[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 23248-23255]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS, FISCAL YEAR 2004

  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, under the previous order of the 
House, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 69) making continuing 
appropriations for the fiscal year 2004, and for other purposes, and 
ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
  The text of House Joint Resolution 69 is as follows:

                              H.J. Res. 69

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are hereby appropriated, out of any money in 
     the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, and out of 
     applicable corporate or other revenues, receipts, and funds, 
     for the several departments, agencies, corporations, and 
     other organizational units of Government for fiscal year 
     2004, and for other purposes, namely:
       Sec. 101. Such amounts as may be necessary under the 
     authority and conditions provided in the applicable 
     appropriations Act for fiscal year 2003 for continuing 
     projects or activities including the costs of direct loans 
     and loan guarantees (not otherwise specifically provided for 
     in this joint resolution) which were conducted in fiscal year 
     2003, at a rate for operations not exceeding the current 
     rate, and for which appropriations, funds, or other authority 
     was made available in the following appropriations Acts:
       (1) The Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 
     Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 
     2003.
       (2) The Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the 
     Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2003, 
     notwithstanding section 15 of the State Department Basic 
     Authorities Act of 1956, section 313 of the Foreign Relations 
     Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law 
     103-236), and section 504(a)(1) of the National Security Act 
     of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 414(a)(1)).
       (3) The District of Columbia Appropriations Act, 2003.
       (4) The Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 
     2003, notwithstanding section 504(a)(1) of the National 
     Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 414(a)(1)).
       (5) The Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related 
     Programs Appropriations Act, 2003, notwithstanding section 10 
     of Public Law 91-672 and section 15 of the State Department 
     Basic Authorities Act of 1956.
       (6) The Department of the Interior and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2003.
       (7) The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, 
     and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2003.
       (8) The Military Construction Appropriations Act, 2003.
       (9) The Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2003.
       (10) The Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
     Act, 2003.
       (11) The Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and 
     Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations 
     Act, 2003.
       Sec. 102. Appropriations made by section 101 shall be 
     available to the extent and in the manner which would be 
     provided by the pertinent appropriations Act.
       Sec. 103. The appropriations Acts listed in section 101 
     shall be deemed to include supplemental appropriation laws 
     enacted during fiscal year 2003.
       Sec. 104. No appropriation or funds made available or 
     authority granted pursuant to section 101 shall be used to 
     initiate or resume any project or activity for which 
     appropriations, funds, or other authority were not available 
     during fiscal year 2003.
       Sec. 105. Appropriations made and authority granted 
     pursuant to this joint resolution shall cover all obligations 
     or expenditures incurred for any program, project, or 
     activity during the period for which funds or authority for 
     such project or activity are available under this joint 
     resolution.
       Sec. 106. (a) The matter under the heading ``Department of 
     Education--Education for the Disadvantaged'' in division G of 
     Public Law 108-7 is amended--

[[Page 23249]]

       (1) by striking ``$4,651,199,000'' and inserting 
     ``$6,895,199,000''; and
       (2) by striking ``$9,027,301,000'' and inserting 
     ``$6,783,301,000''.
       (b) The amendments made by subsection (a) shall take effect 
     on the date of the enactment of this Act.
       Sec. 107. Unless otherwise provided for in this joint 
     resolution or in the applicable appropriations Act, 
     appropriations and funds made available and authority granted 
     pursuant to this joint resolution shall be available until 
     (a) enactment into law of an appropriation for any project or 
     activity provided for in this joint resolution, or (b) the 
     enactment into law of the applicable appropriations Act by 
     both Houses without any provision for such project or 
     activity, or (c) October 31, 2003, whichever first occurs.
       Sec. 108. Expenditures made pursuant to this joint 
     resolution shall be charged to the applicable appropriation, 
     fund, or authorization whenever a bill in which such 
     applicable appropriation, fund, or authorization is contained 
     is enacted into law.
       Sec. 109. Appropriations and funds made available by or 
     authority granted pursuant to this joint resolution may be 
     used without regard to the time limitations for submission 
     and approval of apportionments set forth in section 1513 of 
     title 31, United States Code, but nothing herein shall be 
     construed to waive any other provision of law governing the 
     apportionment of funds.
       Sec. 110. Notwithstanding any other provision of this joint 
     resolution, except section 107, for those programs that had 
     high initial rates of operation or complete distribution of 
     fiscal year 2003 appropriations at the beginning of that 
     fiscal year because of distributions of funding to States, 
     foreign countries, grantees or others, similar distributions 
     of funds for fiscal year 2004 shall not be made and no grants 
     shall be awarded for such programs funded by this resolution 
     that would impinge on final funding prerogatives.
       Sec. 111. This joint resolution shall be implemented so 
     that only the most limited funding action of that permitted 
     in the joint resolution shall be taken in order to provide 
     for continuation of projects and activities.
       Sec. 112. For entitlements and other mandatory payments 
     whose budget authority was provided in appropriations Acts 
     for fiscal year 2003, and for activities under the Food Stamp 
     Act of 1977, activities shall be continued at the rate to 
     maintain program levels under current law, under the 
     authority and conditions provided in the applicable 
     appropriations Act for fiscal year 2003, to be continued 
     through the date specified in section 107(c): Provided, That 
     notwithstanding section 107, funds shall be available and 
     obligations for mandatory payments due on or about November 1 
     and December 1, 2003, may continue to be made.
       Sec. 113. Section 1316(c) of Public Law 108-11 shall be 
     applied by substituting the date specified in section 107(c) 
     of this joint resolution for ``September 30, 2003'' each 
     place it appears.
       Sec. 114. Activities authorized by section 403(f) of Public 
     Law 103-356, as amended by section 634 of Public Law 107-67, 
     and activities authorized under the heading ``Treasury 
     Franchise Fund'' in the Treasury Department Appropriations 
     Act, 1997 (Public Law 104-208), as amended by section 120 of 
     the Treasury Department Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 
     106-554), may continue through the date specified in section 
     107(c) of this joint resolution.
       Sec. 115. Notwithstanding section 235(a)(2) of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2195(a)(2)), the authority 
     of subsections (a) through (c) of section 234 of such Act, 
     shall remain in effect through the date specified in section 
     107(c) of this joint resolution.
       Sec. 116. Section 503(f) of the Small Business Investment 
     Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 697(f)) shall be applied by 
     substituting the date specified in section 107(c) of this 
     joint resolution for ``October 1, 2003''.
       Sec. 117. Section 303(g)(2) of the Small Business 
     Investment Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 683(g)(2)) is amended by 
     striking ``1.38 percent'' in the last sentence and inserting 
     ``1.46 percent''.
       Sec. 118. Collection and use of maintenance fees as 
     authorized by section 4(i) and 4(k) of the Federal 
     Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. Sec. 
     136a-1(i) and (k)) may continue through the date specified in 
     section 107(c) of this joint resolution. Prohibitions against 
     collecting ``other fees'' as described in section 4(i)(6) of 
     the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 
     U.S.C. 136a-1(i)(6)) shall continue in effect through the 
     date specified in section 107(c) of this joint resolution.
       Sec. 119. The full amount provided under this joint 
     resolution for necessary expenses to carry out the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), section 118(f) of the 
     Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, and 
     section 3019 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, shall be 
     derived from the general fund.
       Sec. 120. National Aeronautics and Space Administration is 
     authorized to implement full cost accounting as of October 1, 
     2003, in the account structure that is consistent with the 
     President's request for fiscal year 2004.
       Sec. 121. Notwithstanding any other provision of this joint 
     resolution, except section 107(c), the limitation on new loan 
     guarantee commitments of the Federal Housing Administration, 
     General and Special Risk Insurance Fund, shall be 
     $3,800,000,000 for the period of applicability of this joint 
     resolution to continue projects and activities under that 
     account: Provided, That the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development shall submit daily reports to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate 
     on the total amount of new loan guarantee commitments issued 
     during the period of applicability of this joint resolution.
       Sec. 122. For the period covered by this joint resolution, 
     there shall be available, at the current rate of operations 
     for fiscal year 2003, such funds as may be necessary for 
     grants and necessary expenses as provided for, in accordance 
     with, and subject to the requirements set forth in the 
     Compacts of Free Association, as amended, and their related 
     agreements, (sections 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, and 217) as 
     between the Government of the United States of America and 
     the Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands 
     (signed April 30, 2003), and (sections 211, 212, 213, 214, 
     and 216) as between the Government of the United States of 
     America and the Federated States of Micronesia (signed May 
     14, 2003); to remain available until expended: Provided, That 
     if H.J. Res. 63 of the 108th Congress, or similar legislation 
     to approve the Compacts of Free Association, is enacted, any 
     funding made available in this appropriation shall be 
     considered to have been made available and expended for the 
     purposes of funding for fiscal year 2004 as provided for in 
     such enacted legislation.
       Sec. 123. From amounts available to the Bureau of Indian 
     Affairs under this joint resolution, $123,500 shall be 
     available to satisfy the requirements specified in sections 
     10(f), 11(b)(2), and 11(c) of Public Law 106-263.
       Sec. 124. Notwithstanding any other provision of this joint 
     resolution, except section 107(c), the District of Columbia 
     may expend local funds for programs and activities under the 
     heading ``District of Columbia Funds-Operating Expenses'' at 
     the rate set forth for such programs and activities under 
     title II of H.R. 2765, 108th Congress, as passed by the House 
     of Representatives.
       Sec. 125. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of 
     this joint resolution, except section 107, amounts provided 
     in this joint resolution and in prior Appropriations Acts 
     from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund shall be available for 
     fiscal year 2004, at a rate for operations not exceeding the 
     current rate and for which authority was made available under 
     the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2003, for expenditures to meet 
     obligations, heretofore and hereafter incurred, as paid from 
     the Airport and Airway Trust Fund in fiscal year 2003.
       Sec. 126. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of 
     this joint resolution, except section 107, such amounts as 
     may be necessary for administrative expenses of the Federal 
     Highway Administration, for purposes described in 23 U.S.C. 
     104(a)(1)(A), shall continue to be transferred and credited 
     to the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit 
     Account), to be available to the Secretary of Transportation, 
     at a rate for operations not exceeding the current rate and 
     for which authority was made available under the Department 
     of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 
     2003: Provided, That funds authorized under this section 
     shall be available for obligation in the same manner as if 
     the funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, 
     United States Code, and shall be subject to any limitation on 
     obligations for Federal-aid highways and highway safety 
     construction programs.
       Sec. 127. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of 
     this joint resolution, except section 107, such amounts as 
     may be necessary for administrative expenses of the Bureau of 
     Transportation Statistics, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 111, 
     shall continue to be transferred and credited to the Highway 
     Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account), to be 
     available to the Secretary of Transportation, at a rate for 
     operations not exceeding the current rate and for which 
     authority was made available under the Department of 
     Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2003: 
     Provided, That funds authorized under this section shall be 
     available for obligation in the same manner as if the funds 
     were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States 
     Code, and shall be subject to any limitation on obligations 
     for Federal-aid highways and highway safety construction 
     programs.
       Sec. 128. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of 
     this joint resolution, except section 107, such amounts as 
     may be necessary for administrative expenses of the Federal 
     Transit Administration, in accordance with the Federal 
     Transit Administration's programs authorized by chapter 53 of 
     title 49, United States Code, shall continue to be 
     transferred and credited to the Mass Transit Account of the 
     Highway Trust Fund, to be available to the Secretary of 
     Transportation, at a rate for operations not exceeding the 
     current rate and for which authority was made available under 
     the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2003: Provided, That funds authorized 
     under this section shall be available

[[Page 23250]]

     for obligation in the same manner provided under section 
     5338(g) of title 49, United States Code.
       Sec. 129. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of 
     this joint resolution, except section 107, such amounts as 
     may be necessary for administrative expenses of the National 
     Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in accordance with 23 
     U.S.C. 402, 403, 405, 410 and chapter 303 of title 49, United 
     States Code, shall continue to be transferred and credited to 
     the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account), 
     to be available to the Secretary of Transportation, at a rate 
     for operations not exceeding the current rate and for which 
     authority was made available under the Department of 
     Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2003: 
     Provided, That funds authorized under this section shall be 
     available for obligation in the same manner as if the funds 
     were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States 
     Code.
       Sec. 130. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of 
     this joint resolution, except section 107, such amounts as 
     may be necessary for administrative expenses of the Federal 
     Motor Carrier Safety Administration, for purposes described 
     in 23 U.S.C. 104(a)(1)(B), shall continue to be transferred 
     and credited to the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass 
     Transit Account), to be available to the Secretary of 
     Transportation, at a rate for operations not exceeding the 
     current rate and for which authority was made available under 
     the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2003: Provided, That funds authorized 
     under this section shall be available for obligation in the 
     same manner as if the funds were apportioned under chapter 1 
     of title 23, United States Code.
       Sec. 131. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     amounts shall continue to be appropriated or credited to the 
     Airport and Airway Trust Fund and the Highway Trust Fund 
     after the date of any expenditure pursuant to this Act.
       Sec. 132. Notwithstanding rule 3 of the Budget Scorekeeping 
     Guidelines set forth in the joint explanatory statement of 
     the committee of conference accompanying Conference Report 
     105-217, the provisions of sections 125 through 130, and 
     section 134, of this joint resolution that would change 
     direct spending or receipts under section 252 of the Balanced 
     Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 were they 
     included in an Act other than an appropriations Act shall be 
     treated as direct spending or receipts legislation, as 
     appropriate, under section 252 of the Balanced Budget and 
     Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, and by the Chairmen of 
     the House and Senate Budget Committees, as appropriate, under 
     the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
       Sec. 133. Notwithstanding any other provision of this joint 
     resolution, during fiscal year 2004, direct loans under 
     section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act may be made 
     available for the Czech Republic, gross obligations for the 
     principal amounts of which shall not exceed $550,000,000: 
     Provided, That such loans shall be repaid in not more than 
     twelve years, including a grace period of up to five years on 
     repayment of principal: Provided further, That no funds are 
     available for the subsidy costs for these loans: Provided 
     further, That the Government of the Czech Republic shall pay 
     the full cost, as defined in section 502 of the Federal 
     Credit Reform Act of 1990, associated with these loans, 
     including the cost of any defaults: Provided further, That 
     any fees associated with these loans shall be paid by the 
     Government of the Czech Republic prior to any disbursement of 
     any loan proceeds: Provided further, That no funds made 
     available to the Czech Republic under this joint resolution 
     or any other Act may be used for payment of any fees 
     associated with these loans.
       Sec. 134. The following provisions of law shall continue in 
     effect through the date specified in section 107(c) of this 
     joint resolution:
       (1) Sections 9(b)(7), 14(a), 17(a)(2)(B)(i), and 18(f)(2) 
     of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1758(b)(7), 1762a(a), 1766(a)(2)(B)(i), and 
     1769(f)(2)).
       (2) Section 15 of the Commodity Distribution Reform Act and 
     WIC Amendments of 1987 (7 U.S.C. 612c note; Public Law 100-
     237).
       Sec. 135. Section 8144(b) of the Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Act, 2003, Public Law 107-248, is amended by 
     striking ``on September 30, 2003'' and inserting ``October 
     31, 2003''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
Wednesday, September 24, 2003, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) 
and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) each will control 30 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young).
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the legislation before the House, H.J. Res. 69, is a 
continuing resolution for fiscal year 2004, and it would extend until 
the end of October. Normally we do a 3- or 4- or 5-day CR, but the 
wiser approach is to do this for the entire month of October because 
there is considerable work still to do that has not yet been completed. 
This legislation is needed to continue the operation of the Federal 
Government for the first month of the new fiscal year.
  I think everyone is aware that the Committee on Appropriations 
continues to work on the fiscal year 2004 bills. The House, as a matter 
of fact, has passed all of our appropriations bills, we passed three 
conference reports, and we have two more bills in conference with the 
other body as we speak today. Yesterday, we passed the conference 
reports for three very important appropriations bills: the Defense 
Appropriations bill, the Homeland Security Appropriations bill, and the 
Legislative Branch Appropriations bill that also included supplemental 
appropriations for natural disasters and forest fires.
  We are continuing to move forward on conferences with the other body. 
We hope to have the conference reports for Energy and Water and 
Military Construction ready for House consideration very soon.
  As I think we all know, in addition to our regular appropriations 
bills, we are also in the process of considering an $87 billion budget 
amendment for the war against terror. Yesterday, we began oversight 
hearings on this request. There is still a considerable amount of work 
for our committee to do before we are able to adjourn.
  That is the reason for this continuing resolution. Let me now briefly 
describe the terms and conditions of the continuing resolution. It will 
continue all ongoing activities at current rates, including 
supplemental funding, under the same terms and conditions as fiscal 
year 2003. As in past CRs, it does not allow new starts, and it 
restricts obligations on high initial spend-out programs so the 
annualized funding levels in this bill will not impinge on our final 
budget deliberations.
  It includes provisions that allow for the continuation of programs 
and fee collections that would otherwise expire, for example, 
entitlement payments under the Food Stamp program, certain child 
nutrition programs, certain SBA loan programs, and payments to military 
personnel for imminent danger special pay and family separation 
allowances. The CR also allows the District of Columbia to spend local 
funds through the period of the CR at budget levels as passed by the 
House. The CR ensures that funding is available during the period of 
the CR to conduct administrative oversight and to pay certain 
Department of Transportation personnel managing surface and aviation 
programs in the absence of reauthorizations for such programs.
  A provision was also requested by the Administration that is included 
in the CR that provides legislative authorization to implement a new, 
no-subsidy $550 million Foreign Military Financing 12-year loan to the 
Czech Republic for the purchase of 14 of our used F-16 aircraft, 
weapons, training, and related logistics support from the United 
States.
  Mr. Speaker, I do not think this CR is controversial, and I urge the 
House to move it to the Senate so the government may continue to 
operate efficiently and so that we can continue our work to finish the 
balance of the appropriations bills and the substantial request that we 
have for the $87 billion war against terrorism.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 14 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, this continuing resolution will, I assume, be known as 
the Halloween appropriation bill for the year 2003, because what it 
does is to extend government activities until October 31 of this coming 
year. I am looking around the floor, looking for the chickens, and I do 
not see any. And I am a little confused by that, because this is the 
day that the chickens come home to roost. I guess they are invisible, 
much like much of the truth is in the budget resolution that passed 
earlier this year. But I think we need to understand how we got to this 
situation today.
  As of today, even though we are supposed to have all 13 appropriation 
bills

[[Page 23251]]

passed by October 1, plus any supplementals for that fiscal year, 
despite that fact, this House has passed only three of the 13 
conference reports that it would have to pass on appropriation bills in 
order to do its work. Now, that is not the fault of the Committee on 
Appropriations; it certainly is not the fault of the gentleman from 
Florida. The problem is that we have a budget process which has been 
stood on its head.
  The idea behind the original budget resolution was that it was 
supposed to force all of the players in the Congress to face reality. 
Instead, it has been used increasingly each year by the House 
Republican leadership to assist the House in avoiding reality and 
ignoring reality.
  What happens is this: the budget resolution for the year is produced 
by a committee that has absolutely no responsibility to implement it. 
The Committee on the Budget produces unreal numbers; they produce 
numbers that pretend that this Congress will spend less money than will 
actually wind up being spent on discretionary appropriations. It 
pretends in the budget resolution, as it did in April, that budget 
resolution pretended that we were going to meet the goals that many 
moderate Republicans had in this House for special education and for 
the No Child Left Behind Act, for instance. And then as soon as the 
budget resolution was passed, then the Committee on Appropriations is 
given the responsibility to deliver reality. And because the majority 
did not provide sufficient room in the budget resolution for this House 
to meet the promises that were laid out in the Republican budget 
resolution, then the Committee on Appropriations is stuck with the job 
of being the bad guy messenger.

                              {time}  1030

  So then poor Ralph Regula, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Labor, 
Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, has to come 
to the floor and say, ``Sorry, boys and girls, we do not have enough 
room in the resolution to do what we promised we would do just 3 weeks 
ago.'' So we cannot fund special education the way we were going to 
fund it, and we cannot keep our promises on title I or the No Child 
Left Behind Act, and the list goes on and on and on.
  So because that budget resolution starts out with an unrealistic set 
of numbers, then the next 6 months the House and the other body try to 
get a double hernia trying to lift enough weight in order to get and 
pack all of these obligations into a tiny overall budget ceiling bag, 
and they cannot do it because they cannot repeal the basic laws of 
mathematics.
  So now we are here with only three of the 13 appropriation bills 
passed. Last year when this happened, our friends on the majority side 
of the aisle blamed the other body because it was under Democratic 
control. Well, this year that is not the case. This year the Republican 
Party has all the marbles. They run the House, they run the Senate, 
they run the White House, and on good days, they even run the Supreme 
Court. And now what happened is that they do not have anybody to blame 
anymore. And the fact is, right now the majority Republican Party is 
having a fight with itself and it cannot win the debate. So it is 
stuck.
  And so the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), who has done his job, 
I mean the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) has been a loyal soldier, 
followed his marching orders, even though the orders produced turkey 
results. He is a good, loyal soldier, and he has followed them; and so 
now he has to come to the floor and say, ``Folks, guess what, because 
the budget resolution was not real, we have not been able to move these 
bills forward, and so we are stuck way behind on the calendar.'' And 
that is not the whole story.
  In addition, yesterday we had a hearing on the supplemental for Iraq. 
Now, we were told in March of this year by the wizard who ran OMB for 
the past 2 years, Mitch Daniels, we were told by the resident wizard 
over there that Iraq was only going to cost the $60 billion that the 
White House had already asked for in their first appropriation and 
there would not be any more need for money for Iraq for this year. They 
were only off by $87 billion. So now we have got to come in and pass a 
supplemental, even though the witnesses yesterday did not have a clue, 
or at least they would not tell us if they did, about what it was going 
to cost us over the next 5 years to carry out, not our program, but 
their program in Iraq.
  So, very frankly, this Congress has no budget process at this point. 
The truth is revealed to us on the installment plan by the 
administration in terms of the cost of the effort for Iraq, and the 
truth is obscured as far as the domestic budget is concerned in order 
to maintain the fiction that, even though we have conducted a 
unilateral war, we can afford to continue to provide $88,000 tax cuts 
to millionaires in this country, and that is the biggest fiction of 
all.
  So this bill is here trying to put a reality patch on an Alice in 
Wonderland fairy tale which is what the budget resolution has been. And 
so I do not blame the press for not covering it. This is too absurd a 
story to cover, and so we are left here facing inevitability; and we 
have no choice but to pass this resolution today.
  Now, I would like to think that we would see a new sense of reality 
in the coming months, but I do not think so; and I go back to the 
conversation that I had years ago with Dick Bolling who served in this 
House, very distinguished career, and who wrote the Budget Act under 
which the budget resolution comes to the floor every year. Dick Bolling 
told me the night before he finalized his recommendations that he had 
one hard choice to make. He said, ``I do not know whether we should set 
up the Committee on the Budget so that people who are on the Committee 
on the Budget are people who represent the power centers in this 
institution, like the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on 
Ways and Means and the other committees with direct spending authority. 
I do not know whether we ought to require that it be made up of people 
like that or whether we ought to require that it be made up of 
independent players appointed by the caucuses without respect to what 
committees they serve on.'' He decided to do the latter. But when he 
did, he said, ``If the party leaders do not take this process seriously 
and if they do not use it to force reality, then,'' he said, ``I will 
have made a bad mistake. ''
  And in fact, I think what has happened is that the majority party 
leadership has decided to use the budget process, not as an instrument 
to force Members of Congress to make hard choices but, rather, as an 
instrument that facilitates the pretense that we can have it all. And 
so we pretend that we can provide $3 trillion-plus in tax cuts, even 
though we no longer have the surpluses that we had, that we were 
expecting when those tax cuts were passed.
  We pretend we can fight a war in Iraq and charge every single dime to 
our grandchildren, and we pretend that that war will not have a 
consequence in terms of denied opportunities for kids to get a decent 
education and denied opportunities for people without health care to 
get some coverage. We pretend there are no consequences to the free-
lunch budget that this place has passed. Well, there are in the real 
world, outside of this Chamber. And in this Chamber, probably the least 
consequential consequence is that we get stuck with having to pass a 
CR.
  Now, this is not the first time that this has happened, but each year 
the problem gets worse because each year the Committee on 
Appropriations is asked to perform an act that is more and more 
impossible because the budget resolution is less and less responsible 
and real. And sooner or later we will come to the conclusion that the 
only way to return credibility to this House on the budget matter is to 
start with a budget resolution that makes sense and is honest in the 
first place.
  We have not done that in years; and I will readily grant that in some 
years, when our party was in control, we did not have budget 
resolutions that were the finest in the world either. But none of them, 
none of them departed as

[[Page 23252]]

much from reality as the budget resolutions the last 3 years in this 
place; and so that is why we are here today, not because the Committee 
on Appropriations has not done its work, but because the Committee on 
Appropriations is asked to perform an impossible act. It is supposed to 
tell the truth in the context of a budget resolution which is a public 
lie; and that, no one can do.
  So I sympathize with the gentleman from Florida. I will support this 
resolution because it is the only alternative we have, but the reasons 
we are here, indeed, do no great credit to this institution.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) for pointing 
out that basically the Committee on Appropriations in the House has 
done its job. There are other reasons that are beyond our control that 
require us to have this CR. So I appreciate him pointing that out.
  As he speaks to the budget issue, I want to defend the chairman and 
the ranking member and every member of the Committee on the Budget, but 
I would join the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) in not having very 
complimentary comments about the product that eventually came to us as 
a budget resolution. It required considerable creativity on the part of 
the Committee on Appropriations in order to do what we had to do and 
still comply with the budget; and the fact that we were able to 
conclude our 13 bills early on is in no small part thanks to the 
cooperation that the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and I had with 
each other as we proceeded through some of these rocky paths, some of 
the very difficult differences that we had that we were able to finally 
work out.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, the gentleman indicated that the budget resolution 
required a great degree of creativity. I would like to explain to the 
House what one of those creative measures has been.
  Last year, in order to pretend that the budget resolution provided 
adequate funding for education, the committee provided what was known 
as ``advance funding'' for education to the tune of $2.2 billion. That 
meant that, for Enron accounting purposes, that $2.2 billion, which was 
appropriated last year, was not going to count until the next fiscal 
year, 2004; but now, guess what. Now we are at the end of fiscal 2003. 
So nobody is watching what happens to the deficit for 2003 anymore. So 
what happens instead is that now we get a double reverse because this 
proposal, this resolution today contains a gimmick that can only be 
labeled ``Enron accounting 1A'' because what this resolution does now 
is to move that $2.2 billion back to fiscal 2003.
  So you have to play the shell game when they are looking at what 
happened in 2003, slip the money into the fiscal 2004 budget, and then 
when people take their eyes off 2003 and now focus on 2004, then you 
slip the same money into 2003. Great gimmick. It technically works, but 
if the SEC were supervising this, I think they would have the same kind 
of questions about our bookkeeping that we have had about Enron.
  So that is just one of the creative accounting measures that the 
committee has been reduced to following. I see the gentleman smiling. 
He knows what I am talking about.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. 
Hoyer), the distinguished minority whip.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me 
the time, and I agree with everything he said; and I think the chairman 
agrees with most of what he said.
  Usually when we discuss these issues, almost invariably those of us 
on this side of the aisle rise and first say that we do not hold 
responsible our chairman for the policies that are being pursued. It is 
his responsibility, however, to practically try to carry out flawed 
policies. He does so with a great deal of skill, with eminent fairness 
and with grace for which all of us who serve on his committee are very 
thankful.
  But, Mr. Speaker, the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations is 
operating in the context of the most fiscally irresponsible policy that 
any administration and majority has followed in the history of this 
country. I pause for emphasis. The children of America, the 
grandchildren of America are going to be called upon to pay the bill 
for this irresponsible policy. That is what the ranking member meant 
when he said that all of the dollars that are being requested to pursue 
a policy that I supported in Iraq will be paid for by our children and 
grandchildren.

                              {time}  1045

  An irresponsible policy. An unrealistic policy.
  And I would recall for Members that just a few months ago, when we 
adopted that budget resolution, of which the gentleman from Wisconsin 
(Mr. Obey) spoke, we adopted it on a Thursday. No Democrats voted for 
it. Not one. We then, on the Tuesday following that Thursday, had a 
motion made by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), and that 
motion simply said that we instructed the conference not to do what was 
in the budget; not to cut veterans by $1.5 billion; not to cut housing, 
which is in short supply for middle America; not to do many of the 
things that would have undercut education, health care, and the 
environment that were proposed in that budget.
  And I would further recall for Members, and unfortunately there are 
no press here, but I recall that the chairman of the Committee on the 
Budget (Mr. Nussle), sitting where the chairman of the Committee on 
Appropriations now sits, railed for about 29 minutes about how awful 
the motion to instruct was and how Members ought to vote against it. 
And then, lo and behold, the majority leader came to the floor, spoke 
quietly to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle), and the vote was 
called.
  Many Republicans rushed to the floor to vote against that motion to 
instruct, and, lo and behold, as the minutes went by, votes were 
changed. Lo and behold, as the minutes went by, the rhetoric of the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) was forgotten quickly when the reality 
of the votes and the necessity to report at home the consequences of 
those votes was realized by our Republican friends on the majority 
side. So they changed their votes; or if they had not voted, voted for 
the motion to instruct offered by the gentleman from South Carolina 
(Mr. Spratt). How ironic.
  And now the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) is confronted with 
another reality. Last year, we could not pass appropriation bills. 
Eight of them were passed not only after the fiscal year, but after the 
Congress had adjourned. Why? Because the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Young) was forced to operate within a context of a totally unrealistic 
budget. And what did the Republicans say? They said, oh, it is Mr. 
Daschle's fault. It is the Senate's fault. They have not adopted a 
budget.
  Well, now, they control the House, they control the Senate, they 
control the administration, and as the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Obey) pointed out, on a good day, they control the Supreme Court. I 
thought that was a good line and, unfortunately, true at times as well. 
But the fact of the matter is they control it all. And the lamentation 
that they put forward last year, the excuse that they put forward last 
year, the rationalization they pursued last year is not available to 
them; not to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) but to the majority 
leadership.
  And so we are confronted with, yes, having passed our bills, and I 
might say some without a single Democratic vote. As a matter of fact, 
one of the largest bills, one of the most important bills for education 
of our children, for the health care of our families and citizens, not 
one Democrat voted for it. Not because we are not for education

[[Page 23253]]

and health care, but because we knew that bill was an unrealistic bill.
  So we are confronted today with a resolution that the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Young) is required to put forward, and acting as he always 
does, responsibly, he must put forward, and which I am going to 
support, as the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) is going to 
support. It is the alternative we ought to pursue.
  I said the most fiscally irresponsible administration. Why? Because 
after we adopt this budget or these appropriation bills, which will 
spend a lesser and lesser percentage of the gross domestic product of 
our country on discretionary spending that we will make decisions 
about, we will have created over a $.5 trillion deficit in this single 
year, more debt than we incurred in the first 90 percent of the days of 
this Republic, and our children are going to pay the bill. How tragic. 
How irresponsible.
  We passed a bankruptcy bill in which we made it harder to declare 
bankruptcy, and each of us on the floor said we need to require 
personal responsibility of those who seek credit. If we applied that 
same criteria to this administration and to the Congress of the United 
States, we would fail. We are not exercising personal responsibility. 
In this instance, we must pass this resolution, and I will vote for it, 
but I lament the fact that it is passed in the context of the most 
irresponsible fiscal policy that I have ever seen and this country has 
ever seen, and which is disadvantaging our country and our ability to 
invest in the future.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I wish to associate myself with the comments made by the 
gentleman from Wisconsin and the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. Speaker, we have entered into a new era of irresponsibility in 
government, and this continuing resolution is representative of that. I 
understand the good work that went into trying to put this effort 
together, but as a Nation, we have very serious unmet needs: Health 
care, education, retirement security, and pension reform.
  Our States are laboring under the biggest fiscal crises that we have 
seen since World War II. We have an economy that is faltering. Millions 
of workers are unemployed. We have nine million workers unemployed and 
3.3 private sector jobs gone in the last couple of years. We have 41 
million without health insurance and an entire generation on the cusp 
of retirement.
  The people in charge have no plan to deal with these pressing needs, 
rather we have simply and systematically starved our capacity to do 
anything by imposing incredibly irresponsible tax cuts that benefit 
just a few wealthy individuals and special interests.
  We come to this piece in the process where we say we have limited 
resources in order to deal with these very serious unmet needs, but the 
fact of the matter is we need to deal with the fundamental question of 
why do we have so few resources? It is because so few in our society 
are receiving so much. We have 184,000 millionaires in the United 
States who are going to get a tax cut of $93,000, and yet we cannot do 
anything about people who make between $10,500 and $26,000 in terms of 
a child tax credit because we say we do not have the money to do it. 
With 184,000 people getting $93,000 in a tax break, we have so few 
getting so much. That is what we ought to be debating on the floor of 
this House.
  This Congress is undermining the capacity and the obligation of 
government to provide key social support to reflect the values and the 
issues and the interests of the American people. From prescription 
drugs to education, from veterans health and housing programs, they are 
undermining the idea that our society can act with a shared sense of 
purpose, with a shared sense of responsibility to address the tasks 
that are before our country.
  When we starve the government of the resources to meet its public 
commitments, in essence, we then are saying that government has no role 
to play. And while we know and we understand that government cannot 
play the sole role in people's lives, I believe that all Americans 
believe that we have, at the State and local and the Federal level, the 
obligation to assist people in a time of need to face the challenges 
that they have in their lives.
  We cannot remove government from participating in the lives of the 
American people. We cannot undo our social responsibility. We cannot 
let it happen. The American people deserve better. And as we strive to 
finish the remaining appropriation bills, we should remember that this 
Congress, this House, the people's House, has an obligation to promote 
the capacity of our country to act together on our shared values. That 
is what we were elected to do.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Florida and I are personal friends. 
And I take some pride in the fact that although this institution has 
become incredibly political over the last 15 years, and although it has 
become incredibly partisan, I take some pride in the fact that our 
friendship has withstood the context in which that friendship operates 
every day. I think, frankly, that the unreal demands on the part of the 
power centers in this institution have put greater strains on our 
friendship than is the case with any other chair and ranking member in 
the House, and yet we remain good friends. Because I know that the 
gentleman is trying to do his duty, and I think he understands that I 
am trying to do mine, and I think we genuinely like each other and 
respect each other.
  But he is given the job of bringing some of the saddest pieces of 
legislation to this floor of anyone in the House, simply because he is 
denied the resources to meet our responsibilities to the citizens we 
represent. We had $6 trillion in surpluses when the majority party 2 
years ago started passing out its tax cuts. We are now facing $2 
trillion to $3 trillion in deficits over that same time frame. And on 
top of that, we are going to have to pay for Iraq, which will add a 
whole lot more than the $87 billion that we have been told about so 
far.
  And so in a rational world, one would think that when conditions 
change to that degree, assumptions would also change and conduct would 
change, and we might reconsider some of our past decisions. But that is 
evidently not going to occur, so we are still going to continue to 
pretend that we can afford these huge tax cuts that have been passed 
out to high-income people in this country.
  This Congress faces a very simple choice: What kind of country do we 
want America to be? Are we satisfied with the prospect of having a 
country which in 10 years will have 50 million people without health 
insurance, rather than 40? Are we satisfied with the pretensions that 
we provide equal opportunity for education, when in fact we do not? Are 
we satisfied with the meager enforcement that protects private pension 
systems and that protects and enforces honest accounting by 
corporations so that investors can know what the rules of the game 
really are? Are we satisfied facing the long-term shortfalls that will 
occur in Social Security?
  I am not satisfied with that prospect, and I do not think most 
Members of this institution are either. If that is the case, we need to 
act like it, and we need to have a reconsideration of what the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) correctly calls the most 
colossally, fiscally irresponsible actions on the part of any 
administration certainly in my lifetime.

                              {time}  1100

  Mr. Speaker, having said that, I would simply urge Members for the 
time being to support this continuing resolution to give the Committee 
on Appropriations more time to perform its impossible responsibilities, 
and in hopes that eventually the majority leadership of this House will 
see the necessity to reconsider some of its most reckless fiscal 
actions.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.

[[Page 23254]]

  Mr. Speaker, I want to say that I appreciate more than I can say, the 
friendship that I enjoy with the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) 
and the strong spirit of cooperation, as the leadership of the 
Committee on Appropriations, and also with the gentleman from Maryland 
(Mr. Hoyer), as we work together to meet our responsibilities to the 
Congress and to the country. The gentleman from Maryland and I have not 
only a friendship, but a mutual respect.
  But, Mr. Speaker, I think it is fair to point out that we have 
political and philosophical differences. There is no doubt about that. 
That is basically why we have two parties, because one party believes 
one way and the other party believes another way on many issues. While 
our appropriations bills have received very large votes on the 
Republican side as well as the Democratic side, as we prepared those 
bills, we dealt with a lot of amendments in our committee. Most of 
those amendments were to increase spending and to increase taxes. Our 
committee does not have the jurisdiction to raise taxes, and we make 
that case when necessary in the committee.
  If we were to add up all of the amendments offered by the minority 
party alone in committee, the deficit would really be big. They believe 
we do not spend enough money in many areas, and we believe that 
sometimes we spend too much money.
  I want to say that I meet with my leadership, with the Speaker of the 
House and the majority leader, on a very regular basis. In fact, they 
probably get tired of seeing me, but I would say they are genuine in 
understanding their responsibility to the country. They are genuine and 
sincere in having a reasonable, responsible fiscal policy; and they are 
determined to allow the American workers to keep as much of their own 
money as they can without passing it on to the Congress.
  We are in an unusual time. We have a war going in Iraq and a war 
going in Afghanistan and to a lesser extent a war going in many other 
parts of the world against terrorists, against people who are 
determined to do harm to the American people and to our country.
  This did not just start on September 11. On February 26, 1993, 
terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in New York. Six lives were 
lost. The response was some harsh words, but basically nothing else.
  On June 25, 1996, Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia which housed our 
United States Air Force personnel was bombed by terrorists. Nineteen 
American airmen lost their lives. Again, there were words but no 
action, no response; and the terrorists grew bolder because they 
believed if America was not going to fight back, they should continue. 
So they did.
  On August 7, 1998, terrorists bombed American embassies in Kenya and 
Tanzania, and 259 lives were lost. Well, we took some action then. We 
fired a couple of cruise missiles into abandoned terrorist training 
camps in Afghanistan. That was the extent of it.
  On October 12, 2000, the USS Cole, a Navy warship, was bombed off the 
shore of Yemen. Seventeen sailors lost their lives, and many others 
were injured; again, harsh words, but no action.
  On September 11, 2001, under a new Administration, a new President, a 
hijacked plane crashed into the Pentagon, and 189 lives were lost. 
September 11, 2001, hijacked planes crashed into the World Trade Center 
Towers, and nearly 3,000 lives were lost. September 11, 2001, a 
hijacked plane crashes into rural Pennsylvania, and 44 lives were lost. 
A new Administration, a new President as of September 11, and the words 
were harsh, the words were threatening; but there was more action. The 
attack was massive against the terrorist trainers and the terrorist 
supporters and the terrorist camps in Afghanistan. Further, we sent 
nearly 200,000 American troops into Iraq to rid the world of a tyrant 
who supported terrorist activities.
  There is a major difference. This President, George Bush, took action 
to defend America. We have spent a lot of money since September 11, and 
that is one of the reasons we have a larger deficit. But let me say 
this to those Members who believe this money is nothing more than a 
mortgage on the future of our children and future generations. I say it 
is different. I say that we are going to fight terrorism, wherever it 
raises its ugly head, to secure future generations, to guarantee that 
our children and our grandchildren and future generations do not have 
to worry about being on a hijacked airplane or having a building they 
are inhabiting being attacked by a bomber or a hijacked airplane, or 
that future generations are going to be as secure as we can make them, 
to be free from anthrax, to be free from sarin gases, and to be free 
from nuclear exchanges.
  Mr. Speaker, that is what we are doing today. We are spending 
considerable money to guarantee the future security and safety of 
Americans; and it is better to do that at the source, beyond the United 
States boundaries, than to do it here in the streets of Washington, 
D.C. or to do it in the streets of New York or Pennsylvania or any one 
of our districts that could be a target.
  I say this is the proper philosophy. This is the proper way to secure 
the future generations, to invest what we must today to eliminate the 
ability of terrorists to threaten our future generations, our children 
and our grandchildren and our great grandchildren.
  Yes, Mr. Speaker, there are some philosophical differences, some 
political differences among friends; but this is a brief statement of 
our position. I urge the passage of this continuing resolution.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share my disappointment 
that the Republican leadership must resort to this resolution to ensure 
the continuity of our Nation's vital programs. Instead of staying here 
and finishing the work that needs to be done, the Republican leadership 
continues to schedule short workweeks. Everyday that they drag their 
feet is another day our Nation's working families continue to struggle.
  Our priorities should be passing a child tax credit that extends to 
low-income families denied a break in the Republican tax package, and, 
approving welfare reform that will not only reduce welfare rolls but 
also reduce poverty.
  No person should go a day longer forced to choose between paying 
their rent and paying for their prescription drugs while a prescription 
drug plan awaits a final vote by Congress. Sensible and popular 
initiatives such as education reform, homeland security and affordable 
housing continue to be either inadequately addressed or drastically 
underfunded by this leadership.
  Mr. Speaker, it is time for the Republican leadership to wake up and 
put America's priorities first. Our country's working families are 
working hard everyday to strengthen this nation and we should be 
working just as hard to support them.

  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). All time for debate has 
expired.
  The joint resolution is considered read for amendment and pursuant to 
the order of the House of Wednesday, September 24, 2003, the previous 
question is ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint 
resolution.
  The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 
time, and was read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the joint 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 407, 
nays 8, not voting 19, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 520]

                               YEAS--407

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass

[[Page 23255]]


     Beauprez
     Becerra
     Bell
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burns
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Carter
     Case
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley (CA)
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harman
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Janklow
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Lynch
     Majette
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nethercutt
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Turner (OH)
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watson
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--8

     DeFazio
     Duncan
     Flake
     Ford
     Nussle
     Paul
     Royce
     Smith (MI)

                             NOT VOTING--19

     Bishop (GA)
     Davis (FL)
     Delahunt
     Edwards
     Eshoo
     Frost
     Gephardt
     Istook
     Kucinich
     Larson (CT)
     Lewis (GA)
     Marshall
     Oberstar
     Pastor
     Reyes
     Shays
     Towns
     Watt
     Weldon (PA)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette) (during the vote). Members 
are advised that there are 2 minutes remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1134

  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona and Mr. PEARCE changed their vote from ``nay'' 
to ``yea.''
  So the joint resolution was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________