Houston must pay the rest, as the 
state of Texas has declined to lend financial assistance toward this 
effort. Further, the total eligible buyout funds are only 15 percent of 
FEMA's estimated total disaster costs.
  Moreover, after closing costs and moving expenses, the local 
governments' buyout share may end up closer to half of all expenses for 
buyouts. Estimates are that the repair and buyout of homes may cost 
$200 million or more. The local governments and low and moderate-income 
residents will scarcely have the resources to meet their expenses.
  FEMA does also provide a limited source of funds to individuals and 
families to be used not only for essential home repair, but also to 
purchase destroyed clothing and other needed personal property, as well 
as to meet necessary medical, dental, transportation, and even funeral 
expenses. However, the average grant is only five to six thousand 
dollars, hardly enough in many cases to achieve the recovery that is 
needed. Therefore, I seek additional HUD Community Development Block 
Grant funds to be used to help supplement our local governments meet 
their obligations to their residents in need.
  CDBG provides eligible metropolitan cities and urban counties with 
annual direct grants that they can use to revitalize neighborhoods, 
expand affordable housing and economic opportunities, and/or improve 
community facilities and services, principally to benefit low- and 
moderate-income persons.
  Since 1974 CDBG has been the backbone of improvement efforts in many 
communities, providing a flexible source of annual grant funds for 
local governments nationwide-funds that they, with the participation of 
local citizens, can devote to the activities that best serve their own 
particular development priorities, provided that these projects either 
(1) benefit low- and moderate-income persons; (2) prevent or eliminate 
slums or blight; or (3) meet other urgent community development needs. 
The CDBG Entitlement Communities Program provides this Federal 
assistance to almost 1000 of the largest localities in the country.
  As one of the Nation's largest Federal grant programs, the impact of 
CDBG-funded projects can be seen in the housing stock, the business 
environment, the streets and the public facilities of these entitlement 
communities. The rehabilitation of affordable housing has traditionally 
been the largest single use of CDBG funds.
  Recipients of CDBG entitlement funds include local governments with 
50,000 or more residents, other local government designated as central 
cities of metropolitan areas, and urban counties with populations of at 
least 200,000 (excluding the population of entitled cities). Local 
governments may carry out all activities themselves or award some or 
all of the funds to private or public nonprofit organizations as well 
as for-profit entities.
  Low and moderate-income persons, generally defined as members of a 
family earning no more than 80 percent of the area median income, 
benefit most directly and most often from CDBG-funded activities. 
Grantees must use at least 70 percent of CDBG funds for activities that 
principally benefit low- and moderate-income persons. This includes 
activities where either the majority of direct beneficiaries such as 
housing rehabilitation low- or moderate-income persons.
  Grantees may use CDBG funds for activities that include acquiring 
real property (primarily land, buildings, and other permanent 
improvements to the property) for public purposes. This type of 
activity might include, for example, buying abandoned houses for 
rehabilitation or an old industrial site in a distressed neighborhood 
for redevelopment. CDBG also helps communities demolish property and 
clear sites to prepare the land for other uses.
  These funds can also be used for reconstructing or rehabilitating 
housing and other property from homeless shelters to single-family 
homes and from playgrounds to shopping centers, CDBG enables 
communities to improve properties that have become less usable, whether 
due to age, neglect, natural disaster, or changing needs.
  The committee has recommended a rescission of $886 million for the 
Section 8 Housing Certificate Fund, stating that it is one of several 
programs that has built up a substantial balance of unspent funds. It 
is attempting to take these funds out of HUD until the programs spend 
the funds it has on hand. Well, I say, let HUD keep these funds and put 
them to a desperately needed use. This amendment will merely put those 
funds to a direly needed use.
  Hence, I will be requesting in conference that this CDBG money be 
earmarked for the desperate needs of the homes devastated by Tropical 
Storm Allison, particularly in Houston and Harris County.
  The people of Houston have made extraordinary efforts and acts of 
heroism during this disaster, as we recognized when we passed H. Res. 
166 by a vote of 411-0. Houston contributes significantly to our 
national economy, as energy capital of the nation and a renowned center 
for medical care, and scientific and academic research. FEMA and SBA's 
efforts have been praiseworthy, contributing significant financial 
assistance and other much needed support. But to return to our 
potential, Houston needs to know that Congress continues to support its 
recovery. Although I look forward to this Chamber supporting 
Representative Delay's request for $1.3 billion in emergency 
contingency funding for FEMA, even if we approve these funds, their 
release would still be up to the administration.
  The flood has devastated us emotionally, physically and financially. 
To return to our potential, we still need help. Houston needs to know 
that Congress continues to recognize. Now, it is our turn to continue 
to make sure that we do our share to help them.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
Just briefly, the subcommittee has done its level best to provide 
additional section 8 housing vouchers. In

[[Page 14998]]

fact, we have 34,000 new section 8 vouchers in the bill. As we have 
discussed earlier, this is a very tight allocation. There are really 
very few other places to go within the bill to move money from one 
account to another.
  Since this increase certainly is well intended but there is no offset 
provided, I would obviously continue to reserve my point of order.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1930

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  In conclusion, this is such an important issue for us, I totally 
agree and believe that the committee has been as fair as it can 
possibly be. I would argue that there is such an emergency and such a 
need for assistance in this housing program and giving flexibility in 
additional dollars, I would argue and ask that the point of order be 
waived and the amendment be allowed to go forward.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) insist on 
his point of order?
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment because it is in violation of section 302(f) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974. The Committee on Appropriations filed 
suballocation of Budget Totals for fiscal year 2002 on July 26, 2001, 
House Report 107-165. This amendment would provide new budget authority 
in excess of the subcommittee allocation made under section 302(b) and 
is not permitted under section 302(f) of the Act.
  I ask for a ruling of the Chair.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) 
desire to be heard on the point of order?
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, my simple point on this amendment is that I think it is 
important that the idea of being able to assist flood victims is only 
at this time. I appreciate the fact that we have received additional 
dollars in FEMA. The housing represents an enormous crisis. Simply, Mr. 
Chairman, I would ask that the point of order be considered waived in 
light of the emergency nature of the request.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule.
  The Chair is authoritatively guided under section 312 of the Budget 
Act by an estimate of the Committee on the Budget that an amendment 
providing any net increase in new discretionary budget authority would 
cause a breach of the pertinent allocation of such authority.
  The amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas would increase 
the level of new discretionary budget authority in the bill. As such, 
the amendment violates section 302(f) of the Budget Act.
  The point of order is sustained, the amendment is not in order.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                    TITLE III--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

                  American Battle Monuments Commission


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, of the 
     American Battle Monuments Commission, including the 
     acquisition of land or interest in land in foreign countries; 
     purchases and repair of uniforms for caretakers of national 
     cemeteries and monuments outside of the United States and its 
     territories and possessions; rent of office and garage space 
     in foreign countries; purchase (one for replacement only) and 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles; and insurance of official 
     motor vehicles in foreign countries, when required by law of 
     such countries, $30,466,000, to remain available until 
     expended.
       For the partial cost of construction of a new interpretive 
     and visitor center at the American Cemetery in Normandy, 
     France, $5,000,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That the Commission shall ensure that the 
     placement, scope and character of this new center protect the 
     solemnity of the site and the sensitivity of interested 
     parties including families of servicemen interred at the 
     cemetery, the host country and Allied forces who participated 
     in the invasion and ensuing battle: Provided further, That 
     not more than $1,000,000 shall be for non-construction 
     related costs including initial consultations with interested 
     parties and the conceptual study and design of the new 
     center.

             Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses in carrying out activities pursuant 
     to section 112(r)(6) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, 
     including hire of passenger vehicles, uniforms or allowances 
     therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902, and for 
     services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for 
     individuals not to exceed the per diem equivalent to the 
     maximum rate payable for senior level positions under 5 
     U.S.C. 5376, $8,000,000, $5,500,000 of which to remain 
     available until September 30, 2002 and $2,500,000 of which to 
     remain available until September 30, 2003: Provided, That the 
     Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board shall have not 
     more than three career Senior Executive Service positions: 
     Provided further, That, hereafter, there shall be an 
     Inspector General at the Board who shall have the duties, 
     responsibilities, and authorities specified in the Inspector 
     General Act of 1978, as amended: Provided further, That an 
     individual appointed to the position of Inspector General of 
     the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) shall, by 
     virtue of such appointment, also hold the position of 
     Inspector General of the Board: Provided further, That the 
     Inspector General of the Board shall utilize personnel of the 
     Office of Inspector General of FEMA in performing the duties 
     of the Inspector General of the Board, and shall not appoint 
     any individuals to positions within the Board.

                       Department of the Treasury

              Community Development Financial Institutions


              Community Development Financial Institutions

                          fund program account

       To carry out the Community Development Banking and 
     Financial Institutions Act of 1994, including services 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for individuals not 
     to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the rate for ES-3, 
     $80,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2003, of 
     which $500,000 shall be for technical assistance and training 
     programs designed to benefit Native American communities, and 
     up to $8,948,000 may be used for administrative expenses, 
     including administration of the New Markets Tax Credit, up to 
     $6,000,000 may be used for the cost of direct loans, and up 
     to $1,000,000 may be used for administrative expenses to 
     carry out the direct loan program: Provided, That the cost of 
     direct loans, 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 these 
     funds are available to subsidize gross obligations for the 
     principal amount of direct loans not to exceed $15,000,000.

                   Consumer Product Safety Commission


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Consumer Product Safety 
     Commission, including hire of passenger motor vehicles, 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for 
     individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the 
     maximum rate payable under 5 U.S.C. 5376, purchase of nominal 
     awards to recognize non-Federal officials' contributions to 
     Commission activities, and not to exceed $500 for official 
     reception and representation expenses, $54,200,000.

             Corporation for National and Community Service


                National and Community Service Programs

                           Operating Expenses

       Of the funds appropriated under this heading in Public Law 
     106-377, the Corporation for National and Community Service 
     shall use such amounts of such funds as may be necessary to 
     carry out the orderly termination of the programs, 
     activities, and initiatives under the National Community 
     Service Act of 1990 (Public Law 103-82) and the Corporation: 
     Provided, that such sums shall be utilized to resolve all 
     responsibilities and obligations in connection with said 
     Corporation.


          Amendment No. 30 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. 30 offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
       In title III, under the heading ``national and community 
     service programs operating expenses''--
       (1) strike ``orderly termination of the''; and
       (2) strike the proviso at the end.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of July 27, 2001, 
the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.

[[Page 14999]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee of 
Texas).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, it seems this evening that I am speaking a lot about 
the impact of Tropical Storm Allison in the Houston area and throughout 
Texas, but also as it has impacted Louisiana, the Southeastern Coast 
and many other States. We see now in the State of West Virginia that 
there has been extensive flooding over the last couple of days.
  The reason why I rise is to present this amendment to ensure that 
there will be no language in this legislation that would suggest that 
the Corporation of National Service would be dismantled.
  First of all, I believe that all of us are aware of the Corporation 
of National Service, the AmeriCorps volunteers. They are in our 
communities every single day. As I went about Houston during the 
initial days of the flood, and we were opening Red Cross centers and 
what we call DRCs, the recovery centers organized by FEMA, the 
complimentary volunteers that were there were the AmeriCorps young 
people and National Service Corporation individuals who were there 
every single day helping the flood victims.
  As I noted to you, we have got about $4.88 billion in damage, and 
growing. Over 20,000 homes that have been damaged. But I have seen 
AmeriCorps working in many other capacities, in classrooms, daycare 
centers, cleaning up parks, working side-by-side with the respected 
citizens of the respective areas they are in.
  This amendment is a very simple one and asks that we not consider 
this agency to be one dismantled and to be able to provide the support 
for the agency that I would hope all of us would desire to do.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) seek time 
in opposition to the amendment?
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I am not in opposition to the amendment. I 
do seek to control the time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Walsh) will control 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this AmeriCorps, similar to how the program has been 
handled in the last several years, the House has come into this bill 
without funding for AmeriCorps. It has been resolved in conference each 
time with funding being provided. I suspect, Mr. Chairman, that that is 
the way that this issue will be resolved again this year.
  The President has spoken in support of AmeriCorps. There are many 
advocates for the program within the House and in the Senate. The 
language that the gentlewoman deals with in the bill would strike 
language that deals with the elimination or the phasing-out of the 
AmeriCorps program. I do not think that that is necessary within the 
bill because of recent history, the fact that AmeriCorps is ultimately 
funded in conference.
  So, assuming that that will happen, there is no need for that 
language. I think it is a positive amendment, it has no deleterious 
effect on the bill, and, for that reason, Mr. Chairman, we are prepared 
to accept the gentlewoman's amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, the Corporation for National Service 
changes lives. It gets people of all ages to volunteer, and, as they 
volunteer, to improve the lives of others. While they are doing that, 
they improve their own lives. At the same time, the corporation 
volunteer program fills unmet local community needs.
  In my district, the sixth district of California, AmeriCorps 
volunteers are reading tutors in Larkspur; students from Sonoma State 
University volunteer for a Vista program in Rohnert Park; AmeriCorps 
sponsors a multi-cultural alliance and teacher fellowship program in 
Ross, California; and seniors in Sonoma County donate their time and 
wisdom through the local Retired and Senior Volunteer Program, RSVP.
  We have been lucky to get assistance also from California Statewide 
AmeriCorps programs. Last summer, AmeriCorps volunteers from Los 
Angeles came to my district and spent a week clearing the property 
around the historic Carrillo Adobe. They have done so much. They 
contribute so much.
  Forty other volunteers assisted at the Redwood Empire Food Bank. But 
the Corporation for National Service and AmeriCorps aren't important 
only for the good they do in our communities, or for the experiences of 
the individual volunteers. At a time when too many Americans are 
defined by their differences, the Corporation for National Service, and 
AmeriCorps, give thousands of volunteers, and the communities where 
they serve, an opportunity to meet across the barriers of education, 
race, and income, to work together for a common good. The corporation 
for National Service is one of this Nation's best investments in a 
future of good citizens, and we should be supporting it, not trying to 
eliminate it.
  Mr. Chairman, I was glad to hear the chairman agree with the sponsor 
of this amendment.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for her comments and her 
leadership in working with the program.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan), the distinguished ranking member.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I simply want to rise and compliment the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for this amendment. It brings 
to the attention of the body the fact that in this bill this account, 
the Corporation for National and Community Service, was not funded. It 
also gives us an opportunity to express our support for it. The 
chairman, I know, is very supportive of this program and has in the 
past taken the lead in making sure it was restored in conference.
  The simple fact is, and I want to assure the gentlewoman for the 
chairman, that there was an outlay problem in this bill. The Senate has 
more outlays than we do, $300 million. We have fewer outlays than the 
Senate, so this program was not funded, because it was known that it 
would be supported in conference.
  I would like to say that the chairman, as I stated earlier, has taken 
the lead in restoring this in the past; and I have all the confidence 
in the world that he will in the future. He is extremely supportive of 
community service.
  The corporation funds some wonderful programs; AmeriCorps, Points of 
Light, it funds at $10 million; Youth Life foundation, it funds at $1.5 
million; America's Promise, it funds at $7.5 million; Communities in 
Schools, $5 million; and Boys and Girls Clubs at $2.5 million.
  These are very worthwhile programs targeted to our youth principally, 
and they certainly merit our support and the funding. However, more 
funding certainly could be used in these areas. This program is an 
excellent program for focusing in on our youth and funding worthwhile 
programs that are working to ensure that we support organizations that 
get them off on the right foot.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. Chairman, I will close by simply saying this is like the domestic 
Peace Corps. I thank the chairman and ranking member. I think all 
Americans support this volunteer effort, helping our young people to be 
part of the volunteer spirit, similar to the Peace Corps. I believe 
these are very vital programs. I hope my colleagues will support us, 
and I thank the chairman for accepting the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer an amendment to this section of 
the bill H.R. 2620, VA-HUD-Independent Agencies Appropriations for FY 
2002.

[[Page 15000]]

  It has been the habit of this House to appropriate little or no funds 
for the Community of National Service and this appropriations 
legislation before the House today has the same deficit. This situation 
is disingenuous because those of us who remember the history of the 
appropriations process understand that funding for the Community of 
National Service will be funded by several hundred million dollars.
  I am appreciative for the work done by this office of the Executive 
Branch and know that many communities throughout the United States have 
benefited from its existence. I am particularly grateful for the 
assistance provided by AmeriCorps Volunteers, who were directed to the 
Houston area by the Corporation of National and Community Service. The 
Corporation's three major service initiatives are AmeriCorps, Learn and 
Serve America and the National Senior Service Corps.
  Over 200 AmeriCorps members from four regional campuses responded to 
a call-up from the American Red Cross to assist victims of Tropical 
Storm Allison in Texas and Louisiana. The members are serving as first-
line Family Assistance Representatives, helping families to receive 
immediate aid and to identify each family's long term needs. The corps 
members are also operating emergency assistance shelters, working in 
soup kitchens, and delivering meals to people affected by the flooding. 
Additionally, Spanish speaking members are helping translate emergency 
assistance forms for people who don't speak English. The members are 
working in ten emergency assistance shelters in the Houston, TX 
vicinity and three shelters around Baton Rouge, LA.
  Overall, the storm caused upwards of $4.88 billion in damage to 
Houston and surrounding Harris Country. Over 20,000 homes were damaged 
by the flooding as the storm dumped over 36 inches of rain in some 
areas with some houses reporting over seven feet of water in them.
  It is unfortunate that the Appropriations Committee zeroed out the 
account for the Community Development Fund, when the Administration 
requested $411 million in funding for FY 2002. My amendment would 
restore the program and allow them to continue their work on the behalf 
of communities throughout the United States.
  AmeriCorps, the domestic Peace Corps engages more than 40,000 
Americans in intensive, results-driven service each year. We're 
teaching children to read, making neighborhoods safer, building 
affordable homes, and responding to natural disasters through more than 
1000 projects. Most AmeriCorps members are selected by and serve with 
projects like Habitat for Humanity, the American Red Cross, and Boys 
and Girls Clubs, and many more local and national Organizations. Others 
serve in AmeriCorps*VISTA (Volunteers in Service to America) and 
AmeriCorps*NCCC (the National Civilian Community Corps). After their 
term of service, AmeriCorps members receive education awards to help 
finance college or pay back student loans.
  AmeriCorps is a win-win program that I hope the Rule for this 
legislation will allow it to continue in its work to help make America 
a better place to live. Homelessness in America continues to be a 
problem that seems to lack a broad commitment to see and end to this 
blight on the American Dream. Attempting to attribute homelessness to 
any one cause is difficult and misleading. More often than not, it is a 
combination of factors that culminates in homelessness. Sometimes these 
factors are not observable or identifiable even to those who experience 
them first hand (Wright, Rubin and Devine, 1998). For example, lack of 
affordable housing is a factor repeatedly cited as contributing to 
homelessness (Hertzberg. 1992; Johnson, 1994; Metraux and Culhane, 
1999; National Coalition for the Homeless, 1999-F). However, lack of 
affordable housing is often representative of a collectivity of other 
problems. Other key factors include the inability to earn a living 
wage, poverty, welfare reform, unemployment and/or domestic violence 
that can combine to form a situation in which even the most basic 
housing is not affordable.
  The support that AmeriCorps volunteers provided to Houston area 
residences must be supported by funds from the federal government in 
allowing families to have homes to live in after the damaged causes by 
Tropical Storm Allison. I have an amendment that increases funds for 
HUD's Community Development Block Grant Program to be used as matching 
funds for home repair and buyout for Harris County and the City of 
Houston citizens who have been displaced by Tropical Storm Allison.
  In time of great difficulty the Corporation of National Service has 
been there to assist citizens of our nation to put their lives back 
into order. It is time that this House stop using the Corporation of 
National Service as a budget gimmick to hide the fact that the VA-HUD 
appropriations legislation that will pass is in fact in violation of 
the budget agreement reached by the House earlier this year.
  This is the reason why we must revisit many fiscal issues as they 
relate to our nation's surplus and its obligations. I ask that my 
colleagues support me in removing language from this bill, which gives 
the false impression that this office will be discontinued.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned, we are prepared to accept the 
gentlewoman's amendment. We believe it is constructive.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. 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 Inspector General Act of 1978, as 
     amended, $5,000,000, which shall be available for obligation 
     through September 30, 2003.

               U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses for the operation of the United 
     States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims as authorized by 
     38 U.S.C. 7251-7298, $13,221,000, of which $895,000 shall be 
     available for the purpose of providing financial assistance 
     as described, and in accordance with the process and 
     reporting procedures set forth, under this heading in Public 
     Law 102-229.

                      Department of Defense--Civil

                       Cemeterial Expenses, Army


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses, as authorized by law, for 
     maintenance, operation, and improvement of Arlington National 
     Cemetery and Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemetery, 
     including the purchase of two passenger motor vehicles for 
     replacement only, and not to exceed $1,000 for official 
     reception and representation expenses, $22,537,000, to remain 
     available until expended.

                Department of Health and Human Services

                     National Institutes of Health


          national institute of environmental health sciences

       For necessary expenses for the National Institute of 
     Environmental Health Sciences in carrying out activities set 
     forth in section 311(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as 
     amended, $70,228,000.

            Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for the Agency for Toxic Substances 
     and Disease Registry (ATSDR) in carrying out activities set 
     forth in sections 104(i), 111(c)(4), and 111(c)(14) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended; section 118(f) of 
     the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 
     (SARA), as amended; and section 3019 of the Solid Waste 
     Disposal Act, as amended, $78,235,000, to be derived from the 
     Hazardous Substance Superfund Trust Fund pursuant to section 
     517(a) of SARA (26 U.S.C. 9507): Provided, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, in lieu of 
     performing a health assessment under section 104(i)(6) of 
     CERCLA, the Administrator of ATSDR may conduct other 
     appropriate health studies, evaluations, or activities, 
     including, without limitation, biomedical testing, clinical 
     evaluations, medical monitoring, and referral to accredited 
     health care providers: Provided further, That in performing 
     any such health assessment or health study, evaluation, or 
     activity, the Administrator of ATSDR shall not be bound by 
     the deadlines in section 104(i)(6)(A) of CERCLA: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds appropriated under this 
     heading shall be available for ATSDR to issue in excess of 40 
     toxicological profiles pursuant to section 104(i) of CERCLA 
     during fiscal year 2002, and existing profiles may be updated 
     as necessary.

                    Environmental Protection Agency


                         Science and Technology

       For science and technology, including research and 
     development activities, which shall include research and 
     development activities under the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as 
     amended; necessary expenses for personnel and related costs 
     and travel expenses, including uniforms, or allowances 
     therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for individuals not 
     to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the maximum rate 
     payable for senior level positions under 5 U.S.C. 5376; 
     procurement of laboratory equipment and supplies; other 
     operating expenses in support of research and development; 
     construction, alteration, repair,

[[Page 15001]]

     rehabilitation, and renovation of facilities, not to exceed 
     $75,000 per project, $680,410,000, which shall remain 
     available until September 30, 2003.


                 Environmental Programs and Management

       For environmental programs and management, including 
     necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, for personnel 
     and related costs and travel expenses, including uniforms, or 
     allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for 
     individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the 
     maximum rate payable for senior level positions under 5 
     U.S.C. 5376; hire of passenger motor vehicles; hire, 
     maintenance, and operation of aircraft; purchase of reprints; 
     library memberships in societies or associations which issue 
     publications to members only or at a price to members lower 
     than to subscribers who are not members; construction, 
     alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and renovation of 
     facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per project; and not to 
     exceed $6,000 for official reception and representation 
     expenses, $2,014,799,000, which shall remain available until 
     September 30, 2003.


                 Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mrs. Capps

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

       Amendment No. 7 offered by Mrs. Capps:
       In title III, in the item relating to ``Environmental 
     Protection Agency--environmental programs and management'', 
     after the last dollar amount, insert the following: 
     ``(reduced by $7,200,000)''.
       In title III, in the item relating to ``Environmental 
     Protection Agency--leaking underground storage tank trust 
     fund'', after the last dollar amount, insert the following: 
     ``(increased by $7,200,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of July 27, 2001, 
the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment would increase by $7.2 million Federal 
efforts to clean up leaking underground storage tanks. The amendment 
pays for this increase by cutting the same amount from the EPA's 
Environmental Programs and Management Account. It is my intention that 
this funding would come from the Regional Management Programs, which 
has been increased by nearly $20 million under the bill.
  I am offering this amendment with the hope that we can increase our 
attention to the problem that MTBE contamination is causing to drinking 
water across this country. While I cannot, under the rules of the 
House, specify that this funding be used for MTBE cleanup, it is my 
hope the House will send a clear message that we want to do something 
about this huge problem.
  MTBE is a fuel additive designed to reduce the production of smog by 
increasing the burning efficiency of gasoline. Unfortunately, due to 
its unique properties, MTBE has become one of the leading water 
contamination problems in the United States. MTBE makes water smell and 
taste like turpentine, even at very low levels, and has resulted in the 
closing of important drinking water supplies all across the country.
  For example, in my district, the coastal town of Cambria, California, 
is facing a real calamity. MTBE contamination has shut down two 
municipal drinking water wells the Community Services District has used 
as back-up sources during dry seasons and droughts.

                              {time}  1945

  The district has spent more than $1 million to research the problem. 
Cambria is also considering the addition of a desalinization plant to 
ensure an adequate supply of drinking water, and that will cost 
millions more.
  In fact, there are 38 MTBE contaminated sites in San Luis Obispo 
County and another 86 in Santa Barbara County, both in my district. 
However, Mr. Chairman, MTBE contaminated drinking water is a huge 
problem not just in my district, but across the country. Santa Monica, 
California has lost about 80 percent of its drinking supply and spends 
a quarter of a million dollars per year buying replacement supplies.
  The South Tahoe Public Utility District has shut down 13 of its 34 
drinking water wells due to MTBE contamination. Twenty-one of 
Wisconsin's 71 counties have detected MTBE in groundwater in potable 
wells. In Iowa, it has been detected in 23 percent of urban alluvial 
wells. In Maryland, over 149 domestic public water systems are 
contaminated by MTBE, and the list goes on and on.
  Owners and operators of underground tanks are responsible for 
cleanup, and that is where the responsibility should lie. But the 
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust fund provides additional cleanup 
resources, especially when no responsible party can be found or when 
the responsible party is no longer viable.
  It may also be used to enforce corrective actions and recover costs 
spent from the fund for cleanup activities. Funded by one-tenth of a 
cent tax per gallon of gasoline, this LUST fund is a backstop to ensure 
prompt and appropriate cleanup of leaking tanks. This tax is bringing 
in close to $190 million this year. Mr. Chairman, at the end of fiscal 
year 2002, the administration expects the balance in the LUST fund to 
be nearly $2 billion. The interest on this balance is bringing the 
trust fund another $87 million, yet the bill before us appropriates 
only $72 million to support communities in their efforts to clean up 
leaking tanks. That is $96,000 less than we appropriated last year, and 
that is about $15 million less than the interest we expect to earn on 
the trust fund balance this year.
  Mr. Chairman, I think we can do better than that. The American people 
pay taxes on gasoline and other fuels, in part to ensure that these 
underground tanks are not polluting their drinking water, so we should 
use those funds for this purpose.
  Mr. Chairman, last week the Energy and Commerce Committee unanimously 
adopted my amendment to authorize up to $200 million out of the LUST 
fund for MTBE inspections and cleanup. We took this action because MTBE 
contamination is presenting a real problem to thousands of communities 
across this country. My amendment today is only a small step toward 
addressing those cleanup needs when we should be taking a giant leap. 
So I would urge my colleagues to support this common sense amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition, 
although I am not in opposition to this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise actually in support of the gentlewoman's 
amendment and am prepared to accept it for our bill.
  This is a good idea. It is a little tough on the Environmental 
Protection Agency because it will have to find these funds out of 
existing appropriated funds but, at the same time, it shows that the 
Congress considers this issue a very high priority. I know members of 
the subcommittee, including the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Frelinghuysen), has spoken long and strong in favor of doing a better, 
more aggressive job on leaking underground storage tanks, and 
especially with this issue of MTBE, which pollutes our drinking water. 
This amendment would also provide funds to orphaned sites where the 
owner cannot be located or otherwise cannot be identified.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a serious problem. Communities all over the 
country worry about this issue and suffer from this issue, and we need 
to do a vigilant job in protecting our groundwater supplies which, once 
they are polluted, can be next to impossible to abate the problem.
  So I support the gentlewoman's amendment and am prepared to accept 
it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I would just say how much I appreciate the 
support of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh).
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page 15002]]

  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 19 Offered by Mr. Pallone

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

       Amendment No. 19 offered by Mr. Pallone:
       In the item relating to ``Environmental Protection Agency--
     environmental programs and management'', after the aggregate 
     dollar amount, insert the following: ``(reduced by 
     $3,000,000)''.
       In the item relating to ``Environmental Protection Agency--
     state and tribal assistance grants'', after the 1st and 7th 
     dollar amounts, insert the following: ``(increased by 
     $3,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of July 27, 2001, 
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, let me say, first of all, that this is a bipartisan 
amendment. It is sponsored by myself and the gentlemen from New Jersey 
(Mr. Saxton) and (Mr. Smith), my two colleagues on the Republican side.
  Last year, Mr. Chairman, Congress unanimously passed the Beaches 
Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act; it is also known as 
the Beaches Act. The Beaches Act established consistent water quality 
standards for beach water and provides grants to help States develop 
and implement water quality testing and notification programs to warn 
the public about unsafe conditions at our Nation's beaches.
  The reason we needed the Beaches Act and why it is so important is 
because beach waters are often contaminated by pathogens, which are 
disease-causing bacteria and viruses found in human and animal wastes 
from polluted runoffs, storm drains, sewer overflows and malfunctioning 
septic systems. These pathogens can cause ear, nose and throat 
infections, dysentery, hepatitis. The risks of infections are higher 
for children, the elderly, and those with weak immune systems.
  Just as an example, Mr. Chairman, during 1999, there were more than 
6,000 beach closings and advisories posted at U.S. beaches. Since 1988, 
more than 36,000 beach closures and health advisories have been issued 
across the Nation, but only 11 States regularly monitor most or all of 
their beaches and notify the public. One of the reasons why this 
amendment is sponsored by three Members from New Jersey is because we 
had New Jersey as an example of the type of monitoring, and we used 
this as an example in trying to get this bill passed last year.
  Mr. Chairman, I just want to urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment. It increases EPA's budget by $3 million for grants to States 
for beach water quality testing and notification. Last year, Congress 
unanimously passed the Beaches Act, and the Beaches Act authorizes $30 
million in EPA grants. However, even though it authorizes $30 million, 
I think the President recommended only $2 million. The committee was 
generous in increasing it to $7 million. But we really think that a lot 
more money is needed and, if we are able to increase this by $3 million 
to $10 million, it would really make a big difference.
  Mr. Chairman, if I could just say a few more things. In some ways, I 
see it almost as an unfunded mandate, that now we are asking States to 
do all of these things, but we are not providing them with enough 
money, and that is why I think this amendment is very important. I 
should also mention that there are 23 national and regional 
organizations, environmental groups representing millions of Americans 
who support this.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition, 
although I am not in opposition.
  Mr. Chairman, I congratulate the gentleman from New Jersey and his 
colleagues from New Jersey who have led this fight to provide 
additional funds. This is a brand new program. It was authorized just 
last year, called the Beach Act. It is very popular legislation, it is 
important legislation, and it is clear that the subcommittee considered 
it a priority. It was authorized at a $2 million level. We added $5 
million to raise funding to $7 million, and this amendment would add 
another $3 million, bringing a brand new program a fivefold increase in 
its first year. That is a pretty good test of the popularity and the 
importance of the program.
  The funds, however, will have to come out of the Environmental 
Protection Agency's State Travel Assistance Grants. Those are very 
competitive funds. There is strong support and demand on those funds by 
Members for projects within their districts. So this will put somewhat 
of a hardship not only on EPA, but also on some of the Members' 
projects. But this is, we think, an acceptable amendment and we are 
prepared to support it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
to just thank the chairman of the subcommittee for his support and the 
statement that he made. I understand the limitations under which the 
subcommittee is living and the problem with the offset, but I do 
appreciate the fact that he, first of all, was willing to increase the 
amount from what the President recommended and now also go along with 
this amendment.
  So with that, I thank the chairman and the ranking member, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, just a note of clarification; I misspoke. 
The funding comes out of the Environmental Programs and Management 
Fund, which is EPA's fund and goes into the State Travel Assistance 
Grant. The gentleman understood clearly that I was in sport of his 
amendment. I am in support of it. We accept it.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I would like to express my 
strong support for the Pallone-Saxton-Smith Amendment, which seeks an 
additional $3 million to the EPA budget for enhancing beach water 
monitoring programs. These programs are authorized under the BEACH Act 
(Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act of 2000), 
signed last year as Public Law 106-284.
  Beach water monitoring programs are critical to the health of the 
millions of people who swim in our oceans. Since 1988, more than 36,000 
beaches have been closed due to contaminated water. During 1999 alone, 
more than 6,000 beaches were closed because beach waters were found 
contaminated with pathogens, or disease-causing bacteria and viruses.
  Pathogens are found in human and animal waste from polluted runoff, 
storm drains, sewer overflows and malfunctioning septic systems. When 
swimmers are unknowingly exposed to these pathogens, they can become 
sick from a whole host of diseases--gastroenteritis, dysentery, and 
hepatitis among others. Children, who frequent our beaches, are among 
the highest at risk because their immune systems are not as fully 
developed.
  If we do not take action to keep our shores safe and clean, the dream 
of a family vacation can become a nightmare of disease and illness. 
Many of these pathogens are invisible and undetectable to the naked 
eye. Without testing, there is no way of knowing if beach waters are 
too contaminated for swimming, surfing, and other recreational 
activities.
  Yet, until last year, no national standards were in place to monitor 
beaches for pathogen contamination to ensure the water is safe. As a 
result, Congress unanimously passed the BEACH Act (P.L. 106-284) to 
establish consistent water quality standards for our beaches. The bill 
also provides grants to help states develop and implement water quality 
testing and notification programs about unsafe conditions at our 
beaches.
  The fact of the matter is that our beaches are national assets that 
deserve national protection. Just like our national parks, our beaches 
are not enjoyed solely by those who live near them. In fact, just the 
opposite is true: our beaches are visited by tens of millions of people 
from all over the country. Foreign tourists come from all parts of the 
globe to visit our coasts and beaches, including the Jersey Shore.
  Our nation's beaches contribute heavily to our national economy--four 
times as many

[[Page 15003]]

people visit our nation's beaches each year than visit all of our 
National Parks combined. And yet Congress provides copious funding for 
national parks--as it should. It is estimated that 75% of Americans 
will spend some portion of their vacation at the beach this year. 
Beaches are the most popular destination for foreign visitors to our 
country as well. The amount of money spent by beach-going tourists 
creates an extensive economic benefit--a portion of which goes back to 
the Federal government in the form of income and payroll taxes.
  Clean and safe beaches are not just good public health policy, clean 
beaches are also good for the economy. In my State of New Jersey, in 
1999, tourism brought $27.7 billion to the state--out of the 167 
million trips made to New Jersey in 1999, 101 million were to the Shore 
area.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge all members of Congress to support the Pallone-
Saxton-Smith Amendment which adds an additional $3 million to the EPA 
budget for beach water monitoring programs, for a total of $10 million 
to states and localities to monitor pathogen contamination. Because, a 
trip to the beach should not result in a trip to the hospital.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. 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, and for construction, alteration, 
     repair, rehabilitation, and renovation of facilities, not to 
     exceed $75,000 per project, $34,019,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2003.


                        Buildings and Facilities

       For construction, repair, improvement, extension, 
     alteration, and purchase of fixed equipment or facilities of, 
     or for use by, the Environmental Protection Agency, 
     $25,318,000, to remain available until expended.


                     Hazardous Substance Superfund

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For necessary expenses to carry out the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (CERCLA), as amended, including sections 111(c)(3), 
     (c)(5), (c)(6), and (e)(4) (42 U.S.C. 9611), and for 
     construction, alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and 
     renovation of facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per project; 
     $1,270,000,000 (of which $100,000,000 shall not become 
     available until September 1, 2002) to remain available until 
     expended, consisting of $635,000,000, as authorized by 
     section 517(a) of the Superfund Amendments and 
     Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), as amended by Public Law 
     101-508, and $635,000,000 as a payment from general revenues 
     to the Hazardous Substance Superfund for purposes as 
     authorized by section 517(b) of SARA, as amended: Provided, 
     That funds appropriated under this heading may be allocated 
     to other Federal agencies in accordance with section 111(a) 
     of CERCLA: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated 
     under this heading, $11,867,000 shall be transferred to the 
     ``Office of Inspector General'' appropriation to remain 
     available until September 30, 2003, and $36,891,000 shall be 
     transferred to the ``Science and technology'' appropriation 
     to remain available until September 30, 2003.


                 Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Barcia

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

       Amendment No. 24 offered by Mr. Barcia:
       Page 62, line 21, after the first dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $140,000,000)''.
       Page 64, line 5, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $140,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Friday, July 27, 
2001, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia) and a Member opposed 
each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia).
  Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The amendment that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) and I are 
offering today is a simple one. It would provide funding for an 
authorized grant program that has the potential to benefit communities 
in every district across this country. These communities are currently 
struggling with the pervasive and devastating problem of sewer 
overflows from both combined and sanitary sewer systems. Sewer overflow 
control programs are often the largest public works projects that 
communities will face.
  The amendment itself is a mere down payment on the funding that this 
body authorized in the Wet Weather Water Quality Act for fiscal year 
2002, just last December. However, I am hopeful that in conference, 
more money will be found to fully fund the act at the level of $750 
million or, alternatively, at least at the President's budget request 
of $450 million.
  This amendment, which has bipartisan support, is about protecting the 
health of our citizens from untreated sewage, helping communities 
provide safe and clean drinking water to tens of millions of Americans, 
and protecting the environment. The families, residents and businesses 
who are subjected to sewer overflows nationwide deserve nothing less.
  Fundamentally, this amendment is about our collective commitment to 
ensuring the availability of safe, clean, potable water to communities 
throughout the country.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank all of the Members who share that 
commitment, like the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette), my colleague 
and good friend who has worked tirelessly on this issue. I appreciate 
his continued leadership. I would also like to especially thank the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) and the gentleman from Minnesota 
(Mr. Oberstar) and all of the Members who have expressed support for 
fully funding the grant program. I also want to especially recognize 
and thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), the chairman of the 
subcommittee, and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan), the 
ranking member, in continuing to work with us to find opportunities 
like this to fund the CSO, SSO grant program.
  Mr. Chairman, every community, from Seattle, Washington, to Wheeling, 
West Virginia, to Syracuse, New York, to Indianapolis, Indiana, stands 
to benefit from this program. I have heard from many communities, and 
this is just a small representation of the communities who have written 
to me expressing their strong desire to have this program fully funded.
  President Bush also acknowledged the real problem facing communities 
in his budget stating, ``To address Federal mandates to control the 
biggest remaining municipal waste water problem, funds should be used 
for the newly authorized sewer overflow control grants.''

                              {time}  2000

  I spoke with a constituent just last week, Craig Tetreau from 
Marlette, Michigan. They have a $3 million problem. Around here, $3 
million may not sound like a lot of money. However, 763 families live 
in the city of Marlette, and they have an annual budget of $2 million 
for all city services. If they do not make the upgrades, the State has 
threatened to construct the necessary upgrade at a cost of $11,000 per 
household.
  Similarly the village of Fairgrove, with 233 families, has $1.5 
million in upgrading costs.
  In Saginaw, Michigan, sewer rates jumped from $10.40 a month in 1989 
to over $39 a month in 1999. Another 50 percent rate increase is 
anticipated. Recently, sewer rates were 2.64 percent of the median 
household income alone. This is an enormous burden for which Saginaw, 
like so many other communities across the country, needs help in the 
form of Federal grant funding assistance that would be provided by this 
amendment.
  I urge every Member to support this critically important amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will clarify that the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Barcia) was recognized for 10 minutes for this debate, and a 
Member in opposition will have 10 minutes for this debate.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 10 
minutes.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

[[Page 15004]]

  Mr. Chairman, I have the greatest respect for the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Barcia). We have worked very, very closely with him on a 
number of issues within this bill. I know he is deeply concerned about 
water quality in the Great Lakes and about the quality of drinking 
water in his own community. These are things that he has worked very 
hard on and cares deeply about.
  But what he is asking us to do is to choose which way, almost 
equivalent to asking us which way would we like to die, would we rather 
be hung or burned to death. This is a tough choice.
  The Superfund program is terribly important, and it is very, very 
strongly supported by Members. We all know the combined sewer overflow 
problem this Nation has is in the hundreds of billions of dollars. We 
cannot take from one and give to the other either way. We have funds 
set aside for Superfund. There is not enough money, but we have done 
the best we could.
  There is money set aside for combined sewer overflows through the 
Clean Water grants and special grants, close to $1.5 billion. It is not 
enough. There is more need out there. We all understand that. But we 
cannot take from Superfund $150 million, or $140 million. If we did, it 
would dramatically reduce the pace of Superfund clean-ups across the 
country. Every aspect of the Superfund program, but particularly the 
cleanup or Response program, would be impacted, and none of the 
agency's Superfund goals would be met, so the program would suffer 
dramatically. Funding to State programs would be reduced; communities 
would wait longer for their sites to be addressed.
  I know there are a number of Members who feel very strongly about 
Superfund issues. Superfund sites do a lot of damage to the land, air 
and water. We have to make these projects a priority. We would lose 50 
to 100 ongoing cleanup projects which would be slowed or stopped. The 
EPA would be unable to start toxic waste clean-ups at dozens of 
Superfund sites. Construction and completion would fall by one-third. 
Up to 150 potential sites identified by States would not be evaluated 
for their potential risks to human health and the environment.
  So, Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan).
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time 
to me.
  Mr. Chairman, the Superfund program is funded at $1.2 billion, which 
is barely enough. It is at the President's request, and barely enough 
to cover the responsibilities which Superfund is charged to cover. We 
are talking about toxic waste cleanup; we are talking about 
carcinogenic substances that are real hazards to people.
  I know the gentleman from Michigan had a terrible time in finding 
offsets in this bill. If we try to do it, it is extremely difficult. 
Even though he has gone to this account, I know he strongly supports 
the Superfund program.
  Having said that, the gentleman raises a very important issue here. 
The funding need for water infrastructure is one of the most pressing 
issues addressed in this bill. A needs survey conducted by the American 
Society of Civil Engineers estimates our wastewater needs to be 
approximately $12 billion annually to replace aging facilities and 
comply with existing and future Federal water regulations. The funding 
in this bill does not even begin to touch that need.
  Controlling sewer overflows continues to be a priority mandate 
imposed on communities by the EPA regulatory and enforcement programs, 
and it will continue to be a financing issue that communities around 
the country will have to confront.
  It is terribly difficult for communities to even begin to contemplate 
being able to marshall the resources to solve this problem. So I 
understand the issue that the gentleman is bringing before the Congress 
today. It is an important issue. I compliment him bringing it to our 
attention.
  The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia) has been at the forefront of 
fighting for funding for water projects and for wastewater overflow 
projects, and he is to be commended for that.
  However, I am reluctantly going to oppose his amendment because of 
the offset that he proposes, and hope that in the future we will find 
additional funds to address the very excruciating need that he brings 
to our attention.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time 
to me.
  I want to voice my strong support for his amendment seeking to 
provide relief for local communities that today are shouldering up to 
90 percent of the burden of revamping their wastewater treatment 
facilities.
  The American Waterworks Association unveiled its new study that 
predicts required spending of more than $250 billion over the next 30 
years to take care of this problem. In the last Congress, the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Barcia) led the charge in the Congress with the Wet 
Weather Quality Act, together with the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Pascrell). The language is included in the Labor-HHS bill over in the 
Senate that provided a landmark 2-year grant program to be administered 
by the EPA.
  We are not alone. We had a little hearing in front of the 
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment earlier this year, and 
Administrator Whitman was in front of us. We said they have to provide 
money for the State revolving loan fund and this grant money as well, 
because communities cannot take it across the country.
  The President put in $450 million in his budget for this program. 
While I commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), who certainly 
understands the program and the problems as well as anybody in this 
Congress, the fact is that while the subcommittee has funded the State 
revolving loan fund and is willing to give loans to communities, there 
is no grant program in place that would take care of this problem 
across the Nation.
  I want to just bring up one example, not in my district, but it is in 
Worcester, Massachusetts. To build a single-family home, one has to pay 
a $16,000 tap-in fee. Who in this Congress, Mr. Chairman, could pay 
$16,000 to flush the toilet to build a single-family new house? But 
that is the problem facing not only the folks in Worcester, 
Massachusetts; but it is the problem facing all of America today if we 
do not do something.
  I would say to the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, if we 
go back to the Contract with America in the very first bill the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) introduced, the unfunded mandate 
legislation, this Congress, this Federal Government, has mandated all 
of these initiatives upon the wastewater treatment plants of the small 
municipalities in this country, but has not sent the money.
  It is time to send the money. It is time to pass the Barcia 
amendment. It is too bad that the rules indicate we have to make an 
offset on the basis of the Superfund allocation, but this money needs 
to be sent to the small communities of America.
  I praise the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia) and the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), and I urge an aye vote.
  Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin where the gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) left off. The Clean Water Act provides very 
specific mandates for municipalities.
  I was a mayor, mayor of the third largest city in the State of New 
Jersey. There is no way that the Patersons of this country, smaller, 
larger, can respond to this multibillion dollar need within our 
communities. Our clean water is threatened, is threatened if we do not 
begin to address, and we have, this problem.
  I am positive that the chairman and the ranking member are sensitive 
to

[[Page 15005]]

these needs. But being sensitive to the needs, we need to take it to 
the next level. We need to be in every mayor's office, in every council 
chambers throughout America when these issues are coming up.
  Crumbling systems exist throughout America. We need to respond. The 
cost is great. If we do not do it, the cost will be even greater.
  One segment of the President's proposed budget I was particularly 
pleased with, which was where the President expressed his support for 
the newly authorized sewer overflow control grants. H.R. 828, which 
passed the Congress, authorized $750 million in fiscal years 2002 and 
2003. We are trying to give cities and towns across America the 
resources they need to clean up their sewer systems and comply with the 
Clean Water Act.
  I am hopeful that we can work with the committee to ensure that full 
funding is included in the final bill to address this issue, which is 
important in every district and in every State in this Nation. We must 
follow through on our commitment to local governments to assist in 
their wet-weather infrastructure challenges, and I support this 
critical down payment.
  I recognize the hard work of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia) 
and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to my good 
friend and colleague, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Larsen).
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding time to me.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in support of this amendment. Grant 
funding to help communities control sewer overflows was approved and 
authorized in the last Congress; but in this Congress, in this House, 
in this budget, no funds have been set aside at all. Congress must 
follow through and fund this important program.
  Back home in my district, I can point to the city of Everett, 
Snohomish, Anacordis, three cities with some of the highest sewer rates 
in my district. Everett alone has invested in excess of $12 million 
since 1990 towards reducing and controlling CSOs; and despite the 
substantial financial commitment, nearly $20 million more is required 
for the city to reach full compliance with all local, State, and 
Federal mandates.
  Federal funding will be crucial to the city's efforts to reach full 
compliance, so it is my hope that this Congress can step up to help our 
communities by providing this funding.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of their communities, to vote 
in favor of this amendment. I commend the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Barcia) for his work on this amendment.
  Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief in closing. I have discussed this 
with my ranking member, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. 
Mollohan). We both appreciate not only the sentiment but the leadership 
that has been provided on this issue. It is a real big issue for the 
country.
  But to force us to choose between Superfund and CSOs is just too 
tough a choice to make. We would urge the gentleman, with all due 
respect, to withdraw the amendment; and he should continue to work with 
the authorizing committee and with the Committee on Appropriations to 
see if we can do a better job of meeting this commitment. It is a 
question of allocation and choices, and we just cannot justify the 
choice he is asking us to make. I would ask again that he would 
withdraw the amendment.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. I rise today in support of the Barcia/Latourette 
amendment to HR 2620. This amendment would increase the bills funding 
for EPA Water Improvement Grants--with the intention that these funds 
would be used for grants for combined sewer overflows.
  Mr. Chairman, the condition of our Nation's wastewater collection and 
treatment facilities is alarming. In its 1999 clear water needs survey, 
the EPA estimated that nearly $200 billion will be needed over the next 
20 years to address wastewater infrastructure problems in our 
communities.
  In Lynchburg, Virginia, the cost of improving 174 miles of combined 
sewers that serve 11.4 square miles exceeds $275 million in 2000 
dollars. This equates to $16,875 per ratepayer in a city whose average 
income is $27,500. These CSO improvements are by far the largest 
capital projects the city has ever undertaken.
  Given this great need, I believe the Federal Government has a 
responsibility to assist communities that are trying to fix their 
problems and comply with Federal water quality mandates.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment which will 
increase funding for the Clean Water Revolving Loan Program and help 
cities in need of meeting Federal mandates.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I object to the vote on the ground that 
a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is 
not present.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia) 
will be postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:


              Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund

       For necessary expenses to carry out leaking underground 
     storage tank cleanup activities authorized by section 205 of 
     the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, and 
     for construction, alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and 
     renovation of facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per project, 
     $72,000,000, to remain available until expended.


                           Oil Spill Response

       For expenses necessary to carry out the Environmental 
     Protection Agency's responsibilities under the Oil Pollution 
     Act of 1990, $15,000,000, to be derived from the Oil Spill 
     Liability trust fund, to remain available until expended.


                   State and Tribal Assistance Grants

       For environmental programs and infrastructure assistance, 
     including capitalization grants for State revolving funds and 
     performance partnership grants, $3,433,899,000, to remain 
     available until expended, of which $1,200,000,000 shall be 
     for making capitalization grants for the Clean Water State 
     Revolving Funds under title VI of the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act, as amended (the ``Act''); $850,000,000 shall be 
     for capitalization grants for the Drinking Water State 
     Revolving Funds under section 1452 of the Safe Drinking Water 
     Act, as amended, except that, notwithstanding section 1452(n) 
     of the Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended, none of the funds 
     made available under this heading in this Act, or in previous 
     appropriations Acts, shall be reserved by the Administrator 
     for health effects studies on drinking water contaminants; 
     $75,000,000 shall be for architectural, engineering, 
     planning, design, construction and related activities in 
     connection with the construction of high priority water and 
     wastewater facilities in the area of the United States-Mexico 
     Border, after consultation with the appropriate border 
     commission; $30,000,000 shall be for grants to the State of 
     Alaska to address drinking water and wastewater 
     infrastructure needs of rural and Alaska Native Villages; 
     $200,000,000 shall be for making grants for the construction 
     of wastewater and water treatment facilities and groundwater 
     protection infrastructure in accordance with the terms and 
     conditions specified for such grants in the report 
     accompanying this Act; and $1,078,899,000 shall be for 
     grants, including associated program support costs, to 
     States, federally recognized tribes, interstate agencies, 
     tribal consortia, and air pollution control agencies for 
     multi-media or single media pollution prevention, control and 
     abatement and related activities, including activities 
     pursuant to the provisions set forth under this heading in 
     Public Law 104-134, and for making grants under section 103 
     of the Clean Air Act for particulate matter monitoring and 
     data collection activities of which and subject to terms and 
     conditions specified by the Administrator, $25,000,000 shall 
     be for making grants for enforcement and related activities 
     (in addition to other grants funded under this heading), and 
     $25,000,000 shall be for Environmental Information Exchange 
     Network grants, including associated program support costs: 
     Provided, That for fiscal year 2002 and hereafter,

[[Page 15006]]

     State authority under section 302(a) of Public Law 104-182 
     shall remain in effect: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding section 603(d)(7) of the Act, the limitation 
     on the amounts in a State water pollution control revolving 
     fund that may be used by a State to administer the fund shall 
     not apply to amounts included as principal in loans made by 
     such fund in fiscal year 2002 and prior years where such 
     amounts represent costs of administering the fund to the 
     extent that such amounts are or were deemed reasonable by the 
     Administrator, accounted for separately from other assets in 
     the fund, and used for eligible purposes of the fund, 
     including administration: Provided further, That for fiscal 
     year 2002, and notwithstanding section 518(f) of the Act, the 
     Administrator is authorized to use the amounts appropriated 
     for any fiscal year under section 319 of that Act to make 
     grants to Indian tribes pursuant to section 319(h) and 518(e) 
     of that Act: Provided further, That for fiscal year 2002, 
     notwithstanding the limitation on amounts in section 518(c) 
     of the Act, up to a total of 1\1/2\ percent of the funds 
     appropriated for State Revolving Funds under Title VI of the 
     Act may be reserved by the Administrator for grants under 
     section 518(c) of such Act: Provided further, That no funds 
     provided by this legislation to address the water, wastewater 
     and other critical infrastructure needs of the colonias in 
     the United States along the United States-Mexico border shall 
     be made available to a county or municipal government unless 
     that government has established an enforceable local 
     ordinance, or other zoning rule, which prevents in that 
     jurisdiction the development or construction of any 
     additional colonia areas, or the development within an 
     existing colonia the construction of any new home, business, 
     or other structure which lacks water, wastewater, or other 
     necessary infrastructure.