[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 23]
[House]
[Pages 32006-32012]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    WAIVING REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO 
                  CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS

  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 465 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 465

       Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII 
     for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee 
     on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is 
     waived with respect to any resolution reported on or before 
     the legislative day of January 31, 2004, providing for 
     consideration or disposition of any of the following 
     measures:
       (1) A bill or joint resolution making continuing 
     appropriations for the fiscal year 2004, any amendment 
     thereto, or any conference report thereon.
       (2) A bill or joint resolution making general 
     appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, 
     any amendment thereto, or any conference report thereon.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). The gentleman from Georgia 
(Mr. Linder) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.
  Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 465 is a rule that waives clause 6(a) of rule 
XIII with respect to same-day consideration against certain resolutions 
reported from the Committee on Rules. Specifically, this rule waives 
the requirement for two-thirds majority vote by the House to consider a 
rule on the same-day that it has been reported by the Committee on 
Rules.
  This rule's waiver applies to any special rule reported by the 
Committee on Rules on or before the legislative day of January 31, 
2004, providing for the consideration of disposition of any of the 
following:
  First, a bill or joint resolution making further continuing 
appropriations for the fiscal year 2004, or any amendment thereto, or 
any conference report thereon; or, second, a bill or joint resolution 
making general appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
2004, any amendment thereto, or any conference report thereon.
  Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Rules reported this same-day rule on 
November 21 in order to provide some flexibility to the House 
leadership in terms of bringing the consolidated appropriations bill to 
the floor. On November 25, the text of the conference report on H.R. 
2673, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004, was printed in the 
Congressional Record for review by House Members. While the rule before 
the House today permits consideration of a number of appropriations 
options, the purpose of processing of this rule today is to expedite 
the consideration of the remaining fiscal year 2004 appropriations 
bills in the House. Once this rule is adopted, the House will be able 
to consider a consolidated appropriations rule and the underlying 
conference report without delay.
  This consolidated bill includes the Foreign Operations bill, the 
Transportation-Treasury bill, the Agriculture bill, the VA-HUD bill, 
the Commerce-Justice bill, the District of Columbia bill, and the 
Labor-HHS bill. I commend the hard work of the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Young) and the Committee on Appropriations for their efforts in 
crafting this important funding bill. As I stated, the provisions of 
the consolidated appropriations bill were printed in the Congressional 
Record almost 2 weeks ago, and the passage of the same-day rule will 
provide for prompt consideration of these important funding bills this 
afternoon.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the 
passage of this rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, Christmas has come early for President Bush and his 
high-dollar friends, but for millions of American families, it looks 
like the Grinch will be stealing Christmas. The media has widely 
reported that the President won victory after victory in negotiations 
over the details of this omnibus appropriations bill. But any 
Presidential victory comes at a very high cost.
  America's working families and those struggling to stay afloat in the 
swift currents of unemployment will be

[[Page 32007]]

stuck with the tab. The unemployment rate was essentially unchanged 
from October to November and almost 9 million Americans still cannot 
find work, including 6.2 percent of the New Yorkers who were 
unemployed.
  Across the Nation, the number of Americans filing for the first time 
for unemployment benefits is up. New claims for unemployment have risen 
in 47 States and territories. One economist described last Friday's 
unemployment report as ``getting just the Christmas present you want 
but two sizes too small.'' The President assured the country that his 
massive tax cuts would create 300,000 jobs a month. But unfortunately 
for the millions of men and women looking for work, only 57,000 new 
jobs were created in November. That is the ``two sizes too small.'' The 
real effects of the administration's tax giveaways were more money to 
the wealthiest and a staggering Federal deficit.
  Only a few days before the Christmas holiday and the beginning of a 
new year, unemployment benefits for thousands and thousands of 
Americans will run out. After December 20, thousands more will no 
longer be eligible for an extension of benefits. Today is our last 
opportunity before that happens to extend the unemployment benefits, to 
throw a small life preserver to those still caught in the swift 
currents of steady unemployment flowing through our murky economy.
  Just this morning in the Committee on Rules hearing, the chairman of 
the Committee on Appropriations agreed that unemployment benefits 
should be extended. We are spending $87 billion on Iraq, $150 billion 
this year, and we should be able to extend the unemployment benefits, 
especially considering that there is a surplus of unemployment funds.
  We need to fight with all our might to protect American jobs, 
particularly the manufacturing jobs. Since January 2001, the United 
States has lost 2.4 million manufacturing jobs. We should be exporting 
American products, not our jobs. The Manufacturing Extension 
Partnership, MEP, is a nationwide network of centers devoted to 
providing small and medium size manufacturers with assistance, 
information, and access to business experts. We should be promoting 
this program, but instead this bill slashes the budget by 63 percent. 
It is absurd that we are considering cutting this valuable program 
while thousands of manufacturing jobs are lost every day. MEP has 
proven its value in boosting productivity in sales and employment. 
Slashing this program will cost small manufacturers almost $2 billion 
in sales and cost 28,000 workers their employment.
  Despite the strong opposition of both elected bodies of Congress, 
President Bush was successful in killing legislative protections 
against limitations on overtime pay. Relaxing the overtime pay rules 
makes it easier for companies to force workers to put in more than 40 
hours a week without additional pay. And under the broad rules proposed 
by this administration, many nurses will be ineligible for overtime 
pay, and even manual laborers would be classified as executives, which 
would end their eligibility for overtime pay.
  These new regulations could make at least 8 million workers 
ineligible for the overtime, the money with which many pay their bills 
and take care of their families. Millions of them rely on that just to 
scrape by each month. And protecting the worker's right to overtime pay 
is such an important issue that people from across my district are 
asking me to oppose this entire bill because it does not include 
overtime pay protection.
  I need to add that the overtime pay protection passed handsomely both 
Houses of Congress, and we instructed our conferees to keep it in the 
bill; but mysteriously it disappeared. A man from Tonawanda said last 
week to us no worker should lose his overtime pay since it is essential 
to their lives.
  This massive bill is yet another example of the disturbing disregard 
for women's health. The President's authority to enforce his global gag 
rule remains unchallenged. Under the Mexico City Policy, the United 
States Government uses family-planning dollars to impose itself between 
women and their doctors. The U.S. muzzles health care workers. Clinics 
are prohibited from mentioning or counseling women about abortion. 
Doctors and nurses are forced to forfeit the right to provide complete, 
accurate medical information and advice to their patients.
  Mr. Speaker, for the first time in half a century, the Republican 
Party controls both Houses of Congress and the executive, despite an 
authoritarian leadership style, inefficiency, and squabbling have 
produced a job that is less than half complete. The current fiscal year 
began over 2 months ago, and only three of the 13 measures that pay for 
functioning of the Federal Government were law by October 1 of fiscal 
year 2004. And right now only 6 of the 13 bills are law.
  With this special rule, we will end the first session of the 108th 
Congress in a single day of hurried legislative activity.

                              {time}  1130

  Rather than wisely investing the body's time in deliberating the 
details of each of the seven remaining bills, we will spend 1 hour 
debating the merits of this massive conglomerate report. When 
substantive debate among Members is silenced, the millions of Americans 
that we represent are silenced and disenfranchised. Particularly, that 
is what happens, when one party of the House is excluded from all 
deliberations. This is not an attribute of a deliberative democracy.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope that during the coming second session that comity 
and genuine bipartisan collaboration will replace arm-twisting and 
exclusion. I hope that character, decency, virtue, and respect are more 
than words on a page. I hope that we all will embrace the right of all 
Members elected here to fully participate in a truly deliberative 
process and of all the people to be fully represented in their national 
legislature. A natural result of the decline of deliberative democracy 
is the decline in the quality of our laws and the decline of public 
support for them and the decline of the standard of living in the 
United States. I urge my colleagues to vote against the previous 
question.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this martial law 
rule. This rule will allow us to consider a seriously flawed omnibus 
appropriations bill and nothing else.
  After today, the House will not come back to work for legislative 
business until January 20. The time between now and January 20 that 
Congress will be out of session might not seen seem that important to 
some, but for hundreds of thousands of Americans it will be a terrible 
time indeed; that is because their Federal unemployment assistance is 
due to expire.
  Mr. Speaker, even with the modest job gains made over the past few 
months, the U.S. economy has 2.4 million fewer jobs today compared to 
2\1/2\ years ago. There are more than 2 million workers who have been 
unemployed for more than 6 months; and to make a bad situation worse, 
over 400,000 jobless American will not be eligible for unemployment 
compensation after the first of the year.
  Americans continue to be unemployed at alarmingly high rates. Just 
last week, we saw job numbers that fell well below expectations. And 
the percentage of Americans exhausting their unemployment benefits 
without finding a job has reached its highest level on record.
  Mr. Speaker, jobless Americans need help and they need it now. But 
while unemployed Americans continue to struggle to find work, this 
Republican-controlled Congress is preparing to leave town for the year. 
Like last year, Members of Congress will be free to go home to their 
families and constituents. Like last year, Members will have a nice 
holiday. And just like last year, the Republican-controlled Congress is 
letting unemployment insurance expire during the Christmas season. For 
hundreds of thousands of Americans, this

[[Page 32008]]

Republican Congress will be their Grinch who stole Christmas. And I 
have little hope that Congress's heart will grow any time soon; that 
is, unless we act today.
  The facts are clear. It is clear we will not be back in session until 
late January; and it is clear that during that time, hundreds of 
thousands of jobless Americans will lose their unemployment insurance. 
We should not turn our backs on these people and their families in our 
rush to adjourn.
  Now, I am sure that there is a bipartisan consensus to extend 
unemployment benefits. I am sure that if we brought up a bill to do 
that, a majority would support it; and if not, we could just hold the 
vote open for 3 hours or 4 hours until a majority appeared. That seems 
to be the new precedent around here. But the leadership does not want 
it. And in today's House of Representatives, what the leadership wants, 
the leadership gets. To heck with democracy.
  Unemployed Americans deserve better than this.
  Mr. Speaker, since this may be our last opportunity to speak this 
year, let me conclude with a few words about the process that has 
dominated during this session.
  I have worked in this House for 20 years, both as a staffer and as a 
Member. Never have I seen so much disregard for the rules, the 
traditions, and the well-being of this House. We have seen huge pieces 
of legislation come to this floor for consideration without allowing 
Members the time to read what they are voting on. We have seen 
conference reports appear without a conference committee ever having 
met. We have seen conference committees that meet, but shut Democrats 
out. We have seen conference reports come to the floor, like the one 
that we are going to deal with today, that undo the work of the both 
the full House and Senate. These bills drop provisions that were 
supported by both bodies and add things that we never voted on. And we 
have seen rollcall votes held open for hours and hours until the 
leadership gets the result they want by any means necessary.
  I am honored to hold the seat on the Committee on Rules that my old 
boss, Joe Moakley, had; and it saddens me that the Committee on Rules 
has become a place not to manage debate, but to stifle it. It has been 
used as a weapon against Members of both parties. I have been 
approached many times by Republican colleagues expressing their 
sympathy and their outrage with the action of their Republican 
leadership, and I appreciate their kind words. But I say to my friends 
on the other side, I do not need your sympathy. I need your vote.
  Until Members on the other side stand up to their leadership, stand 
up for democracy in this House, stand up for the precedents and the 
traditions of this body, things will get worse, not better. This House 
is broken. And I urge my colleagues to think long and hard during this 
holiday season about how we can fix it.
  Vote no on the previous question.
  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Oregon (Ms. Hooley).
  Ms. HOOLEY of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the 
martial law rule.
  In Oregon, the recession much earlier than the rest of the country. 
My State has had the dubious distinction of having the highest rate of 
unemployment in the country for much of the last 3 years. During that 
time, Oregon has lost 57,000 jobs, a lot of jobs from a State like 
mine.
  Unemployment benefits are intended as a safety net to carry people 
from one job to the next. They do not provide 100 percent of a person's 
previous salary, and they require sacrifice to make it work, but the 
benefits are absolutely vital for families to make ends meet. And not 
only do those benefits provide a level of security to families, 
unemployment benefits are also a stimulus to our local economies. When 
you take spending power from people, businesses hurt. Each dollar spent 
on unemployment benefits results in boosting the economy by $1.73. But 
unless Congress takes action today, almost 40,000 Oregonians will lose 
their unemployment benefits in the first half of next year. Benefits 
that are needed to pay their rent, pay their mortgage, pay for food, 
pay utility bills.
  Eleven thousand Oregonians exhausted their benefits last month and 
that number is going to continue to grow unless Congress acts today. 
The Federal Government Unemployment Trust Funds have a balance of 
roughly $20 billion, more than enough to continue and improve the 
extended benefits program. These funds were paid into that unemployment 
compensation system just for the purpose of helping dislocated workers 
during difficult economic times. This is money that is there. This is 
the only thing that money can be used for. It does not add to the debt. 
This is something we need to do.
  I urge my colleagues in joining me to defeat the previous question on 
the martial law rule for the omnibus spending bill so we can bring up 
an unemployment extension bill.
  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Levin).
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, this is not a happy moment. This is not a 
happy moment. We are forced to come up here and ask that the previous 
question be defeated so that we can give to people who are unemployed, 
who need unemployment comp, who are looking for work, an additional 13 
weeks. And all we get from the Republican side is reserving the balance 
of their time.
  There are 9 million unemployed in this country; and here is what is 
going to happen: December 20, if you are laid off, or I should say if 
you are drawing benefits, you can continue to receive your extended 
benefits. But, if you exhaust your benefits on December 21, you are out 
in the cold. That is the holiday message from the majority in this 
House. It is unconscionable. All kinds of excuses.
  The gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) has said, Every indicator is 
better than in 1993. But the job picture is entirely worse. Job 
creation is entirely, dramatically less.
  Then I heard: Leave it to the Senate. They are not going to act.
  Where are my colleagues from Michigan on the Republican side? Because 
of a bipartisan action in Lansing, people who needed it could draw up 
to 65 weeks; and now, someone laid off on December 21, or I should say 
who is exhausting their benefits, is out in the cold. Not one more 
week.
  We should not have to be coming here, Mr. Speaker. Times are tough. I 
talked to building trade leaders an hour ago. Unemployment is going up 
in the building trades in Michigan and in lots of other places, and 
there is nothing but a cold shoulder from the leadership of this House. 
And I say to the Speaker, whom it is now being said about, that he can 
patrol this floor and get the votes, where is your leadership?
  We should not have to be here today, the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Rangel), myself and others. This should be a bipartisan effort, and I 
hope in the next 24, no, it is not 24, it is 5 or 6 hours, that you, on 
the Republican side, will keep faith with the American people, those 
who are working and those who are not working through no fault of their 
own. Do not reserve your time. Come here with a bill.
  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, unemployed Americans are about to get their 
annual Christmas gift from the Republican majority, and that is the end 
of their unemployment benefits.
  This is not the first time this happened. Last year, Congress went 
home without extending unemployment benefits for those who, through no 
fault of their own, cannot find a job and have exhausted their 
benefits.
  Now they say, well, we just cannot afford it. They can afford 
hundreds of billions of dollars of other things in this bill, foreign 
aid other things, much

[[Page 32009]]

of it borrowed, but they cannot find the money for unemployed 
Americans. Well, that is actually a lie because there is $20 billion in 
the unemployment trust fund.
  They do not even have to borrow the money to help unemployed 
Americans like they are going to borrow to help many of the special 
interests. All they have to do is agree to spend some of the taxes paid 
and on deposit to help unemployed Americans, paid by workers, paid by 
employers. That is why that money is there.
  Every week, 400 Oregonians exhaust their benefits in this jobless 
recovery. Nationwide, tens of thousands of Americans are losing their 
unemployment benefits. They cannot find work through no fault of their 
own. They want to work. They want to work, but they cannot find a job. 
Their job has exported to China or to Mexico or from my district, some 
of them even to Canada. They cannot find a decent paying job. And now 
what is the Republican majority going to do? They are going to go home 
without extending unemployment benefits for these people. Many will 
lose the benefits Christmas week or New Year's week or in the month 
following. They may not be able to make the payments on their house. 
They are not going to be able to help their kids get the things they 
need to go to school, to feed their family, to pay their electric 
bills. These are basics.
  We cannot find that money. We have the money. It is sitting in the 
bank. All we have to do is agree to spend it.
  We have to stop pretending that everything is good with the economy, 
that America's just booming ahead again. We have what is called ``a 
jobless recovery'' in this country, and those are real people who do 
not have jobs. They are real people in my district. And Congress could 
do something real for them today. It is just choosing not to. It will 
help the special interests but not working Americans.

                              {time}  1145

  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Rangel).
  Mr. RANGEL. My colleagues, I do not know why the majority is 
reserving their time. Some pretty rough accusations have been made 
against them as a party. It would just seem to me that there should be 
enough sensitivity if not to respond to us then at least to respond to 
those 9 million people who are without work and without hope for the 
future.
  I can understand the majority in trying to eliminate all taxes for 
corporations and the rich. I can understand them trying to dismantle 
the Social Security System and the Medicare system. These are things 
they have dedicated themselves to doing and can be described as being 
Republican and Democratic positions. But how can someone out of work be 
the victim of partisanship? How can they determine whether they are 
Republican or Democrat? How can they benefit when a kid has to be 
withdrawn from school because of their parents' failure to pay their 
tuition, or their mortgage is forced to be foreclosed on?
  It seems to me that at this time of the year we can at least join 
ranks to take care of those people who want to work each and every day. 
If we can spend $1 billion a week rebuilding Baghdad, we should at 
least give some token of appreciation for those people who have worked 
hard to build this Nation, to make her as strong as she is by giving to 
them out of their own trust funds that this Congress established to 
protect them; that we have the compassion, no, not the compassion, we 
have the responsibility to respond to their needs.
  Sometimes I am so proud to be a Member of this body, but it is 
becoming increasingly more difficult to go to town hall meetings and to 
not ask why we tolerate the Republicans doing these things. Why does 
this institution, this great institution that we inherited, allow such 
pain and suffering to go to the least among us? It is wrong.
  We should vote ``no'' on the previous question, and I hope we hear 
sometime this morning from the majority.
  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Woolsey).
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I too am in opposition to this martial law 
rule because it fails to bring attention to the hardworking families 
that are struggling every day in this Nation to meet their needs and to 
take care of their children. The economy is letting them down. The 
economy continues to suffer. The job market is weak. These families are 
why we must absolutely extend the unemployment benefits and why we must 
do it now. Not later, but now.
  Mr. Speaker, families must have the means to be healthy, they must be 
safe when their jobs are no longer secure, and that is why we must 
extend these unemployment benefits before we adjourn Congress this 
year, before we leave here for our holidays. We are highly paid. We are 
employed. Yet we are going to leave and enjoy our holidays, and it will 
be absolutely irresponsible if we do not extend the unemployment 
benefits.
  If it is not irresponsible, Mr. Speaker, it is certainly hardhearted, 
because we need 26 weeks' more extension for those who have already 
lost their jobs or who are going to lose their jobs or for those who 
have unemployment benefits that have lapsed. If we do not give 
unemployed workers the help they need today, an estimated 500,000 or 
900,000, over half a million of the Nation's jobless, will be without 
benefits by the time we return from our holidays in January; holidays 
that we have been able to enjoy because we are highly paid and we are 
employed, until at least November of every other year.
  Why are we not taking care of those who do not have the benefits that 
we have? I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the extension of 
benefits and vote against the martial law rule.
  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
this time. In 1971, when I was 14 years old, in the spring of that 
year, one day my father came home from work from the shipyard at which 
he had worked for nearly 40 years and he brought home with him that day 
a layoff notice from the shipyard because we were no longer making 
enough money building the ships. That was a summer where he applied for 
a lot of jobs. He had to make, as I recall, a weekly visit to the 
unemployment office to pick up his check; and his benefits ran out in 
the fall of 1971.
  I was not quite old enough to understand what that meant, but I was 
old enough to remember the stress and anxiety my mother and father felt 
that fall; and I was also old enough to remember that somehow or 
another there was some good news that came that fall because the 
unemployment checks that my dad was picking up once a week were going 
to keep going for a while, to get us through the holiday season that 
year in 1971. He hung in there. He eventually got a part-time job and 
worked every day for the rest of his life, until he died in 1985 at the 
age of 75 years old. Government reached out and helped us that holiday 
season 32 years ago.
  Mr. Speaker, I know there are 1.3 million American families who feel 
today like we felt that day 32 years ago, not knowing whether the money 
was going to be there for us to have any kind of holiday at all, much 
less the money to pay our rent for the next month, to pay for our heat 
for the next month to survive on into the next year.
  There was money around here to pay for a solar heating experiment for 
a Hooters restaurant down South, there was plenty of money, necessary 
money in my opinion, to rebuild the wreckage of postwar Baghdad, there 
is certainly enough money for the 1.3 million American families who 
have already exhausted their unemployment benefits.
  Defeat the previous question. Let us bring this issue to the floor.
  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page 32010]]


  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Washington State (Mr. McDermott).
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Well, Merry Christmas, Mr. Speaker. We are here, and 
we are going to have a party down at the White House tonight, and 
everybody is going to be full of happiness and gemitlichkeit, but the 
workers of this country are not going to get anything done by the 
Republican legislature.
  The leadership of the Republican Congress is ignoring the need to 
extend benefits this year, just like they did last year. We will be 
back in January; and there will be all this clamor about, oh, we have 
to do something about unemployment. We know it now. We not only need to 
extend these benefits, but we need to fix a quirk in the law that keeps 
people in Washington State from even getting it if we would extend it.
  Now, the administration likes to trumpet, oh, the stock market is up 
and there are a few jobs here and there, but this economic recovery is 
a mile wide and an inch deep. Two out of every three people will not 
find a job. That is the statistic out of the Department of Labor in the 
Bush administration. We know there are no jobs out there. We say, well, 
try harder. Go work harder. Walk around.
  Mr. Speaker, no matter how dedicated you are, how willing you are to 
accept a job, if there is no chance, it sounds to me like, you know, it 
is like being on the Titanic and looking down to see how many life 
boats there are and saying, well, I guess I am not getting into one, 
but I guess maybe the ship will make it.
  Washington State remains one of the hardest hit States in the Nation, 
despite being a diverse economy that is a model and a microcosm of 
America. Too many people are falling through the cracks, and the 
leadership of the Republican Party does not care. They want martial law 
in here in this Congress. They would be willing to put martial law out 
on the streets if the unemployed in this country rose up.
  For every person we know who is unemployed, there are many more who 
have been given up, dropped out of sight and out of reach. Washington 
citizens from all walks of life look to us for leadership, look to us 
for a helping hand in time of hardship. They deserve it, and for the 
good of America we cannot turn our backs on our own people.
  Now, we can go have that party down at the White House, and there 
will be bands playing and violins, and lots of drinks and good food; 
but it is sort of like Old England. It is Scrooge's business. Let us 
have a party, but we will not worry about the people out on the 
streets.
  Vote against the previous question and make this leadership bring up 
unemployment.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  We are about to adjourn sine die and close the first session of the 
108th Congress with no more legislative business until January 20th of 
next year. And just like last year at this time, we are again callously 
turning our backs on millions of unemployed Americans whose Federal 
unemployment benefits are set to expire shortly after Christmas.
  It is very interesting how the Republican leadership can find 
billions of dollars to make their rich friends even richer, but cannot 
find it in their hearts to help jobless workers through this rough time 
with money that is already there for them. They can find $87 billion to 
fund the war in Iraq, but nothing for those here without jobs.
  Mr. Speaker, I am going to call for a ``no'' vote to defeat the 
previous question on this rule so we can try to do something to help 
the unemployed American workers. If the previous question is defeated, 
I will offer an amendment so we can immediately take up legislation to 
extend the expiring Federal unemployment benefits. And I want to state 
again: the money is there. It does not have to be borrowed. It has been 
paid in. It simply requires Federal action to allow the States to 
expend it.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation will continue the extended unemployment 
benefits program for the first 6 months of next year. The bill would 
also increase to 26 weeks the amount of benefits provided under that 
program, which is up from 13 weeks. This would provide new help to the 
1.4 million workers who have already exhausted their extended benefits 
and have yet to find work.
  This measure is identical to the text of H.R. 3244, the Rangel-Cardin 
unemployment extension, and also contains the text of H.R. 3554, 
authored by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), which would 
fix a flaw in the current law that prevents those States with 
exceptionally high long-term unemployment rates from continuing to 
receive extra benefits.
  There is so much talk today about our economy and claims that things 
are looking good. However, new jobs are not forthcoming at this time 
and do not appear to be coming anytime soon. Americans continue to be 
unemployed at alarmingly high rates. The percentage of Americans 
exhausting their unemployment benefits without finding a job has 
reached the highest level on record. More than 2 million workers have 
been unemployed for more than 6 months. Jobs are disappearing every day 
with no relief in sight. These Americans need relief, and they need it 
immediately.
  If we do not fix this today, over 400,000 jobless Americans will not 
be eligible for unemployment compensation after the first of the year. 
More than 2 million more will lose the benefits in the first 6 months 
of next year. And, Mr. Speaker, the House will probably adjourn sine 
die today or later this week, so this is the only opportunity we have 
to help unemployed Americans this year. Let us not abandon them today.
  I want to emphasize that voting against the previous question will 
not stop the omnibus appropriations conference report from coming to 
the floor today.
  Voting ``no'' on the previous question will still allow that bill to 
be considered. But a ``no'' vote will allow the House to vote on 
legislation that will help our Nation's unemployed workers.
  However, a ``yes'' vote on the previous question you will stop any 
opportunity for this House to extend desperately needed unemployment 
assistance to hundreds of thousands of our constituents and their 
families. Do you really want to go home and tell these people that you 
failed to do your job and failed to help them in their time of need?
  Make no mistake, this vote will give the House the opportunity to 
vote today to extend Federal unemployment benefits and to give relief 
to those hardest hit by our Nation's grim employment situation. I urge 
a ``no'' vote on the previous question.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the amendment 
be printed in the Record immediately before the vote on the previous 
question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to echo the 
sentiment of my Democratic colleagues about where our priorities are. 
As Congress comes to a close for 2003, I want to emphasize the needs of 
the middle class, of the unemployed and of the families struggling to 
make ends meet.
  I am here to vote ``no'' on the Previous Question on both the Martial 
Law Rule and the Rule for the Omnibus Appropriations bill. I am doing 
this to allow the House to consider legislation that would continue to 
extend unemployment benefits through the first six months of next year.
  By voting no, we can consider H.R. 3568, a bill that would also 
increase to 26 weeks the amount of benefits provided under that 
program--up from 13 weeks--and help the 1.4 million workers who have 
already exhausted their extended benefits.
  Already this year, the Bush Administration has cut education 
spending, giving the rich more tax breaks, and taken away the child tax 
credit for the middle class. We need to be taking steps to change this 
selfish economic policy and focus on creating jobs and incentives to 
employ more people and assist those during the transition.
  Right now we know that job creation will need to be far greater, more 
sustained and more robust to start to undo the damage of the recession 
created by the Bush Administration. Already, President Bush is on track 
to have the worst job creation record of any

[[Page 32011]]

modern President. With a current unemployment rate of 5.9 percent, it 
is a 44 percent increase than the rate when President Bush took office 
in January 2001. This means 2.7 million more Americans are without a 
job because of our irresponsible economic practices.
  Extending unemployment benefits is one of the first steps to 
correcting the administration's poor economic planning. Economists have 
estimated that each dollar of unemployment benefits leads to $1.75 in 
economic growth.
  Last year, the Republicans went home for the holidays and left 
800,000 jobless Americans fearing for their terminated benefits. This 
year, we have two million Americans out of work for over six months, 
and benefits will expire for 90,000 workers every week unless we do 
something about this now.
  This is something we must do for our constituents who are struggling 
to make ends meet because of circumstances that are out of their 
control. From my own district in Houston, I have received over 150 
pleading requests to not adjourn without passing the unemployment 
benefit extension. This Administration needs to come up with economic 
policies that will create jobs, and in the interim they must provide 
support to unemployed workers by immediately extending Federal 
unemployment benefits. We need to take better care of our working 
families and make this a priority.

                              {time}  1200

  The text of the material previously referred to by Ms. Slaughter is 
as follows:

 Previous Question for H. Res. 465--Rule on waiving 2/3rds for Omnibus/
                   C/R and/or Appropriations Measures

       At the end of the resolution add the following new section:
       Sec. 2. Immediately after disposition of this resolution, 
     it shall be in order without intervention of any point of 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3568) to 
     provide extended unemployment benefits to displaced workers, 
     and to make other improvements in the unemployment insurance 
     system. The bill shall be considered as read for amendment. 
     The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     bill to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) 
     one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the 
     Chairman and ranking Minority Member of the Committee on Ways 
     and Means; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without 
     instructions.

  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to support the previous 
question and the rule, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move 
the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). The question is on ordering 
the previous question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. 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.
  Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair will reduce to 5 minutes 
the minimum time for electronic voting, if ordered, on the question of 
adoption of the resolution.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 211, 
nays 179, not voting 44, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 672]

                               YEAS--211

     Akin
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Bereuter
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burns
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Capito
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Cox
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Feeney
     Flake
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Goode
     Gordon
     Goss
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Schrock
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Turner (OH)
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                               NAYS--179

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Becerra
     Bell
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown, Corrine
     Capps
     Carson (IN)
     Case
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dooley (CA)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Emanuel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Gonzalez
     Green (TX)
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall
     Harman
     Hill
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     John
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Majette
     Maloney
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (NC)
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Towns
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Watson
     Watt
     Weiner
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                             NOT VOTING--44

     Aderholt
     Bachus
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Cantor
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (OK)
     Cubin
     Deal (GA)
     Doggett
     Engel
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Gallegly
     Gephardt
     Goodlatte
     Hastings (FL)
     Hinchey
     Janklow
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lantos
     Larson (CT)
     Lynch
     Markey
     Meehan
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, George
     Nadler
     Rangel
     Regula
     Royce
     Rush
     Scott (GA)
     Sessions
     Tierney
     Waters
     Waxman
     Wexler
     Young (AK)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry)(during the vote). Members 
are reminded that 2 minutes remain in this vote.

                              {time}  1221

  Messrs. WYNN, PASCRELL and CRAMER changed their vote from ``yea'' to 
``nay.''
  Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. FERGUSON. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 672, I was unavoidably 
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
  Stated against:

[[Page 32012]]


  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 672, due to urgent 
constituent support commitments in my congressional district, I missed 
the vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 672, 
I missed due to unavoidable circumstances. Had I been present, I would 
have voted ``nay.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 212, 
noes 182, not voting 40, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 673]

                               AYES--212

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Bereuter
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burns
     Calvert
     Cannon
     Capito
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Cox
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     English
     Everett
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Goode
     Goss
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Schrock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Turner (OH)
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--182

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Becerra
     Bell
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown, Corrine
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Case
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dooley (CA)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Emanuel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green (TX)
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hill
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     John
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Majette
     Maloney
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (NC)
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Towns
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Watson
     Watt
     Weiner
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                             NOT VOTING--40

     Bachus
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Camp
     Cantor
     Cardin
     Carson (OK)
     Cubin
     Deal (GA)
     Doggett
     Emerson
     Engel
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Gallegly
     Gephardt
     Goodlatte
     Hastings (FL)
     Herger
     Hinchey
     Janklow
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lantos
     Larson (CT)
     Lynch
     Markey
     Meehan
     Miller, George
     Nadler
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rush
     Scott (GA)
     Tierney
     Waters
     Waxman
     Wexler
     Young (AK)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are reminded that 
2 minutes remain in this vote.

                              {time}  1230

  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated against:
  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 673, due to urgent 
constituent support commitments in my congressional district, I missed 
the vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

                          ____________________