[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 3722-3726]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   MAKING AVAILABLE FUNDS FOR THE LOW-INCOME HOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE 
                                PROGRAM

  Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
pass the Senate bill (S. 2320) to make available funds included in the 
Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance 
Program for fiscal year 2006, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                S. 2320

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. FUNDS FOR LOW-INCOME HOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE 
                   PROGRAM.

       Section 9001 of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 is 
     amended--

[[Page 3723]]

       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``for a 1-time only obligation and 
     expenditure'';
       (B) in paragraph (1), by striking ``$250,000,000 for fiscal 
     year 2007'' and inserting ``$500,000,000 for fiscal year 
     2006''; and
       (C) in paragraph (2), by striking ``$750,000,000 for fiscal 
     year 2007'' and inserting ``$500,000,000 for fiscal year 
     2006'';
       (2) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c);
       (3) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
       ``(b) Limitation.--None of the funds made available under 
     this section may be used for the planning and administering 
     described in section 2605(b)(9) of the Low-Income Home Energy 
     Assistance Act of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 8624(b)(9)).''; and
       (4) in subsection (c) (as redesignated by paragraph (2)), 
     by striking ``September 30, 2007'' and inserting ``September 
     30, 2006''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Barton) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.


                             General Leave

  Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would ask unanimous consent that 
all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and 
extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous 
material on the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in favor of S. 2320, legislation 
regarding the low-income home energy assistance program that we call by 
the acronym of LIHEAP.
  I believe that this is a good bill that will help all Americans, both 
in warm weather States and in cold weather States, but it will be 
particularly helpful to those in the warm weather States like Texas and 
places where summers can be difficult as the winters are in the 
Northern States.
  The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 which this House passed, the other 
body passed and the President signed recently, included $1 billion for 
LIHEAP for fiscal year 2007. The moneys were offset by savings 
elsewhere in the titles written by the Energy and Commerce Committee, 
which I have the privilege to chair.
  The bill before us today spends the funds this year and splits the 
funds equally between regular and contingency funds. Mr. Speaker, I 
support this approach because the increase in regular funds in the bill 
would allow significantly more LIHEAP funds to flow to the warm weather 
States to help with cooling costs this summer.
  This has happened only once before in the 1980s. For Texans, which is 
the State that I come from, this will mean an additional $38 million 
this year, almost doubling Texas's LIHEAP funds.
  Overall, the funding increases in the bill before us will help both 
the warm weather States and the cold weather States in the winter. Warm 
weather States in the summer and the cold weather States in the winter. 
This is a good solution for all States, both warm and cool; and I hope 
that we will support the bill.
  We do have an unusual parliamentary procedure, Madam Speaker, that I 
think we need to bring before the body. The bill before us has already 
passed the Senate. If we pass it with no amendments, it will go to the 
President for his signature.
  The supplemental bill, which we have been debating until several 
minutes ago, also has some LIHEAP funding that is under a different 
formula mechanism, as I understand it. It is quite possible, if not 
probable, that that bill is also going to pass.
  If it does, we then have a situation which is somewhat murky, but, as 
best we can tell, whichever bill gets to the President last for his 
signature will be the bill that dictates the formula funding for this 
fiscal year. I put that into the Record simply because I think all 
Members of the Chamber need to know that.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I would like to thank my colleague from Texas for calling up S. 2320, 
and I agree with what he said. I this it is interesting, though, the 
parliamentary procedure that the chairman of our Energy and Commerce 
Committee talked about, because I would assume that if this bill passes 
with the two-thirds requisite votes tomorrow and goes to the President, 
that the section in the supplemental bill would be stripped out in the 
conference committee, because that bill still goes to the Senate into a 
conference committee. So I guess parliamentarily that would be the 
solution in our situation.
  Madam Speaker and Members, low-income Americans have been struggling 
to pay for heating bills during the winter; and, thankfully, this 
winter has not been as cold as expected and heating bills have not 
increased as greatly as feared. However, natural gas prices that drive 
electric prices have quadrupled over the past several years. The 
States' public utilities commissions, PUCs, are passing those costs on 
to our constituents.
  Low-income Americans also struggle to pay cooling bills. When the 90 
and 100 degrees heat rolls around this year, the situation is going to 
become very critical very quickly.
  Air conditioners run on electricity, and a lot of electricity comes 
from natural gas. The need for relief is going to be intense throughout 
2006, the end of this winter, this summer, and the start of next winter 
due to the incredible energy prices our country is experiencing.
  The LIHEAP program has been controversial because the formula can pit 
different regions of the country against each other. For the first $2 
billion appropriated under this program, Northern States do very well, 
and relatively little funding goes to the South. Above this $2 billion 
trigger, however, the formula becomes much fairer, for Congress has 
never crossed this trigger by any large amount, that is until tonight.
  The Senate compromise legislation provides an extra $500 million to 
the LIHEAP formula over and above the $2 billion Congress has already 
provided. This is incredibly important for regional equity.
  This legislation has provided $500 million in contingency funding 
which can be used for emergencies such as blizzards, heat waves, 
hurricanes; and this funding is required to be allocated in 2006.
  Today marks the first day we have a real chance to cross that $2 
billion trigger and provide a measure of equity for the warm States. 
Importantly, today also marks the best chance to increase LIHEAP for 
2006 for cold States as well by providing 2006 contingency funding.
  If we pass this legislation today, the LIHEAP allocations for 2006 
will become much more equitable between regions. It is important we 
pass this legislation today. It will directly go to the President's 
desk and provide immediate extra assistance for the Northern and the 
Southern States this year.
  The administration supports this bill, and I would like to introduce 
this letter from Secretary Leavitt into the Record.

                                           The Secretary of Health


                                           and Human Services,

                                    Washington, DC, March 8, 2006.
     Hon. Olympia J. Snowe,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Snowe: I am pleased to respond to your request 
     for my view on your LlHEAP amendment (which is attached).
       This is a positive step to provide additional aid for those 
     in need of energy assistance this year. HHS supports Senator 
     Snowe's amendment to utilize '07 funds this year to help 
     those affected by increased home energy costs. HHS supports 
     providing at least $500 million of the total as contingency 
     funds.
           Sincerely,
                                               Michael O. Leavitt.

  Madam Speaker, CBO certified this bill with no budgetary effect, and 
I want to introduce their letter into the Record.
                                                    U.S. Congress,


                                  Congressional Budget Office,

                                    Washington, DC, March 6, 2006.
     Hon. Olympia J. Snowe,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator: As requested by your staff, the Congressional 
     Budget Office has prepared

[[Page 3724]]

     the enclosed cost estimate for S. 2320, a bill to make 
     available funds included in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 
     for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program for fiscal 
     year 2006, and for other purposes.
       If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
     pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew 
     Kapuscinski.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Donald B. Marron,
                                                  Acting Director.
       Enclosure.
     S. 2320--A bill to make available funds included in the 
         Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 for the Low-Income Home 
         Energy Assistance Program for fiscal year 2006, and for 
         other purposes
       Summary: S. 2273 would amend section 9001 of the Deficit 
     Reduction Act of 2005 by making the $1.0 billion appropriated 
     for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) 
     available in 2006 rather than 2007. The bill would increase 
     direct spending in 2006 by $750 million, but have no net 
     budgetary effect over the 2006-2009 period as a whole.
       S. 2273 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
     mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
     (UMRA) and would benefit state and tribal governments by 
     making federal funds available a year early.
       Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
     budgetary impact of S. 2273 is shown in the following table. 
     The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 600 
     (income security).
       Basis of Estimate: Under current law, CBO expects that the 
     entire $1.0 billion in LIHEAP funding appropriated for 2007 
     would be obligated in 2007 and spent over a three-year 
     period, resulting in outlays of $750 million in 2007, $230 
     million in 2008, and $20 million in 2009. Enacting S. 2320 
     would accelerate the spending of these same amounts to the 
     2006-2008 period.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                       ---------------------------------------------------------
                                                         2006     2007      2008      2009      2010      2011
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 DIRECT SPENDING
 
Spending under current law:
    Budget authority..................................       0     1,000         0         0         0         0
    Estimated outlays.................................       0       750       230        20         0         0
Proposed changes:
    Budget Authority..................................   1,000    -1,000         0         0         0         0
    Estimated outlays.................................     750      -520      -210       -20         0         0
Spending under S. 2320:
    Budget authority..................................   1,000         0         0         0         0         0
    Estimated outlays.................................     750       230        20         0         0         0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 2273 
     contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
     defined in UMRA and would benefit state and tribal 
     governments by making federal funds available a year early.
       Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Matthew Kapuscinski 
     (226-2820); Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: 
     Leo Lex (226-2885) and Impact on the Private Sector: Craig 
     Cammarata (226-2947).
       Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant 
     Director for Budget Analysis.

  Madam Speaker, the language in the House supplemental would not 
provide equity. It would provide $750 million in contingency funding 
for 2006, which is no guarantee of funding at all, not for the North or 
the South. The House supplemental will not pass the critical trigger, 
$2 billion trigger, which is very important for the equity among the 
regions.
  The Senate North-South compromise would guarantee the largest amount 
of LIHEAP funding for Southern and Western States ever, while providing 
immediate assistance for the Northern States.
  This bill would double Texas LIHEAP funding from $40 million to $80 
million, allowing us to serve 80,000 families instead of the 40,000 we 
currently serve. Since our State ended its energy assistance program 
because of budget problems, this support is sorely needed.
  Other Southern and Western States, that is, Alabama, Arizona, 
Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, 
the Carolinas, Oklahoma, Utah and Virginia, will also likely receive 
the largest LIHEAP allocations ever.
  With the $500 million in contingency funding, the Northern States 
will not be left out in the cold either, either in the end of this 
winter, during any heat wave this summer or during the next winter, 
November and December. We have bipartisan support, both Northern and 
Southern support, and we have the endorsement of the American Gas 
Association, which I will insert into the Record, Madam Speaker.
  Madam Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote yes on the bill.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BARTON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula).
  Mr. REGULA. Madam Speaker, my colleagues, this is a classic example 
of robbing Peter to pay Paul. What we are going to do is propose to 
move money from the 2007 bill to spend in 2006.
  Now that sounds very seductive and sounds like an easy way to deal 
with having more money available in this fiscal year. But let me point 
out to my colleagues that what this will do is take a billion dollars 
ultimately out of the 2007 bill that has to be made up.
  We will have one of two choices in the labor HHS 2007 bill: Get the 
money out of education, or get the money out of medical research, NIH, 
CDC. There is no other source. Because this billion dollars that was 
provided by the budget reconciliation to address LIHEAP spending for 
2007 would no longer be available, because what this proposes to do is 
to move it into 2006.
  Well, obviously to make up that billion in the 2007 bill we will have 
to get it somewhere. Now if it would be an increased allocation, which 
seems unlikely, because the President's budget already has Labor HHS 
Education money substantially under last year, and, therefore, to make 
another billion available will just exacerbate the problem.
  While this has a very seductive appeal, that, well, we are going to 
have this extra money for 2006, we are forgetting that there is a 2007 
year coming up; and, therefore, by passing this kind of legislation, we 
are simply making it very difficult to meet the other needs in the 2007 
budget.
  Madam Speaker, I would urge my Members to vote against this simply 
because it is not responsible budgeting to say to the Labor HHS that 
you have to go get a billion dollars out of other very important 
programs such as education and medical research.
  But inevitably that is where it has to come from, because this will 
leave a billion-dollar hole in the 2007 budget.
  In the budget reconciliation, they attempted to ensure that the 
billion would be there for 2007. But what this legislation does is 
simply say we are going to move it into 2006 and figure out where to 
get it for 2007.
  Well, there is no easy way to figure it out, because already 2007, in 
putting together the 2007 budget we are having a tough time having the 
resources to do the other important functions. I think it would not be 
responsible stewardship of our money, of our resources for the public, 
to take this money and leave a billion dollars unfunded for LIHEAP in 
2007.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I want to thank our colleague and chair of our 
appropriations subcommittee. I understand where he is coming from. But 
I also know, Madam Speaker, that we have not passed a budget for 2007 
and that is still to be considered.
  I understand that the concern about moving money into this year. But 
it is also going to be very difficult for me to talk to the 40,000 plus 
Texas families if we do not pass this bill. By the way, this summer, I 
am sorry it did not fit within our legislative rules, and it is

[[Page 3725]]

causing more problems, and we are not going to give you any heat 
assistance when it gets to be 100 degrees in Texas and across the 
South, and, frankly, even the Northern States, Illinois, Maryland and 
other places, New York has problems with heat in the summer.
  So I would hope that next year or later this year we will probably 
see another supplemental. If we see a year like we have seen now for 
both the cold assistance for the Northern States and what we see in the 
South that we need help, then I would hope in the future that we would 
see a supplemental that would restore that money. I would be glad to 
support that at that time.
  Madam Speaker, I also understand Chairman Regula and the 
Appropriations Committee, a lot of us want them to be able to have the 
funding for medical research and education. Those programs are near and 
dear to our heart. I hope we will still be able to do that.
  But I also know there are some other ways that we can deal with that 
since we have not adopted a budget and we will probably have another 
supplemental, because they get pretty regular around here. I hope that 
we can add to it without having to rob Peter to pay Paul.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2245

  Mr. BARTON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bradley).
  Mr. BRADLEY of New Hampshire. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And 
I would like to thank you for your leadership in bringing this bill 
from Senator Snowe to the floor. I thank Mr. Green for his bipartisan 
support, and I thank the leadership of the House for allowing this 
vote.
  I am from New Hampshire, one of the cold weather States, and even 
though the weather has been somewhat warmer than might be expected in 
most winters, we have seen at times a spike in the price of home 
heating oil by nearly 65 percent in some instances. It has abated 
somewhat, but nevertheless prices of home heating oil this winter are 
significantly higher.
  We all know how successful the LIHEAP, the Low Income Heating 
Assistance Program, has been. It is effectively monitored by State and 
local interests, but it is funded at the Federal level. My State has 
seen about a 12 percent increase in applications this winter because of 
that spike in prices. My State has allocated all of the dollars it has 
received so far to trying to process the applications that it has and 
it is committed; and without this funding, the State of New Hampshire 
and other cold weather States are going to have to dip into their own 
State funds to help fund a Federal program in 2006.
  My State, before the emergency funding was released by the President, 
was nearly $3 million short, that is about 15 percent under last year 
and at a time when there is record demand and record high prices. That 
is why this bill is so important, Madam Speaker, why we need to bring 
it up, have this vote tonight, get it to the President's desk. This 
bill is balanced well because the interests of warm weather States and 
cold weather States because of the 50-50 split and because of the 
emergency funding and the formula funding.
  So I am hopeful that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will 
see fit to move forward with this. This bill is fully offset by the 
Budget Deficit Reconciliation Act, which is important for our Nation's 
budget deficit, obviously, but it is also important for States, both in 
the southern part of the country and the northern part of the country, 
to pass this bill tonight and to make sure it gets to the President's 
desk as soon as possible so States like mine can get more money into 
the pipeline while it is still important.
  Mr. BARTON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula).
  Mr. REGULA. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. A 
couple of other things I would point out. In reality, we will have to 
find $1.4 billion when you work out the numbers to match the level 
provided for 2006. That is in the 2007 bill. So I reiterate, that means 
$1.4 billion will have to come out of education or medical research, 
because I just do not see any enhanced allocation to do that.
  Now, in adopting the supplemental, we recognize the potential 
emergency, and we provided language in there. This is an amendment that 
I offered in the supplemental in the full committee that allows the 
shift of $750 million as needed to address any shortfall in 2006, but 
we do not mandate that it be done.
  Under the Snowe approach, this would force the expenditure, and if 
the funds were not used, they would lapse. And I think that it is just 
not good management to require, as this bill does, the movement of this 
money from 2007 to 2006, and therefore, run the risk that it might 
lapse. When we tried to address the problem in the supplemental by 
saying that the money could be used up to $750 million if needed, and I 
think that is a much better solution.
  It is a more responsible solution to manage of potential problem 
without impinging heavily on the 2007 money and forcing the committee 
to make that up to the amount of $1.4 billion out of other very 
important programs. I would urge my colleagues to reject this.
  Mr. BARTON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  I have nothing but the utmost support for Mr. Regula and the 
appropriators. All the Members, the rank and file Members, the full 
committee chairman, the subcommittee chairman, but I want to disagree 
with his premises slightly.
  In most cases, a program like LIHEAP is funded from general revenue, 
and what Mr. Regula said is absolutely true, absolutely true. In this 
case, the budget reconciliation package for the fiscal year 2007 or the 
budget reconciliation package that we just passed, the Energy and 
Commerce Committee, on a bipartisan basis, worked to offset by saving 
in other areas of our jurisdiction so that we could plus-up LIHEAP by 
$1 billion. So the LIHEAP money that is before us today in the bill 
that is coming over from the other body has been paid for.
  Now, it is true as the gentleman from Ohio said that that money was 
supposed to be spent in fiscal year 2007, but it is also true that we 
need additional funds for 2006. And we are going to need additional 
funds, in all likelihood, in the warm weather States this summer, 
because of the expected heat. We have already had a record heat wave in 
Texas 2 weeks ago. It was 95 degrees. I will pledge to Mr. Regula and 
Mr. Lewis and Mr. Obey and all the folks, the appropriators, that if we 
get the will of our leadership, I am willing to engage in another 
reconciliation package to find offsets for next year. I think that is 
only fair so that we help our appropriators.
  But we have a bill before us that if we affirmatively pass it like 
the other body has, it is going to go to the President's desk. It is 
going to be signed. There will be additional funds to help both the 
cold weather and the warm weather States. And I would hope that we 
would, while we have nothing but respect for Mr. Regula, that we would 
oppose his motion to oppose this bill. Pass it. Send it to the 
President so that we could get his signature and allocate these funds 
to the most needy of Americans in both the warm weather and cold 
weather States.
  I ask for a yea vote.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, how much time do I have 
remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Drake). The gentleman from Texas has 13 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Following the chairman of our full committee and, again, I understand 
the Chair of our appropriations subcommittee's concern, but this bill 
has a great deal of bipartisan support.
  We heard from our colleague from New Hampshire, who is experiencing 
high utility bills and has already run out of their funding for their 
poor in New Hampshire. But a lot of us are looking forward to what may 
be happening not only this winter, but also

[[Page 3726]]

this summer. So I am proud to have Congressman Pickering of Mississippi 
and Congressman LaTourette, who is also supporting this legislation.
  When we vote on this tomorrow, we will see a lot of Members from 
across the aisle who are supporting this legislation; and again, like 
my chairman of our full committee and also the ranking member of the 
committee, John Dingell is supporting this legislation. We need to do 
something now to help and we will work whatever we can to help with the 
allocation from the Appropriations Subcommittee on Health and Human 
Services or, again, another supplemental next year or later this year 
that will be able to deal with it.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote aye.
  Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, 
which moves funds appropriated to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance 
Program, or LIHEAP, from Fiscal Year 2007 to Fiscal Year 2006. This 
legislation passed the Senate last week, so its passage in this Chamber 
will send the bill on to the President.
  The legislation would move $1 billion in funding to this fiscal year. 
Half of the funds would be allocated to the States pursuant to the 
statutory formula. The other half, however, would be considered 
contingent funding, and subject to the discretion of the 
Administration.
  It is important that all of these funds reach those in need. The 
recently passed Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorized $5 billion for 
this fiscal year. But even if all of the funds in this bill are sent to 
those in need, the total funding for the program will only total a 
little over $3 billion. In other words, we are still going to be $2 
billion below the program authorization.
  People in the Midwest and Northeast are in desperate need of these 
funds. According to the National Energy Assistance Directors' 
Association, since the winter of 2001-2002, yearly natural gas bills 
have soared from $465 to $1000, while annual heating oil bills have 
gone from $465 to $1000.
  In my home state of Michigan, these national trends have translated 
to an average energy cost increase of nearly 37 percent. As a result, 
the state has anticipated a 6 percent increase in LIHEAP applications. 
Without additional funding, our state could experience as much as a $60 
million shortfall in LIHEAP money. This bill, while falling far short 
of providing the money necessary or authorized by EPACT, provide at 
least a few million dollars more to help my state address this 
projected shortfall.
  Of course, much of the new funds will also go to warmer climates, 
where families will be facing unprecedented cooling bills this summer, 
so this is not just a regional bill.
  It is unfortunate that funding for LIHEAP has remained constant over 
the years while heating costs have soared. Even with these new funds, 
many families will have a hard time paying their heating bills this 
winter.
  Many of us would like to see LIHEAP funded at its authorized level of 
$5 billion, but certainly this bill will be of immediate assistance and 
I urge its passage.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the Senate bill, S. 2320.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Mr. REGULA. 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 and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this question will 
be postponed.

                          ____________________