[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 18]
[House]
[Pages 23278-23281]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS, FISCAL YEAR 2007

  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 
1105, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 102) making further 
continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2007, and for other 
purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
  The text of the joint resolution is as follows:

                             H.J. Res. 102

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 109-
     289, div. B) is further amended by striking the date 
     specified in section 106(3) and inserting ``February 15, 
     2007''.
       Sec. 2. Section 102(c) of the Continuing Appropriations 
     Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 109-289, div. B) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Activities under the `Chemical Demilitarization 
     Construction, Defense-Wide' account.''.
       Sec. 3. Section 114(b) of the Continuing Appropriations 
     Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 109-289, div. B) is amended by 
     striking ``and December 1, 2006,'' and inserting ``December 
     1, 2006, January 1, 2007, February 1, 2007, and March 1, 
     2007,''.
       Sec. 4. Section 125 of the Continuing Appropriations 
     Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 109-289, div. B) is amended by 
     striking ``Partner Purchases'' and inserting ``Partnership 
     Purchases and International Space Station/Multi-User System 
     Support''.
       Sec. 5. Section 126 of the Continuing Appropriations 
     Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 109-289, div. B) is amended by 
     inserting ``(1)'' after ``except that'', and by inserting 
     before the period at the end the following: ``, and (2) 
     amounts made available under section 101 for departments and 
     agencies that have been apportioned pursuant to this section 
     prior to November 17, 2006, may be at a rate for operations 
     not exceeding the current rate''.
       Sec. 6. Section 101 of the Continuing Appropriations 
     Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 109-289, div. B) is amended by 
     striking ``as of October 1, 2006'' each place it appears in 
     subsections (b) through (e) and inserting ``as of November 
     15, 2006''.
       Sec. 7. The Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007 
     (Public Law 109-289, div. B) is amended by adding after 
     section 132 the following new sections:
       ``Sec. 133. (a) Section 44302(f)(1) of title 49, United 
     States Code, shall be applied by substituting the date 
     specified in section 106(3) of this division for `August 31, 
     2006, and may extend through December 31, 2006'.
       ``(b) Section 44303(b) of title 49, United States Code, 
     shall be applied by substituting the date specified in 
     section 106(3) of this division for `December 31, 2006'.
       ``Sec. 134. The authority provided by H. Res. 135 (109th 
     Congress), as adopted on March 14, 2005, shall continue in 
     effect through the date specified in section 106(3) of this 
     division.
       ``Sec. 135. The rule referenced in section 126 of Public 
     Law 109-54 shall continue in effect for the 2006-2007 winter 
     use season through the date specified in section 106(3) of 
     this division.
       ``Sec. 136. In addition to any other transfer authority of 
     the Department of Veterans Affairs, up to $683,970,000 of the 
     funds made available to the Department by this division may 
     be transferred to `Veterans Health Administration--Medical 
     Services' during the period covered by this division.''.
       ``Sec. 137. Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
     division and notwithstanding section 601(a)(2) of the 
     Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 31), the 
     percentage adjustment scheduled to take effect under such 
     section for 2007 shall not take effect until February 16, 
     2007.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hayes). Pursuant to House Resolution 
1105, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) and the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I bring before the House a continuing resolution for 
fiscal year 2007. This CR, which is clean, runs through February 15, 
2007. Only necessary technical anomalies are included.
  This CR will fund the agencies in the nine remaining bills awaiting 
conference at the lower rate the House passed, Senate passed, or 
current fiscal year 2006 level.
  We have been working closely with both leadership and Chairman 
Cochran

[[Page 23279]]

on this CR to ensure that all essential functions of the government 
continue without interruption.
  With regard to veterans medical care funding, the VA presently has 
approximately $600 million left over from fiscal year 2006. However, 
should the VA need additional resources between now and February 15, we 
are providing the VA and the Secretary with the authority to transfer 
funds from within other Veterans Affairs accounts.
  When we passed this CR the last time, my hope was it would provide a 
strong motivation for Congress to complete its work in regular order. I 
was hopeful that our colleagues in the Senate would complete their work 
on the floor so we could move the remaining individual conference 
reports before the end of this legislative session.
  I want the body to know that the Appropriations Committee has been 
strongly committed to bringing to this floor individual conference 
reports. That has not occurred. Each and every individual bill should 
have come to the floor and gone to conference with the Senate and been 
sent to the President. From the beginning of our process, Chairman 
Cochran and I pledged to pass funding bills in regular order. We also 
stated publicly we would not, I repeat, not, support an omnibus bill in 
any form.
  The House Appropriations Committee passed each of the 11 subcommittee 
bills out of the full committee by June 30, and with the exception of 
the Labor-HHS bill, all of the bills off the House floor by the July 4 
break.
  Similarly, the Senate passed each of its bill out of the full 
committee to ensure timely consideration on the Senate floor.
  The Appropriations Committee has remained committed to moving these 
bills individually and within the framework of the budget resolution.
  My colleagues, the Appropriations Committee has kept its word. The 
breakdown of regular order this cycle, indeed the failure to get our 
bills done, should be fairly placed at the feet of the departing Senate 
majority leader who failed to schedule floor time for the consideration 
of appropriations bills.
  Senator Cochran and I were convinced that moving bills individually 
was the only way for us to get back to regular order. Lacking regular 
order, there is a tendency for the remaining bills to become Christmas 
trees and for spending to grow out of control, having individual 
Members do with a Christmas tree what they might. In our view, that is 
simply not acceptable.
  Let me make one personal comment aside: my appropriations colleague, 
Senator Thad Cochran of Mississippi, could not have been a better 
partner as we attempted to bringing regular order to the appropriations 
process. The Senator of Mississippi was poorly served by his own 
leadership.
  I would prefer to return to Congress in January as chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee but look forward to working with the new 
chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
  Until then, I urge my colleagues to support this CR and I would like 
to close my remarks by wishing all of my friends a Merry Christmas and 
a happy new year.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, this resolution tonight is a blatant admission of abject 
failure by the most useless Congress in modern times. That we do not 
have a budget before us is certainly not the fault of the gentleman 
from California, the distinguished chairman of the committee.
  This House passed every single appropriation bill except the Labor-
Health appropriation bill, before the July 4 recess.
  The problem is that the budget resolution which defined what would be 
contained in those appropriation bills was so wildly unrealistic that 
moderate Republicans in this House rebelled and would not, for 
instance, agree to support the budget resolution until a promise was 
made that $3 billion in additional funding would be found in order to 
correct some of the shortfalls in education and health and worker 
protection programs.
  In addition, as the gentleman from California has said, when these 
bills went over to the other end of the Capitol, the United States 
Senate, they ran into the decision of the Republican majority leader to 
avoid having the Senate take votes on any controversial issues in the 
domestic portion of the budget.
  As a result, we are here tonight with not a single dollar having been 
appropriated to any government program that has anything whatsoever to 
do with the domestic operations of this government. That is a 
disgraceful performance. And so we are left with the choice of passing 
this continuing resolution or having the government shut down.
  I want to contrast that with the condition that we left the 
government in when the Democrats lost the majority in 1994. In 1994 I 
was chairman of the Appropriations Committee and when we lost the 
election, we had still managed to complete every single appropriation 
before the end of the fiscal year. We did that because we had reached a 
bipartisan agreement between the then-majority Democrats and the then-
minority Republicans on the allocation of appropriated dollars to each 
of the subcommittees. And it was that bipartisan cooperation which 
allowed us to pass every single bill in the allotted time.
  Now we are here with Governors unable to plan, State legislatures 
unable to plan, mayors being unable to plan, families being unable to 
plan, because they do not know what the final disposition of the entire 
domestic budget is going to be.
  And so now the Congress is going to leave town and when the Democrats 
assume control next January, we are going to have to pass 2 years of 
appropriation bills in 1 year. We will do our best to do that; but I 
must say to my majority party friends that I think that by this act of 
abdication, they have given up any right to criticize in any way 
whatever devices we have to use in order to dispose of the unfinished 
business of this Congress come next January.

                              {time}  2115

  We will do our best, but we have very few decent options. And I find 
it ironic, as the gentleman from California at least obliquely 
referenced, I find it ironic that the Senate majority leader found time 
to publicly diagnose Terri Schiavo's case from the Senate floor. I find 
it ironic that the majority leader in the Senate found the time to 
insert 40 pages of language into the defense bill last year 
indemnifying the entire pharmaceutical industry. He insisted on having 
that language inserted, although it had never been cleared by anyone in 
the conference and the conference had already finished its work before 
that was inserted. So he had plenty of time to do that, but he didn't 
manage to find the time to schedule the appropriation bills on the 
Senate floor, and as a result, we are here with this mess tonight.
  The most fundamental obligation of the Congress under the 
Constitution of the United States is to decide what activities the 
government needs to engage in and to provide the financing for those 
activities. That is the purpose of appropriation bills. And when the 
Congress fails to pass that legislation, it fails in its principal 
obligation to the taxpayers.
  So I simply want to say that Senator Byrd and I expect to have an 
announcement next week on how we will attempt to deal with the 
leftovers from this congressional session.
  But I would simply ask one thing of my friends on the majority side 
of the aisle: Please spare me. Don't have the gall to go to the 
American public 2 years from now and ask once again to be put in charge 
of handling the Nation's budget when the decision has been made at the 
highest levels of the Republican Party tonight to walk away from our 
collective responsibility to pass this legislation before we adjourn.
  The President is entitled to have his new budget considered anew. He 
is entitled to have the decks wiped clean so that he can start fresh; 
and with all

[[Page 23280]]

due respect, I think we are also entitled to be able to start fresh so 
that come January, we can consider the President's new budget and not 
have to turn to last year's problems. We are not going to be given that 
opportunity, and the President isn't going to be given that 
opportunity. That is a shame. But at this point we have no choice but 
to support this resolution.
  I do want to say one thing. Speaking of unfinished business, I am 
pleased to see that this resolution at this point does contain the 
suspension of the congressional COLA until such time as the minimum 
wage is increased. I know the distinguished minority leader, Ms. 
Pelosi, had asked that that be done. This resolution does not complete 
the linkage, but it does suspend that COLA until February 17, I believe 
the date is, which gives us an opportunity to pass the minimum wage 
bill in January before it goes into effect. I hope we meet that 
obligation so that we can see to it that as Congress receives its COLA, 
the lowest-paid workers in this country also get a benefit.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Wisconsin, who has done such an extraordinary job in trying to bring 
fairness and coherence in this process. Unfortunately, he will soon be 
in the business to do so, although carrying the burden that he has to 
get out from under.
  I first want to join him in saying that I am glad to see we finally 
recognize the incongruity of pay raises for ourselves and no minimum 
wage increase. Many of us tried to argue that on logical grounds and on 
moral grounds. It is interesting to see that the loss of 30 seats 
apparently succeeded, where morality and logic was less persuasive. But 
I will take it any way I can get it.
  Then I also want to congratulate my colleagues on the other side for 
their consistency because they end this Congress governing in the same 
way in which they carried on for 2 years: frankly, incompetently, 
without respect for democratic procedures, and with a willingness to 
inflict harm on the most vulnerable members of our society.
  Earlier today we voted on packages of things that in a Democratic 
legislature, for example, Iraq, we would not have had all lumped 
together. Members who opposed some and supported others would have had 
a chance to say so. Today we got have one continuing resolution, as the 
gentleman from Wisconsin said, we have no choice but to vote ``yes'' so 
that the government does not stop acting.
  But let us take a look at what they have done. I have a particular 
responsibility in my committee for housing. The one housing program 
that the Republican Party has not undone is the section 8 program. But 
we have today a resolution that substantially and deliberately provides 
fewer dollars for the section 8 program than the housing authorities of 
this country need to meet their existing commitments. This is a budget 
that goes into, what, January of this current fiscal year. Months will 
have gone by in this current fiscal year, and you are funding section 8 
at significantly less than your president asked for for this fiscal 
year, significantly less than is needed to meet commitments. And in 
January housing authorities will be faced with dilemmas. They may be 
told by HUD that they cannot continue to service what they are now 
doing.
  There is section 8 project-based assistance you put forward in a bill 
here which is $636 million below what your President asked for just to 
meet existing commitments. And housing authorities that have 
jurisdiction over projects which house elderly people and disabled 
people may be in turmoil and there will be uncertainty. We will 
probably be able come to their rescue; but why should we have to? Why 
should we create, Mr. Speaker, you and your colleagues, a situation in 
which this difficulty exists and we have to come to the rescue? Why 
such little regard for the poorest people in this country, the most 
vulnerable? Why are they going to be treated this way, as pawns, so you 
can avoid having to make difficult decisions, Mr. Speaker?
  So I just want to echo what the gentleman from Wisconsin said about 
the inappropriateness of this. I do want to point out in particular 
what happens here. And let me say to those Members on the other side 
who supported this rule and supported this approach, I will predict 
now, Mr. Speaker, that many of them will be hearing from the housing 
authorities and from section 8 residents in January complaining of the 
uncertainty, complaining of the difficulty. You will have no 
justification in claiming that it wasn't your fault, those of you who 
voted to send this procedure. So please be ready to explain to people 
in January why you so callously, Mr. Speaker, disregarded once again 
the interests of the poorest people in the country.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, in closing, I just want to congratulate the gentleman 
from California for doing his dead-level best to fulfill his duties in 
getting all of these bills through, even though he received precious 
little cooperation from many other key players on Capitol Hill. I would 
simply point out that it is not his fault that the budget resolution 
which was adopted by the majority party was so highly unrealistic that, 
in the end, the majority party in this House could not convince their 
Senate brethren to vote for the same legislation that was required by 
that budget resolution. And I want to simply say that I think the 
record demonstrates that both of us on both sides of the aisle did 
everything that we could procedurally to get these bills through the 
House. We reached time agreements on amendment after amendment, on bill 
after bill. Sometimes time agreements were so tight that Members were 
significantly angered by how little time they had to debate these 
bills. But even though we often opposed the content of the bills, we 
worked together to move them because we recognized that we had a 
responsibility to make decisions and to finish the job, whether we won 
or lost. Unfortunately, the gentleman did not have enough allies on his 
side of the aisle, and so we are stuck with this leftover mess. We will 
do our best in January and February to clean it up, but it is not going 
to be a very pleasant couple of months.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, when Congress passed SAFETEA-LU--the 
legislation that reauthorizes the Federal surface transportation 
programs--in 2005, it recognized the need to significantly increase 
Federal investment for highway, highway safety, and transit programs. 
In fact, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation 
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, SAFETEA-LU, increased the overall 
investment in surface transportation programs by more than 40 percent, 
with a significant part of that increase guaranteed to take effect in 
fiscal year 2007.
  Earlier this year, the House passed H.R. 5576, the Transportation, 
Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, TTHUD, appropriations 
bill, which meets SAFETEA-LU's funding guarantees. It provides an 
increase of $3.4 billion for the Federal-aid highway programs and an 
additional $474 million for the transit programs over the fiscal year 
2006 SAFETEA-LU funding levels.
  It is now more than 2 months since the start of fiscal year 2007, and 
the Republican-led Congress has not enacted the TTHUD appropriations 
bill. Instead, H.J. Res. 102 provides funding for the highway, highway 
safety, and transit programs through February 15, 2007. The resolution 
funds these programs at the fiscal year 2006 level. Thus, all of the 
highway and transit investment increases guaranteed by SAFETEA-LU are 
put on hold. If this approach is continued and the continuing 
resolution is extended through fiscal year 2007, SAFETEA-LU's 
guaranteed highway funding will be cut by $3.4 billion and its transit 
investment slashed by $474 million.
  Under a long-term continuing resolution, the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration, NHTSA, and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration, FMCSA, safety programs will be funded at substantially 
lower levels than guaranteed in SAFETEA-LU. NHTSA

[[Page 23281]]

stands to lose up to $21.7 million. At a time when more than 43,000 
people are dying in roadway crashes each year, we simply cannot afford 
to shortchange an agency tasked with making our roadways safer. 
Likewise, FMCSA could lose almost $27 million that would be spent on 
motor carrier safety programs and grants. It is essential that we 
properly fund these critical programs.
  The highway, highway safety, and transit programs differ from most 
other Federal programs in that they are supported by user fees. 
Motorists who drive on our highways pay the fees when they pump gas. 
They willingly pay the fees because they rely on a commitment by the 
Federal Government to use the money so collected to finance our highway 
and transit programs. In other words, users have already paid for the 
investments authorized in SAFETEA-LU and funded in the House-passed 
TTHUD appropriations bill. However, the Republican-led Congress's 
failure to enact this legislation in a timely manner will shortchange 
funding for critical transportation projects.
  Transportation projects are usually high-cost undertakings that take 
several years to complete. Certainty in funding--especially Federal 
funding--is critical to their success. Relying on short-term, stopgap 
measures, such as continuing resolutions, does not provide the 
certainty that State departments of transportation need to plan for 
their construction projects in the upcoming season. And for northern-
tier States, where construction seasons are short, delays in providing 
adequate Federal funding can severely disrupt their process for 
contract bidding, directly affecting next year's construction season.
  Continuing resolutions also provide great uncertainty for transit 
programs. The Federal Transit Administration, FTA, has delayed the 
release of transit formula apportionments and other new grants until a 
final TTHUD appropriations act is enacted. The continuing resolution, 
coupled with FTA's policy, is resulting in many transit agencies being 
unable to advance badly needed transit projects.
  According to the Federal Reserve, housing construction is currently 
very weak throughout the country. Congress should do everything within 
its power to ensure that transportation infrastructure investment is 
not disrupted through congressional inaction, placing an additional 
burden on this sector of the economy. Hundreds of our small businesses 
and thousands of our workers could be put at risk as a result. I urge 
Congress to fulfill its responsibilities in passing appropriations acts 
and to honor the funding guarantees established in SAFETEA-LU.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hayes). All time for debate has expired.
  The joint resolution is considered read for amendment, and pursuant 
to House Resolution 1105, 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. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________