[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 12782-12784]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




LIMITING AMENDMENTS DURING FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5672, SCIENCE, 
STATE, JUSTICE, COMMERCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during further 
consideration of H.R. 5672 in the Committee of the Whole, pursuant to 
House Resolution 890, notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, no 
further amendment to the bill may be offered except: pro forma 
amendments offered at any point in the reading by the chairman or 
ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their 
designees for the purpose of debate; amendments printed in the Record 
and numbered 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 and 
25; an amendment by each of the following specified Members:
  Mr. Reichert, regarding funding for the Justice Assistance grant 
program, which shall be debatable for 20 minutes;
  Ms. Brown-Waite, regarding funding for VAWA program;
  Ms. Velazquez, regarding funding for the SBA, which shall be 
debatable for 20 minutes;
  Mr. Hinchey, regarding funding limitation on implementation of 
medical marijuana laws, which shall be debatable for 20 minutes;

[[Page 12783]]

  Mr. Wolf or Mr. Mollohan, regarding funding for State and local law 
enforcement assistance;
  Mr. Obey, regarding funding for Legal Services Corporation;
  Mr. Boswell, regarding funding for criminal records upgrades;
  Mr. Wynn, regarding funding for drug courts;
  Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut, regarding funding for FBI salaries and 
expenses;
  Mr. Mollohan, regarding funding for various programs and tax law 
changes;
  Mr. Kennedy of Minnesota, regarding funding for Justice Assistance 
grant program;
  Mr. Kennedy of Minnesota, regarding funding for Justice Assistance 
grant program;
  Mr. Barrow, regarding funding for SCAAP;
  Ms. Millender-McDonald, regarding funding for drug courts;
  Mr. Garrett of New Jersey, regarding funding for Justice Assistance 
grant programs;
  Mr. Reyes, regarding funding for the Southwest Border Initiative;
  Mr. Fossella, regarding funding for COPS bulletproof vest program;
  Mr. Lynch, regarding funding for COPS bulletproof vest program;
  Mr. Renzi, regarding funding for tribal law enforcement;
  Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas, regarding funding limitation on targeting 
segments of the Muslim and Arab communities for national security 
investigations;
  Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas, regarding funding limitation on State and 
local anti-drug task forces that do not collect data on the racial 
distribution of convictions;
  Mr. Brown of Ohio, regarding USTR funding for China enforcement;
  Mr. Brown of Ohio, regarding ITA funding for the Office of China 
compliance;
  Mr. Rogers of Michigan, regarding funding for the Manufacturing 
Extension Partnership Program;
  Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas, regarding funding for NOAA;
  Mr. Gilchrest, regarding funding for certain NOAA programs;
  Mr. Thompson of California, regarding funding for Pacific Coastal 
salmon recovery;

                              {time}  1900

  Mr. Brown of Ohio, regarding funding for NASA aeronautics research;
  Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas, regarding funding for NASA education 
programs;
  Ms. Watson, regarding funding for the Bureau of Economic and Business 
Affairs;
  Mr. Murphy, regarding funding reduction for FCC unless certain 
rulemaking occurs;
  Mrs. Davis of California, regarding funding for the National Veterans 
Business Development Corporation;
  Mr. Obey, amending FLSA with respect to the minimum wage;
  Mr. Andrews, regarding funding limitation on revisions to OMB 
circular A-76;
  Mr. Baird, regarding funding limitation on motions filed under 
section 3730 of title 31;
  Mr. Capuano, regarding funding for young witness assistance grants;
  Mr. Cardoza, regarding funding for drug endangered children grant 
program;
  Mr. Culberson, regarding funding limitation on activities in 
contravention of section 1373 of title 8;
  Ms. DeGette, regarding funding for Internet Crimes Against Children 
task forces;
  Ms. DeLauro, regarding funding for sexual assault services grants;
  Mr. Engel, regarding funding limitation on energy efficiency 
standards;
  Mr. Etheridge, regarding the Hometown Heroes Act;
  a funding limitation by Mr. Flake on each of the following: 
Rochester, New York Tooling and Machining Association for a workforce 
development program;
  Bronx Council for marketing of local business arts initiatives;
  Arthur Avenue Retail Market for local business requirements and 
improvements;
  Wisconsin Procurement Initiative;
  JARI for a regional business incubator;
  Fairmont State University for a small business development 
initiative;
  Fairplex Trade and Conference Center;
  Southern and Eastern Kentucky Tourism Development Association;
  JARI Workforce Development Program and Small Business Technology 
Center;
  Oil Region Alliance of Business, Industry and Tourism;
  Mr. Frank of Massachusetts, regarding funding limitation on manned 
space mission to Mars;
  Mr. Garrett of New Jersey, requiring annual report on U.S. 
contributions to the U.N. and affiliated entities;
  Mr. Gingrey, regarding funding limitation on participation under the 
Visa Waiver program;
  Mr. Hinchey, regarding funding limitation on ``Knock and Announce'' 
policies;
  Mr. Hinchey, regarding medical marijuana and transfers of funds for 
certain State and local programs;
  Mr. Hinchey, regarding funding limitation for FCC licenses based on 
ownership;
  Mr. Hinchey, regarding funding limitation on private phone records 
from data and credit brokers;
  Mr. Inslee, regarding funding for children and youth programs and the 
national tribal sexual offender registry;
  Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas, regarding funding for juvenile 
justice programs;
  Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas, regarding funding for the 
juvenile delinquency prevention block grant program;
  Mrs. Jones of Ohio, regarding funding limitation on the EEOC National 
Contact Center;
  Mr. King of Iowa, regarding funding for enforcement of section 642 of 
the IIRIRA;
  Mr. Kucinich, regarding funding limitation on NASA involuntary 
separations;
  Mr. Lipinski, regarding funding for Law Enforcement Tribute Act;
  Mr. McCaul of Texas, regarding funding limitation on U.N. 
peacekeeping missions in which U.N. employees under investigation have 
not been removed;
  Mr. McCaul of Texas, regarding funding limitation on the U.N. Human 
Rights Council unless certain members are removed;
  Mr. McCotter, regarding funding limitation on filing under FARA 
unless certain conditions are met;
  Mr. Nadler, regarding funding for the Jessica Gonzalez Victims 
Assistance Program;
  Mr. Nadler, regarding funding for FBI salaries and expenses;
  Mr. Nadler, regarding funding limitation on issuance of NSA letters 
to health insurance companies;
  Mr. Sherman, regarding funding limitation on detention of enemy 
combatants;
  Mr. Sodrel, regarding funding limitation on enforcement of the final 
judgment issued in Hinrichs v. Bosman;
  Mr. Tiahrt, regarding competitiveness;
  Ms. Watson or Mr. Issa, regarding funding limitation on accession of 
the Russian Federation into the WTO unless USTR makes certain 
certifications;
  Mr. Waxman, regarding funding limitation on Industry Trade Advisory 
Committee on Chemicals unless certain membership requirements are met;
  Mr. Weiner, regarding funding for COPS hiring program; and
  an amendment or amendments by Mr. Wolf.
  Each such amendment may be offered only by the Member named in this 
request or a designee, or by the Member who caused it to be printed in 
the Record or a designee, shall be considered as read, shall not be 
subject to amendment except that the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Appropriations and the Subcommittee on 
Science, the Departments of State, Justice, and Commerce, and Related 
Agencies each may offer one pro forma amendment for the purpose of 
debate; and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.
  Except as otherwise specified, each amendment shall be debatable for 
10

[[Page 12784]]

minutes, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent. An amendment shall be considered to fit the description 
stated in this request if it addresses in whole or in part the object 
described.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  Mr. OBEY. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, I want to make 
the point again that if all of these amendments are offered, we could 
be here for as much as 25 hours.
  So I would hope that Members would consider whether or not these 
amendments are duplicative and that some of them might not be offered, 
if we are going to finish this in a timely fashion.
  Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.

                          ____________________