[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 21]
[House]
[Pages 29822-29833]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2007--VETO MESSAGE FROM THE 
                     PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Doyle). The unfinished business is the

[[Page 29823]]

further consideration of the veto message of the President on the bill 
(H.R. 1495) to provide for the conservation and development of water 
and related resources, to authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
construct various projects for improvements to rivers and harbors of 
the United States, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is, Will the House, on 
reconsideration, pass the bill, the objections of the President to the 
contrary notwithstanding?
  (For veto message, see proceedings of the House of November 5, 2007, 
at page 29383.)
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie 
Bernice Johnson) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of 
debate only, I yield 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Mica).


                             General Leave

  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and 
extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the matter 
under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Texas?
  There was no objection.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentlewoman from Texas yield for a 
parliamentary inquiry?
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. I will.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. MICA. My only parliamentary inquiry is, in fact, that we are now 
in fact taking up the WRDA veto override, and that debate will take up 
1 hour, and the time has been equally divided.
  Is that the correct parliamentary procedure or order of business?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is correct.
  Mr. MICA. Thank you.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, it was a little over 2 years ago that Hurricanes Katrina 
and Rita tore through the gulf coast leaving a trail of tragedy and 
despair in their wake.
  Endless news reports documented the disaster, the catastrophe, the 
misfortune and the heartbreak of the affected communities. Even some of 
our colleagues lost their homes. Many wondered how they could help 
these victims, whose homes, families, and livelihoods were destroyed in 
a matter of hours.
  Washington may be geographically far from Mississippi, Louisiana, 
Alabama and Texas, but it gives us no excuse to dismiss the travails of 
those States. We cannot merely look at these events through protective 
glass, ruling on the fates of these communities from far away. We must 
be on the ground, planning recovery and reconstruction to ensure the 
devastation experienced never happens again.
  Most of us have traveled to New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina to 
try and understand what needs to be done to help the region prepare for 
the future. I have seen firsthand the devastation faced by the citizens 
of New Orleans and the surrounding region.
  On September 15, 2005, President Bush stood in New Orleans, 
Louisiana, in the dark of the night and stated, ``Throughout the area 
hit by the hurricane, we will do what it takes, we will stay as long as 
it takes, to help citizens rebuild their communities and their lives.''
  How is vetoing the Water Resources Development Act consistent with 
this pledge? We need to change how we deal with these events.
  Our Federal emergency planning should not consist of after-the-fact 
recovery. We must institute prevention. We cannot simply wait for 
tragedy after tragedy and then hastily truck in meals ready to eat or 
trucks of bottles of water. We need to truck in reform now.
  Prior to the hurricanes, the gulf coast had but a patchwork of 
protection. The wetlands had disappeared. The buffer that could have 
reduced the wrath of the winds and storm surge of Katrina and Rita had 
been vanishing. This legislation authorizes the Army Corps of Engineers 
to begin to replenish the water coastline.
  WRDA 2007 also closes the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, commonly 
known as ``Mr. Go,'' taking a proactive step to help the people and the 
businesses of Louisiana, Mississippi and the entire Gulf Coast States. 
The Mississippi River Gulf Outlet was authorized to provide a shorter 
shipping channel from the Gulf of Mexico to New Orleans; yet the 
projected traffic for this corridor never materialized. Unfortunately, 
the outlet may have substantially contributed to the severe flooding of 
the City of New Orleans and the lower Ninth Ward during Hurricane 
Katrina.
  WRDA 2007 is also essential to fulfill the President's commitment to 
rebuild New Orleans even better and stronger than before the storm. 
Unfortunately, by vetoing this legislation, the President is turning 
his back on the commitment to rebuild this great city, vetoing the 
authorization for the Corps to raise enhanced flood protection levees 
surrounding the City of New Orleans and to achieve a 100-year level of 
protection.
  Some may think that investment in our Nation's infrastructure should 
have a cost ceiling. We will never be able to contain this cost until 
we do some of the work. That investment in our Nation's future should 
only cost so much. Well, for those who make this argument concerning 
this bill, I urge them to study the recent past of this legislative 
body.
  This bill is not new. As many times as we don't finish it, cost goes 
up. WRDA 2007 contains water resource projects that have been pending 
in the halls of this Chamber for far too long. Water resources 
legislation is most effective when authorized every 2 years. Even the 
executive branch department indicated that we need $19 billion every 
other year to bring this, all the infrastructure, up to par. This 
hasn't happened.
  The last bill was signed in 2000 by President Clinton. This bill 
clears a 7-year logjam. A larger bill is necessary to carry a larger 
load.
  When President Bush states that this bill is too costly, he is not 
considering the time lag. This debate is not about whether this 
legislation could cost $14 billion or $15 billion, but about whether 
this legislation authorizes projects that reinvest in the Nation's 
crumbling infrastructure.
  We do right by this country when we invest in its infrastructure. 
Regrettably, we are falling miserably behind. China spends 9 percent of 
its gross domestic product on infrastructure. India spends 3.5 percent 
and the U.S. spends a meager .93 percent. We must do better.
  We don't want a situation where our beaches remain contaminated with 
open sewage or other contaminants. We passed this particular conference 
report on August 1, 2007, the same day that the highway bridge I-35 
collapsed in Minnesota. We stood on this floor considering investment 
in infrastructure at the same time that emergency personnel were 
working the wreckage of a structure that unexpectedly is unstable. Our 
country cannot continue to put an arbitrary cost ceiling on investment 
in our public works.
  If we do this on a regular basis, we won't have to do that.
  Simply put, this legislation is about meeting our commitments to the 
Nation on protecting lives and livelihoods, ensuring economic 
competitiveness in the global marketplace, and restoring the Nation's 
ecological treasures.
  For example, WRDA 2007 authorizes the first three projects in the 
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, the Picayune Strand, Indian 
River Lagoon, and the Site 1 Impoundment Project.
  Since 2000, all 15 components of the Comprehensive Everglades 
Restoration Plan have been delayed. Costs have decreased, and even in 
my paper this

[[Page 29824]]

weekend, there was an article on how the Everglades were disappearing.
  Florida's Big Cypress National Preserve and Everglades National Park 
continue to be listed in the directories of our country's most 
endangered parks. As the population of the State of Florida has boomed, 
land management has not kept pace. This bill begins the journey to a 
better Florida.
  If safety and human protection are not good enough reasons to secure 
the passage of this legislation, I urge the President to consider our 
industry. WRDA 2007 seeks to improve our waters for our industry and 
our environment. This bill authorizes 7 locks and dams in the Upper 
Mississippi River, as well as the ecosystem restoration projects in the 
Midwest region.

                              {time}  1645

  This bill doesn't just address large water resources projects. Many 
smaller projects are contained within this legislation, seeking to 
improve cities and small towns across the Nation. We'd like very much 
for drinking bottled water to continue to be a selection and a choice, 
rather than a necessity.
  These projects do not make national headlines, but they make a 
difference in the quality of life for those who live in these 
vicinities. Without these projects, many communities would be without 
necessary flood control, ecosystem restoration, and economic and public 
health necessities.
  Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I'd be remiss if I failed to mention the flood 
control needs of my district in Dallas. The Dallas Floodway accepts 
1,600 square miles of Trinity River watershed runoff and safely moves 
the flood waters through the City of Dallas by virtue of levees that 
form both sides of the 2,000 foot-wide floodway. The flooding has been 
projected to flood the downtown area where all of the basis of our 
economy is. The floodway levees protect the downtown Dallas vicinity 
from a potential flood damage loss to property and infrastructure of $8 
billion or more.
  The 23 miles of levees for the Dallas Floodway were originally 
constructed by local interests in 1932 and reconstructed by the Corps 
in 1960. Since 1960, the upstream watershed has experienced the 
exploding population growth, which has significantly increased run-off, 
overwhelmed our antiquated interior drainage pumps, and greatly reduced 
the flood protection afforded by the levee system.
  My district's flood control needs are great; and like other 
communities across the Nation, they are anxiously anticipating the 
resumption of a predictable, consistent and 2-year WRDA cycle.
  Mr. Speaker, it is imperative that this Congress send a message to 
the American people today that we intend to make our Nation's 
infrastructure a priority.
  I urge my colleagues to join with me and vote ``yes'' in making our 
infrastructure a priority, vote ``yes'' for your districts, and vote 
``yes'' to override the ill-advised veto.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, let me say at the outset, I have supported 
President Bush on many occasions. In fact, I pulled a list of some 43 
measures on which I supported the President in an attempt to sustain a 
veto.
  But today, my colleagues, I must respectfully disagree with President 
Bush's veto of this important and long overdue Water Resources 
Development Act. I believe it's far too important for both our Nation 
and for my State of Florida and, again, for all the projects that are 
in the backlog. I'm disappointed the President and the White House have 
decided to veto this legislation that includes many critically needed 
infrastructure and restoration projects.
  For the first time, you've heard this since 2000, the year 2000, 
Congress will enact legislation authorizing, and this is authorizing, 
we are setting Congress's priorities for authorization. All of these 
projects in this bill must come back for approval for funding.
  But this particular bill includes all of the water resource projects 
to restore our endangered ecosystems across the country, construct new 
levees, dams, rebuild our beaches, and work on other important water 
resources projects.
  A significant portion of the bill, I might say, deals with Everglades 
restoration, something that we've been working on for years. And also 
another significant portion of this legislation deals with work and 
reconstruction of some of our water resources projects in the damaged 
gulf of the United States.
  There's been, as you've heard, a water resources bill introduced in 
every Congress since 2000; however, controversies always dash the hopes 
of approving a measure.
  After I assumed responsibility for ranking member of the House 
Republican leader on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, I 
met with the new chairman, Mr. Oberstar, and I sat down and we tried to 
decide what were our priorities. And this is a great example of how 
this body should work. This is a bipartisan measure. Mr. Oberstar, this 
was one of his priorities. He worked on it for a number of years. I 
came new to my leadership position, but pledged to work with him; and 
we did work together on this.
  Let me say also, ironically, I feel sad today that Mr. Oberstar is 
not joining us. Our hearts, our thoughts and our prayers are with him. 
He's recovering from surgery yesterday which he had scheduled some time 
in advance.
  But he served this House for 32 years before he became the chairman 
of T & I. He made a commitment, a bipartisan commitment to work 
together, and we did that. And when you do that in this House, you can 
achieve anything. And in a few minutes we will achieve an override of 
the President's veto because we worked together in a bipartisan manner 
to rebuild our Nation's water resources.
  Let me say also that earmarks, and this contains a number of 
projects, earmarks have gotten a somewhat tainted reputation and were 
criticized. But what we did, and what I tried to do on the Republican 
side, was make certain that this was a transparent process. Every 
Republican House project was publicly submitted, publicly available for 
review, and very carefully vetted. In fact, Mr. Oberstar and I cut more 
than 100 projects from the 2005 proposed House-passed WRDA proposal 
that did not pass.
  The 2007 WRDA bill addresses what I believe are the important needs 
of our Nation. Again, I think this is a good bill that represents 
investment in America. These investments will improve trade, protect 
our homes, our businesses from flood damages, and from other ravages of 
Mother Nature we've seen. They'll enhance our quality of life by 
restoring aquatic ecosystems like in the State of Florida with the 
Everglades restoration.
  This legislation ensures our ports and waterways remain viable in the 
international marketplace by authorizing critical navigational 
deepening projects. Maritime commerce is absolutely essential to the 
future of our economy. Congestion at an outdated port or waterway is 
becoming a national economic issue, and this bill addresses that 
economic problem. Products moving into our waterways aid our 
environment and lessen highway and rail congestion.
  Efficient waterways must be, in fact, an integral part of America's 
intermodal transportation system, and this bill helps do that.
  To maintain our place in the global economy, the United States must 
have modern ports and waterways. Our ports and waterways need to be 
improved to handle additional traffic. And what's coming are mega-
ships, a new class of larger liners and freighters that are coming. We 
have almost no ports that can handle that type of traffic. This 
conference report addresses these needs in several ways, including 
improvements to waterways in my State of Florida, as well as in Texas, 
Louisiana, Virginia, and other areas.
  In addition, this bill authorizes seven new locks and other 
navigational improvements on the upper Mississippi River.
  The WRDA conference report authorizes critical projects to provide 
flood protection to millions of Americans. And we've all seen that if 
we neglect our waterway infrastructure or our water protection system, 
you've heard that adage, we pay now or we pay later.

[[Page 29825]]

Well, I can tell you we'll pay much later if we don't protect ourselves 
from, again, reducing the potential flood damage that we've seen.
  This bill includes many projects that protect our cities from floods 
and also from those coastal storms we've experienced.
  The Corps of Engineers is the leader in planning and carrying out our 
environmental restoration projects. And this conference report that we 
will override a veto on in a few minutes is by far the greenest, most 
environmentally friendly Water Resources Development Act ever passed by 
Congress. This bill's major new focus is environmental restoration, and 
again, it contains the first work. In 2000 we authorized study of 
cleaning up the Everglades. This bill authorizes work on the 
Everglades.
  Everglades restoration, as I said, has been talked about for years. 
And it is a national ecological treasure that must be protected for 
future generations of Americans.
  I might say too that the restoration of the Everglades is in 
partnership with the State of Florida. And I have a message from a 
Republican Governor, Charlie Crist, was handed to me earlier: Greetings 
from Brazil, where he's now with 200 businessmen. And the Republican 
Governor of the State of Florida is urging that we override the 
President's veto, basically because of what I said about the Everglades 
and other critical water infrastructure projects in the State of 
Florida.
  This bill does not, as I said, guarantee funding. Money will have to 
be appropriated to meet these authorization levels; but it represents a 
critical commitment by this Congress to restore, again, an ecological 
jewel in Florida and water resources projects throughout the United 
States.
  Also addressed in the bill are policy issues that will improve how 
the Corps of Engineers actually conducts projects, and that's also 
important. There's a peer review process that I think is critical to 
monitoring and protecting whether the projects perform as designed.
  I know the President is concerned that the conference report 
authorizes more projects than could actually be funded. All of those 
projects may not ultimately receive funding from Congress. They have to 
come back to Congress, even after this authorization. But it is 
important that we authorize, through this conference report, a good 
list of investments from which the Congress can later prioritize 
funding.
  Finally, I know the White House has expressed concerns with this 
bill. However, again, the House bill in 2005 contained 784 projects. 
The House bill in 2007 that we worked to examine in a transparent 
manner the projects, contains 682. Over 100 projects were cut out of 
the previous House bill. Again, this was, I believe, an open and 
transparent and a bipartisan process that, hopefully, will restore some 
of the public's confidence in this process.
  And, finally, we have to realize that this bill, since we haven't 
passed one since 2000, represents the equivalent of three WRDA bills. 
When we had a backup in 1986 we, in fact, funded $11 billion worth of 
projects back in 1986 because we hadn't passed a bill in a long time.
  So while I wholeheartedly respect the President's veto, we, as 
Congress have a responsibility to provide for our Nation's resources 
and infrastructure, provide the leadership to get that job done. And I 
urge Members to support overriding the President's veto.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from South Carolina, our majority whip, Mr. Clyburn.
  Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Water 
Resources Development Act. The benefits that this bill provides are not 
only long overdue, but much needed by communities all across our great 
Nation.
  The importance of this bill is highlighted throughout my 
congressional district and this country. Part of my district has been 
labeled by some as a ``corridor of shame,'' communities bisected by 
Interstate 95. This region of South Carolina has some of the most 
serious health problems to be found anywhere in this country.
  I have consulted the experts trying to ascertain why these health 
disparities exist in my district.

                              {time}  1700

  And they have said that the problems originate in the water that my 
constituents are drinking. In fact, they tell me that at the turn of 
the last century, the life expectancy in this country was less than 50 
years. At the turn of this century, life expectancy has reached over 70 
years. They say that this extension of life is directly attributed to 
the water that my constituents or the people in this country drink.
  And beyond the health issue, this is also a safety and natural 
disaster issue. This bill authorizes funds for our coastal communities 
throughout the country that are susceptible to hurricanes and flooding. 
This legislation also reaffirms this Congress's commitment to helping 
our brothers and sisters who had their lives shattered by Hurricanes 
Katrina and Rita. This bill authorizes close to $2 billion for coastal 
restoration initiatives along the gulf coast.
  So I encourage my colleagues to vote to override this veto because in 
doing so, you are safeguarding the health and physical well-being of 
millions of Americans.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to one of 
the leaders in the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, the 
gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller).
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I certainly thank the gentleman 
for yielding and I appreciate his very hard work on this bill, as well 
as the chairperson of T & I, who, unfortunately, as has been mentioned, 
has not been able to be with us today. But we have got great 
leadership, and to the chairperson of the Water Resources Subcommittee 
as well.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my incredible disappointment of the 
President's veto of the Water Resources Development Act because there 
was an enormous amount of bipartisan work that went into crafting this 
bill, as was demonstrated actually by the overwhelming support it 
received in both Chambers for final passage.
  The President says this bill spends too much. Well, fair enough, 
until you consider that this bill actually spends nothing; it simply 
authorizes, and the actual appropriations for every project will have 
plenty of time for discussion on the merits before approval.
  The Congress has not passed a WRDA bill since 1999. It is long 
overdue, and it addresses critical water projects and related 
infrastructure throughout our Nation that I believe we need to invest 
in to keep America strong and healthy.
  Members are talking today about various projects in their part of the 
country, so let me just mention a few in my area. The great State of 
Michigan, also known as the Great Lakes State, not just because our 
magnificent Great Lakes are a huge economic impetus for us or because 
our quality of life is predicated on them, but, in fact, because they 
are our very identity.
  Keep in mind that the Great Lakes actually comprise 20 percent, or 
one-fifth, of the fresh water supply on the entire planet and that they 
are facing historic low water levels, that they are being inundated 
with invasive species, and that they are suffering from chemical spills 
and billions of gallons of raw sewage that are being dumped into them.
  This bill authorizes funding for the Lake St. Clair-St. Clair River 
Management Plan. It authorizes building an electronic barrier at the 
Chicago Diversionary Canal to keep the Asian carp from coming in to 
Lake Michigan from the Mississippi River. It authorizes funding to stop 
the spread of VHS, which is an Ebola-like virus that is infecting some 
of the fish in the Great Lakes. And it authorizes studies on how water 
diversions may be contributing to the historic low lake levels.
  Mr. Speaker, I like to think of myself as a fiscal conservative, but 
part of that, I believe, means being able to clearly make choices about 
priority spending. In my mind these types of projects are priorities 
for our Nation.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote to override the President's veto.

[[Page 29826]]


  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to 
the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello), senior member of the 
committee.
  Mr. COSTELLO. I thank the gentlewoman, the Chair of the subcommittee, 
for yielding time to me, and I thank her for all of her hard work on 
this legislation, as well as Chairman Oberstar, Ranking Member Mica, 
and the ranking member of the subcommittee.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the resolution to 
override the President's veto of the Water Resources Development Act.
  Overriding the President's veto is extremely important, as this 
legislation addresses what the Congress and administration failed to do 
in previous years: enact a WRDA bill that addresses the critical 
infrastructure needs of our country.
  WRDA authorizes projects from major flood control, navigation, 
environmental restoration, and other water resource projects, as well 
as includes authorizations of several important projects to restore and 
enhance the Nation's environmental infrastructure.
  The United States transportation system has an extensive system of 
highways, ports, locks and dams, and airports; yet we continue to 
neglect upgrading and modernizing our infrastructure. We shouldn't 
build our infrastructure and then walk away without maintaining and 
modernizing it as it becomes antiquated, like we have done with the 
upper Mississippi and the Illinois Waterways lock and dam system.
  In this WRDA bill, we are authorizing the Upper Mississippi and 
Illinois Waterway System. The bill authorizes the replacement of 600-
foot navigation locks with seven new 1,200-foot locks to bring more 
efficiency and effectiveness to our water transportation system.
  Our current system looses about 10 percent of its capacity due to the 
system failure and breakdowns because it has exceeded its life 
expectancy by over 20 years. It can't handle the traffic in an 
efficient and cost-effective manner, and it's costing taxpayers tens of 
millions of dollars to patch it together every year, let alone the cost 
in time and money to its users.
  At a time when we continue to spend $12 billion of the U.S. 
taxpayers' money every month in Iraq, I can't understand why the 
President would veto this important legislation. You have to ask the 
question, how can we afford to spend billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars 
to rebuild the infrastructure in Iraq but can't afford to invest in our 
own infrastructure right here at home?
  This bill is 7 years overdue. Our infrastructure needs are growing. 
The President's veto message talks about priorities. I believe that the 
future of the U.S. economy and the living standards of our people 
should be our top priorities. This bill will help our farmers get their 
crops to market, protect critical habitat, and provide flood protection 
for our people.
  Modernizing our infrastructure is the right thing to do. It is a 
necessity for our economy and commerce, and we, therefore, must 
override the President's veto today.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly support overriding the President's veto of 
WRDA and urge my colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to another 
leader on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on the 
Republican side, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany).
  Mr. BOUSTANY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this Water Resources Development 
Act and urge all Members of this Chamber to vote to override the 
Presidential veto.
  When Benjamin Franklin stated ``An ounce of prevention is worth a 
pound of cure,'' he very well could have been speaking about the 
Louisiana coastline. For years, years, we have been losing acres of 
coastline.
  Now, why is this important? The Louisiana coastline is critical for 
our energy infrastructure in this country. It's critical to support the 
maritime industry that supports this energy infrastructure. And without 
a Water Resources Development Act, which is 7 years overdue, we are 
seeing our coastline disappear.
  This bill is a start. It's a start to help us to ensure that we can 
protect our coastline from future storm surges, to protect this 
coastline and energy infrastructure that is so necessary for this 
country.
  Some have said that the bill is too expensive. Well, it is a 7-year 
bill and it's an authorization. It helps Congress set priorities, 
working with our States, working with local officials and the 
scientific community particularly in my State of Louisiana who set 
these priorities so as to preserve our coastline and valuable water 
infrastructure throughout the country.
  I am very much pleased as well to see that the bill has peer review 
measures in it to make sure that we have independent peer review of 
major Corps projects. The threshold, I think, was set at $45 million. 
But it also allows the chief to have certain flexibilities so as to not 
create unnecessary delays to these very valuable projects.
  This is a critically important bill. I urge all colleagues to support 
this bill, support an override of the Presidential veto.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to 
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui).
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support 
for the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 and to encourage all of 
my colleagues to vote to override the President's veto for this long 
overdue legislation.
  We have not had a WRDA bill in over 7 years. If Hurricane Katrina 
taught us anything, it is that investing in our infrastructure is a 
crucial component of preparing for emergencies. Seven years is 
perilously close to an entire generation without a national overarching 
water policy.
  In my hometown of Sacramento, we are all too aware of the importance 
of investing in water projects. We live at the confluence of two great 
rivers: the American and Sacramento.
  Sacramento is the most at-risk river city in the Nation, and we know 
that we must be vigilant in our efforts to increase our flood 
protection. This bill marks a significant step in our efforts to 
increasing the security of our Nation for generations to come. To be 
clear, Mr. Speaker, we need this bill in Sacramento and the Nation 
needs this bill.
  After years of inaction, the bipartisan WRDA bill we have passed 
comes not a moment too soon. There should be a WRDA bill coming out of 
Congress and signed by the President every 2 years. Unfortunately, the 
President has turned his back on assuring the safety and security of 
the American people. This strong, bipartisan legislation will take 
significant steps to improve our flood protection and invest in the 
future health of our communities.
  In Sacramento we know exactly how important this bill is to our 
safety, and I look forward to voting to override the President's veto 
today.
  I want to commend Chairman Jim Oberstar, Ranking Member Mica, 
Subcommittee Chairwoman Johnson, and Ranking Member Baker for their 
strong bipartisan leadership in making WRDA 2007 a reality.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to one of 
the true fiscal conservatives of the House, the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Flake).
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  And I want to thank the President for vetoing this bill. We 
Republicans promised a new era of fiscal responsibility, and I don't 
think it is very fiscally responsible to add $750 million in earmarks 
in the conference report alone.
  The Senate passed a $14 billion WRDA bill. The House passed a $15 
billion WRDA bill. And when the conference came back, you would think 
that they would split the difference, maybe 14.5. But, no, it came back 
at $23 billion. So $14 billion, $15 billion, you compromise and you get 
$23 billion. There is something wrong with this picture.
  So I think we should sustain the President's veto. We need to be 
fiscally responsible not just with appropriations but with 
authorizations as well.

[[Page 29827]]

We simply can't continue to add to the backlog of projects that are 
already out there. It will simply mean that more will go unfinished and 
priorities will be diverted off into doing studies that will never be 
done.
  So I applaud the President for vetoing this bill, and I urge my 
colleagues to sustain that veto.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ 
minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop).
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding, and I 
also thank her for her leadership on this very important bill.
  Mr. Speaker, a congressional override of this Presidential veto is 
absolutely imperative to ensure the safety and viability of our 
Nation's water infrastructure.
  For the President to veto this legislation under the guise of fiscal 
responsibility is hypocritical at best. The tab for the President's 
endless war in Iraq is now in excess of $600 billion and counting. Just 
the interest on the amount we have borrowed to fund the war is $25 
billion per year, an amount that exceeds the authorized level of this 
legislation. This veto is a stark reminder that the hundreds of 
billions of dollars spent on the war in Iraq has been at the expense of 
pressing priorities here at home.
  In the 5 years since the war began, over $45 billion has been spent 
on restoring the infrastructure in Iraq. This is double the $23 billion 
price tag a bipartisan majority of Congress seeks now to address a 7-
year backlog of much-needed projects.

                              {time}  1715

  When it comes to domestic priorities, the President has decided 
against investing in America. He has vetoed expanding health care for 
children, he has vetoed research for life-threatening diseases, he has 
vetoed benchmarks for Iraq, and has threatened vetoes on investments 
ranging from education to law enforcement. Are these vetoes the 
priorities of America, or are they the misplaced priorities of an 
administration hopelessly out of step with the American people?
  Mr. Speaker, the Water Resources Development Act benefits all 
Americans and their families who use and enjoy our Nation's waterways. 
My district benefits from the good work that the Army Corps of 
Engineers does for coastal communities by helping small towns deal with 
multiple concerns ranging from erosion to longstanding environmental 
challenges.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1495 will go a long way towards supplying the Corps 
with the resources it needs to protect coastal communities by 
modernizing project planning and approval. We simply cannot afford to 
let another year go by without passing this legislation.
  I urge my colleagues to override the President's veto.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to 
another fiscal watchdog in the House, a leader in the Republican Study 
Group, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).
  Mr. PENCE. I thank the distinguished gentleman for yielding and for 
his courtesy.
  Mr. Speaker, in 2006, the American people looked at a sea of debt and 
deficit spending and said, Enough is enough, and President Bush got the 
message.
  In using his veto pen in the Water Resources Development Act, the 
President is exercising the fiscal discipline that the American people 
demand of this Congress. But the question today is, did the Congress 
get the message? Even The Washington Post said, and I quote, this last 
Sunday: ``Mr. Bush is a bit late in trying to recover his party's 
reputation for fiscal conservatism.'' But they go on to say: ``And he's 
right: after all, the Senate and House versions of the legislation 
tipped the scales at $14 billion and $15 billion, respectively.'' And 
the compromise that lawmakers came together with is $23 billion.
  The American people long for a Congress and a national government 
that will embrace fiscal discipline and reform.
  I urge my colleagues, respectively, support the President's veto. Say 
``yes'' to a renewed commitment to fiscal discipline and reform.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1 minute 
to our majority leader from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  The previous speaker I have great respect for; I think he's one of 
the very conscientious, very able Members of this House, and I think he 
is one of the fiscal conservatives that follows a consistent policy. I 
don't think that's true of all his colleagues. I think they talk a 
fiscally conservative game sometimes, but don't play a fiscally 
conservative game. But let me tell my friend this: expenditures are 
both domestic and non-domestic. And my friend is leaving, Mr. Flake. I 
guess I'm not going to talk to him about it. But the previous speaker 
spoke about fiscally conservative actions. This President has sent down 
to us a request for $196.4 billion in expenditures, not in Anchorage, 
not in Baltimore and not in Mississippi or California, $196.4 billion 
for Baghdad and Kabul. But, he says, water resources development is too 
much for America. He doesn't pay for a single cent of that $196.4 
billion, not a cent, but he says in order to develop the levees to save 
New Orleans, it has cost us billions of dollars because they weren't 
adequate; or to build bridges that don't fall down in Minnesota, he 
says this is too much money. And I understand that WDRA doesn't cover 
bridges. But the point is it covers investment in our country.
  Mr. Speaker, like most of our House colleagues, I am deeply 
disappointed that the President has chosen to veto the Water Resources 
Development Act. It is critical to the health of our people, to 
economic development in this country, and the safety of our 
communities.
  The WDRA conference report, which passed the House and Senate by 
overwhelming bipartisan votes, 381 Members of this House said this 
investment is good for America, and in the Senate, 81 Senators said 
this investment is good for America, because it makes critical 
investments in our Nation's water resources and infrastructure.
  In short, this conference report will enable the Army Corps of 
Engineers to maintain our Federal shipping channels, preserving jobs 
and bolstering the economy. It will allow the Corps to work with States 
and local communities on necessary environmental restoration projects, 
and it will permit the Corps to ensure the safety of our citizens by 
shoring up our aging levees, dams, and reducing the possibility of 
flooding.
  Furthermore, this conference report makes specific investments in the 
gulf coast, which was so damaged by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. I see 
my friend, Mr. Melancon, on the floor of this House. He knows how 
critical this funding is for his region and for America. For example, 
it would restore Louisiana's coastal wetlands, which provide increased 
hurricane and storm damage protection which ultimately will save us 
billions of dollars. It would raise and enhance flood protection levees 
surrounding the City of New Orleans, and it would make improvements to 
the drainage canals that significantly contributed to the flooding of 
New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina. Many of us have been there and 
have seen that damage.
  Unfortunately, despite the beneficial investments called for in this 
conference report, the President has chosen to stand in the way of this 
bipartisan legislation, this overwhelmingly bipartisan legislation, in 
an attempt to claim the mantle of fiscal responsibility. Fiscally 
responsible people invest in their future. Fiscally responsible people 
maintain their infrastructure. Fiscally responsible people know that 
clean water and safe harbors aid our commerce and the health of our 
people. That is conservative investment. Let us be clear, the President 
wants to make a stand on fiscal responsibility. This is the wrong bill 
to have done so.
  The WRDA conference report is a multi-year authorization through 
which Congress would appropriate about $2 billion a year for the Corps 
to

[[Page 29828]]

undertake important projects. Furthermore, this conference report 
reflects a backlog of 7 years of project requests because the 107th, 
108th and 109th Congresses failed to enact a water resources bill.
  Ladies and gentlemen of this House, let us fulfill our promise to 
communities all across this Nation, not to Baghdad, not to Kabul, but 
to the cities and States that I've mentioned. Let us meet our 
responsibility, the vital fiscally responsible investments in projects 
that facilitate commerce and economic development, provide eco-system 
restoration, and protect human life and property.
  Let us exercise the responsibility that the Constitution of the 
United States gives to us, and that is to set policy and invest the 
resources of our public in a better future for our country.
  Vote to override this mistaken veto.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes at this time 
to the senior member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee 
and the former immediate past chair of the committee, the distinguished 
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young).
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. I want to thank the ranking member, Mr. Mica, 
and congratulate him on his good work on this legislation.
  This is a good bill. I want to thank Mr. Oberstar and Ms. Johnson for 
the work that you've done on this bill.
  This bill has been passed out of this House approximately three 
times, two times while I was chairman, and now Mr. Mica and Mr. 
Oberstar have got the bill to the President's desk. All the previous 
speakers are not here to beat up the President. I am here to say this 
bill should be passed; we should override the President's veto because 
it's right for America.
  It is an investment, and we are way behind in this investment. Some 
have said, well, we started out with a certain amount of money on the 
House side, the Senate had a certain amount, and we came out with more. 
Frankly, I think it should be about $40 billion. And I say this from a 
little bit of experience. We did the same thing in the Highway bill, it 
should have been $375 billion, not $285 billion, because it is an 
investment in the future and the infrastructure to provide the economy 
for this country that creates the jobs and makes us competitive 
worldwide.
  Without this bill, we will lose. Without this bill, we will not be 
able to achieve those goals. We will not save people's lives. But more 
than that, the next crisis we will face in this country is our water, 
the use of our water, the water to be used correctly, for 
transportation, for recreation and for the good of man.
  This bill is right. Let's override the President. Let's do something 
for America.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 2 
minutes to the distinguished senior member of the committee from 
Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown).
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. I want to thank Chairman Oberstar and 
my friend, Chairwoman Johnson, as well as Mr. Mica and Mr. Duncan, for 
their hard work in completing this long-awaited bill.
  These water projects are extremely important to my home State of 
Florida and for the Nation as a whole and have been held hostage for 
far too long.
  Like all transportation projects, Mr. Oberstar always said that our 
committee, the Committee on Infrastructure, is the committee that 
actually put America to work. And this bill will put America back to 
work, improve our communities, and create economic activity.
  This legislation will also ensure that workers are paid a fair rate 
for their hard work. It is these workers' taxes that pay for these 
projects, and they deserve a fair wage that allows them to adequately 
provide for their families.
  By delaying the passage of this much-needed legislation any further, 
we are doing a disservice to the people we represent.
  Like so many Americans, it is hard for me to understand how President 
Bush can spend $600 billion on his never-ending war, but yet veto $23 
billion in vital water and civil work projects for the cities and towns 
right here in America. This is just one more example of how out of 
touch this administration is. They live in a bubble.
  I encourage my colleagues to support this veto override and let's 
move forward and work on the next WRDA bill so we don't have to wait 6 
more years.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased at this time to yield to a 
gentleman for whom I have the greatest respect; he is also the ranking 
member of the Water Resources Committee, has done an excellent job on 
this bill working in a bipartisan effort. It is my honor to yield 5 
minutes to our ranking member, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. 
Baker).
  Mr. BAKER. I thank the gentleman for his courtesy in yielding time. 
And I certainly want to express appreciation to my chairman of the 
subcommittee for her good work and her bipartisan work in this and many 
other subjects, as well as extending our best wishes to Chairman 
Oberstar and his speedy recovery.
  I am particularly pleased to have the opportunity to speak on this 
matter as a Member from Louisiana. In fact, it reminds me of a 
circumstance where a fellow went to the lumberyard to buy some 2 by 4s, 
and when the vendor at the lumberyard asked, How long do you need them? 
The fellow said, Well, I'm going to need them for a long time, I'm 
building a house. That's the way we feel about the WRDA bill, we've 
been wanting this for a very, very long time.
  There are many Members whose handiwork is evident in this bill 
preceding me, many members of our delegation, but I certainly want to 
acknowledge the work of Mr. Boustany from southwest Louisiana who has 
been so adversely impacted by the storm many have forgotten called 
Rita. He has worked mightily to make sure his constituents' needs are 
met.
  I wish to put a different face on the adoption of this bill than 
perhaps others have characterized. There will be many in the aftermath 
to say, Well, if you throw pork in front of a Congressman, you know 
what's going to happen. And that's unfortunate.
  In the case of Louisiana, this is not a matter of political 
convenience. Many people who will benefit from the $7 billion or so 
that is in this bill would never be able to vote for me anyway.
  The bill provides for construction of 16 different hurricane and 
coastal reclamation projects which have literally been vetted for over 
decades.

                              {time}  1730

  So these have been subject to public discussion, local governments, 
State government, Corps of Engineers examination, and we have been 
ready to go for many, many years. This is not about a matter of 
political convenience or economic development. This is really about 
preservation of a culture in our country that is so vital in our oil 
and gas and natural resources development. From the Rockies to the 
Appalachians, every drop of water runs through the Mississippi system 
and runs right through the Bayou of Louisiana out into the open waters 
of the gulf. In order to protect people from the ravages of the river's 
annual flooding, the Corps constructed enormous levees which throw all 
that sediment now out into the deep waters of the gulf. The result of 
man's own engineering is that we are now subject to the ravages of 
coastal destruction, particularly in the heights of the hurricane 
season. One storm does more damage in a few hours than a decade long of 
natural forces. We are at our rope's end. Some estimate we have less 
than 10 years to act.
  The bill before us, although merely an authorization, will make 
available to us a wide scope of projects which will take decades to 
complete. But I, for one, and I am sure other members of the Louisiana 
delegation will state to this Congress, we are deeply indebted to this 
Congress for taking this action. And as to the disagreement with the 
President, I have had many disagreements with my President. I have had 
disagreements with other Presidents. That is nothing new for us. This 
is just a difference of opinion. I am sure we will all have differences 
of opinion as we move forward through

[[Page 29829]]

the legislative process. I am glad that in this instance we have found 
a way to act from committee to floor to the United States Senate in a 
bipartisan manner and produce a product that is beneficial to the 
entire country.
  I hope you will join with me in overriding this veto and sending this 
important measure on to the Corps of Engineers and to the States for 
implementation as soon as is practical.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ 
minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Melancon).
  Mr. MELANCON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to associate myself with the 
words of my colleague from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), and I thank you for 
that because he, like the people that have not been affected by Katrina 
and Rita have been supportive of Louisiana.
  Today I ask everyone to join in supporting one of the most critical 
bills for Louisiana's recovery in the future. The Water Resources and 
Development Act contains several critical authorizations for hurricane 
protections throughout south Louisiana. WRDA authorizes the closure of 
the Mississippi River-Gulf outlet, also known as the hurricane corridor 
after Katrina, which funneled deadly waters into the heart of New 
Orleans and St. Bernard Parish, destroying thousands upon thousands of 
homes and businesses.
  Also authorized in WRDA is the comprehensive hurricane protection 
system known as Morganza to the Gulf, a 64-mile system of levees, 
locks, floodgates, and they are all planned to help the people of this 
region. Morganza would offer hurricane protection to about 120,000 
people in south Louisiana who currently have no defense against storms 
and are like sitting ducks in the path of the next hurricane.
  This hurricane protection system is so critical and the local 
communities have been taxing themselves for years to build this system. 
It is eminent that we get this bill passed. But they need the Federal 
Government to be a partner in this project and have anxiously followed 
the progress of WRDA for years, hoping for full authorization for 
Morganza.
  WRDA also authorizes funding to bring the Federal levees in South 
Lafourche Levee District up to the 100-year protection level, creating 
better hurricane protection to residents in Lafourche Parish, which is 
home to one of the largest energy corridors in this country. This area 
has also been taxing itself for years.
  In addition to these vital hurricane protection projects, WRDA 
includes a comprehensive coastal restoration plan that will authorize 
projects to rebuild protective wetlands along Louisiana's coast. When I 
travel across south Louisiana, I see with my own eyes how our rich 
marshes and wetlands are disappearing. Louisiana loses a football 
field-sized piece of land to the sea every 35 minutes. During hurricane 
season and Katrina and Rita, we lost over 200 miles. Our State is 
literally washing away into the Gulf of Mexico.
  Let me close, because I have more, and I will put the words into the 
Record, but let me just close by saying that I am appreciative for 
everything that the Members of Congress who have supported our needs in 
south Louisiana and the gulf coast of the United States. I ask for one 
big favor today, and please vote to override the veto of this all-
important piece of legislation.
  In addition to these vital hurricane protection projects, WRDA 
includes a comprehensive coastal restoration plan that will authorize 
projects to rebuild the protective wetlands along Louisiana's coast.
  When I travel across south Louisiana, I see with my own eyes how our 
rich marshes and wetlands are disappearing. Louisiana loses a football 
field-sized piece of land to the sea every 35 minutes. During 
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, we lost over 200 square miles of 
coastline. Our state is literally washing away into the Gulf of Mexico.
  The Louisiana Coastal Area (LCA) authorized by WRDA is a responsible 
plan that ensures the marshes and wetlands that buffer our coast from 
storms are protected, as well as the infrastructure that provides over 
30% of the nation's oil and gas supply and the habitat for marine 
species that supplies 30% of the seafood consumed in the United States.
  This Congress must override the President's veto today.
  Every day WRDA is delayed is another day that 120,000 Americans in 
south Louisiana remain unprotected from storms because we haven't 
broken ground on Morganza-to-the-Gulf.
  Every year that we don't pass a WRDA bill is another year that 
Louisiana's coastal wetlands wash away, even further, because we 
haven't begun work on the LCA (LA Coastal Area) comprehensive coastal 
restoration plan.
  And every hurricane season that goes by without WRDA becoming law is 
another season that the citizens of St. Bernard/Plaquemines, Jefferson, 
New Orleans remain and all of S. LA remain more vulnerable to deadly 
storm surges.
  We can't wait any longer.
  Congress has come up short in finishing a WRDA bill for 7 years now, 
and today we are so close we can't allow it to be stopped.
  Louisiana's hurricane protection and coastal restoration needs must 
not be pushed aside any longer.
  Finally, I would like to thank the committee members and staff for 
their steadfast dedication to this legislation and I urge my colleagues 
to support the successful recovery of Louisiana and the rest of the 
Gulf Coast by voting to override the President's veto and passing WRDA 
with an overwhelming bipartisan vote.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, first, I want to yield myself one-half minute 
for the purpose of an introduction, and then I am going to yield 3 
minutes to the individual I want to introduce.
  Mr. Speaker, and my colleagues, it is now one of the greatest 
pleasures I have had to introduce a gentleman who I got to know for a 
brief period of time. He came into this House, and he has done an 
incredible job of representation in a difficult time for his State of 
Louisiana. I had the chance to go down with him and look at 
infrastructure projects after the damage. I think the people of 
Louisiana recognized, in an unprecedented historic fashion, his 
leadership, in electing him Governor in a tide that was historic in 
proportions.
  So, Mr. Speaker, my colleagues, the gentleman and future Governor of 
the State of Louisiana, our colleague, Mr. Jindal, the gentleman from 
Louisiana, again, I recognize for 3 minutes.
  Mr. JINDAL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Florida for that 
generous introduction, for yielding time as well.
  Mr. Speaker, we have heard now from I think every member of 
Louisiana's delegation. We have heard from both parties telling you how 
important this bill is for Louisiana's future. So many of us saw after 
the disastrous storms of 2005 Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, both storms, 
so many people wondered wouldn't it have been more effective to have 
prevented, to have defended against that damage in the first place? 
Indeed, we heard and recited numbers that are familiar to residents of 
Louisiana; for example, knowing that every couple of miles of healthy 
wetlands reduces tidal surges by a foot. We heard, for example, for 
years there have been projects in the works to raise the levees around 
New Orleans. We heard, for example, that for years there have been 
studies after studies on the Morganza-Gulf and other hurricane 
protection projects. And what we saw that awful year was incredible 
destruction, incredible loss of life. We also have learned, and we have 
seen, that every year Louisiana loses 30 miles a year off our coast. 
That year alone we lost 200 miles off our coast. Many of the Nation's 
best environmental scientists say that now is the time to act, not just 
for Louisiana but for America.
  Louisiana is home to 30 percent of the Nation's fisheries. Thirty 
percent of the Nation's energy production comes off of Louisiana's 
coast. Investing in restoring Louisiana's coast is important for the 
people of Louisiana. But it is also important for the people of the 
entire country all over the United States.
  Now, as we rebuild from the storms, I certainly want to thank my 
colleagues on both sides for their continued support, for their 
generosity. But that is the reason I stand today, to ask for your 
continued support by voting to override this veto of this very 
important piece of legislation.
  In terms of Louisiana's ongoing recovery, passing the WRDA bill is 
one of our three top priorities, in addition to full funding of the 
Road Home program, as well as continued support of

[[Page 29830]]

offshore revenue sharing so that we can repair our coast, repair our 
levees, make our people safe. I have heard several colleagues on this 
House floor, Democrat and Republican, talk about the need to encourage 
people to come back to south Louisiana and talk about the need to help 
businesses come back, help hospitals and medical offices open their 
doors, help schools reopen. Again, we are thankful for the help that 
has already been provided to make those things possible. More help is 
needed.
  But all of that is dependent on making people safe. All of that is 
dependent on guaranteeing to the people of south Louisiana that they 
can be safe living and working in their communities. The WRDA bill 
takes a huge step forward, whether it is the 100-year flood protection 
authorization for the greater New Orleans area, whether it is the 
Morganza-Gulf project, whether it is the port projects. These are 
incredibly important hurricane and flood protection projects.
  This is a bill long overdue. This House is accustomed to passing a 
WRDA bill every couple of years. This bill is over 7 years overdue. I 
would encourage my colleagues to vote to override the veto of this very 
important legislation.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, how much time do we 
have left?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Texas has 5 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Florida has 4 minutes remaining.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to 
Mrs. Tubbs Jones from the State of Ohio.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding the time.
  Usually I stay within the subject matter of my committee. But 30 
years ago, I used to work for something called the Cleveland Regional 
Sewer District. It was actually water development. I thought I was 
going to be an environmental lawyer. I saw how much money and how much 
help was brought to the City of Cleveland by the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act where we were able to build sewage treatment 
plants to treat water all across northeast Ohio.
  This is a comparable bill. It gives communities an opportunity to 
make better what is not in such good shape. At a point back in those 
days, we had a river that was suffering, a lot of things that were 
going on. The money that came into northeast Ohio made a real change 
about how water, how Lake Erie was given an opportunity.
  So I rise today to encourage my colleagues across the aisle, all of 
my colleagues, to support this important legislation and override the 
veto. Not only in Louisiana do we need this help, but we need it in 
northeast Ohio where we have erosion occurring on properties and small 
communities. We need it in Michigan. We need it all across the country. 
What better way to do this job and also put America back to work? Let's 
invest in our infrastructure. Ladies and gentlemen, all my colleagues, 
I encourage you to vote to override the veto and support this Water 
Resources Development Act.
  Mr. MICA. I will continue to reserve until the last speaker.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1 minute 
to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I ask my colleagues to vote against the 
President's veto and therefore override the veto. As I call the roll, 
Cedar Bayou, Texas, Port of Galveston, Houston Ship Channel, Bayport 
Cruise Channel, Jacinto Port, the Upper White Oak Bayou, Buffalo Bayou, 
and Halls Bayou, all impacting people's lives, all of them impacting 
residential areas and all are covered by their water bill. And in 
particular, we need to vote to override the veto because 1,500 homes in 
my congressional district are now being required, in essence, to leave 
their homes because they are in a floodplain, and part of the work that 
this water bill will do is to help to save the homes of these 
hardworking Houstonians and Americans.
  This is a good bill. This is a bill to give people back their lives 
and their property. This bill will contribute to improving America's 
failing water infrastructure and flood prone areas like Houston, Texas. 
I ask my colleagues to vote to override the President's veto.
  Mr. MICA. Understanding that Ms. Johnson will close, I yield myself 
the balance of our time.
  Now, Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, we come to the close of the 
debate on overriding the Presidential veto. Today, indeed, has been a 
strange day. That is the interesting thing about politics and 
government in the United States of America. Look at the people who have 
spoken here; a future Governor. We have heard people who have had their 
homes destroyed, their property. We had a strange day here today. My 
side of the aisle ended up voting not to end a particular debate on a 
possible impeachment resolution of the Vice President. Here I am, a 
staunch supporter of the President's effort to maintain fiscal 
responsibility, supporting override of his veto.
  But this is a very difficult job. It is a difficult job for me. It is 
a difficult job for the President. I think we like to do everything we 
can. I think it is in the heart of the other side of the aisle, and I 
know in the heart of my fellow Republican Members to do as good a job 
as we can in representing people. I know the President has had to make 
some difficult choices coming into office with the events of September 
11 and the terrorist threat that we face and the line drawn in the sand 
by al Qaeda and Iraq. And national security is our primary 
responsibility, but we also have responsibility to our infrastructure.
  So we have tried to sort out those priorities in this process. We do 
need an investment in our infrastructure.
  The President is right in, probably, his stance. I think we are right 
in our stance. This is an authorization bill. This is not a spending 
bill. It does prioritize for the Congress bills that have been 
carefully considered and projects that have been considered by Members, 
and Members make very sincere requests based on the conditions of their 
particular districts.

                              {time}  1745

  It is a great system and it does work. I understand the President's 
commitment to fiscal responsibility, and I think we have tried to act 
in a responsible and good-steward fashion.
  In closing, I again want to thank Mr. Oberstar. Unfortunately, he is 
not with us today, on this day that he worked so hard for. I thank Ms. 
Johnson. I want to thank Mr. Baker, our ranking member, and all of 
those who have worked, particularly the staff: Jim Coon, our staff 
director; David Heymsfeld on the Democrat staff side; John Anderson and 
Ryan Seiger; all of the staff, those named and others, who have worked 
to bring this bill together, all with the same intent, to improve the 
lives, the resources and the condition of our Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have no further 
requests for time, so I rise to close.
  I would like to thank Mr. Oberstar for his tremendous leadership, Mr. 
Young, Mr. Duncan, Mr. Baker, and, of course, Mr. Mica. We have worked 
together for the last 6 years, actually, a little longer, 7 years, on a 
bill to try to address these infrastructure problems throughout our 
Nation. This is the first opportunity that we have really had to begin 
to address the many massive problems that we do have.
  It gives no one pleasure to override any President because I was 
always taught to listen to both sides. This time, Mr. Speaker, I 
believe it's a necessity. We simply must begin to address these many, 
many problems that we are facing. If we had done what the executive 
branch had recommended, we would have had at least $19 billion in 2001; 
another $19 billion in 2003; and another $19 billion in 2005; then the 
$19 billion due this year. As it is, $23 billion is short $55 billion.
  So we are not addressing every problem, but we are trying our best to 
prioritize; and hopefully we can get back on schedule and address these 
problems every 2 years so that we

[[Page 29831]]

won't have to deal with more floods like Katrina and Rita; we won't 
have to do without our Everglades as they begin to disappear.
  So thank you very much to the staff, to all of the Members, both 
minority and majority, because we have all been one or the other. We 
have been majority and we have been minority. We still work together. 
This bill hasn't changed that much, no matter who was in the majority 
or no matter who was in the minority, because we know that problems of 
this sort are really simply not Democrat or Republican; these are 
people's problems and we simply have the responsibility to address 
them.
  Mr. Speaker, I would ask everyone to vote to override this veto.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it's unfortunate we have to be 
here today to override the president's veto of H.R. 1495 (WRDA), a bill 
which has such overwhelming support in our districts across the 
country.
  Now is not the time for inaction on our nation's infrastructure and 
environment. The previous three Congresses have failed to do so, and 
because of that, much needed flood control projects in Houston, Texas 
have been delayed.
  WRDA includes language for the Halls Bayou Federal Flood Control 
Project in Houston which will allow the Harris County Flood Control 
District (HCFCD) to start work on this project in the near future.
  Historic flooding along Halls Bayou has been severe and frequent in 
some neighborhoods. During Tropical Storm Allison in June 2001, Halls 
Bayou was hit very hard, with more than 8,000 homes flooding within the 
watershed. No project can keep all homes from flooding but a project 
can help reduce the risk of flooding for a significant number of 
families, reducing the need for federal assistance, property damage, 
and loss of life.
  The purpose of section 5157 of this legislation which pertains to 
Halls Bayou is to allow the HCFCD to conduct the General Reevaluation 
Review (GRR) and any subsequent federal interest project on Halls 
Bayou. The Corps is limited in its staff, resources, and time with the 
many projects in the Galveston District and the Southwest Division. 
Local project sponsors with the necessary expertise, like Harris 
County, can provide efficiency by becoming more involved.
  Halls Bayou, a major tributary of Greens Bayou, was authorized in 
WRDA 1990 as part of the Buffalo Bayou and Tributaries Project. The 
original Halls Bayou authorization assumed the Greens Bayou project in 
place, which is now finishing a GRR. Results indicate that the work on 
Greens Bayou downstream of Halls Bayou will not have federal work 
although it will have significant local projects. Therefore, a GRR is 
now needed for Halls Bayou as well.
  While conducting the GRR to find a possible federal interest, Harris 
County can begin project implementation in order to reduce future flood 
damage as soon as possible. Adding Halls Bayou to Section 211(f) allows 
Harris County to be reimbursed if the project is later approved by the 
Secretary. I want to thank the Chairman of the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee, Chairman Obey, and my good friend from Texas, 
Subcommittee Chairwoman Eddie Bernice Johnson, for including this and 
other meritorious projects for Harris County.
  I support this bill and the balance that it strikes between the need 
to improve water resources for human purposes and to preserve our water 
uses for the environment and future generations. The projects in this 
bill are much needed, and I hope the Senate will also soon vote to 
override the President's veto so these projects can become law.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, the President's veto of the Water 
Resources Development Act was pointless and unnecessary.
  This legislation, which authorizes project authorizations, 
modifications, and studies for the breadth of authorities for the 
United States Army Corps of Engineers and for the entirety of the 
United States, represents a culmination of seven years of bipartisan, 
bicameral consensus to invest in our nation's future.
  The Water Resources Development Act is vital for our nation's 
economic growth.
  It is essential to maintaining the nation's competitiveness in the 
international marketplace.
  It is necessary for the lives of our families, our neighbors, and our 
nation through the authorization of flood control structures, and 
hurricane and storm damage reduction projects throughout the country--
but most notably for those living in the Gulf Coast region.
  It is necessary for crucial navigation projects and studies, 
including the modernization of a portion of the largest inland waterway 
system in the United States--the Upper Mississippi River and Illinois 
Waterway System.
  It is prudent for sustaining economic growth in our nation's 
industries--such as the revitalized iron ore and steel industries of 
the Great Lakes.
  Finally, it is critical for the long-term, environmental health of 
the nation's ecosystems, including fulfilling our commitment to restore 
the Florida Everglades.
  Enactment of the Water Resources Development Act is also significant 
because it represents the culmination of many years of debate on 
programmatic changes to the economic and environmental policies of the 
Corps of Engineers.
  These changes, which have colloquially been referred to as ``Corps 
reform'', are noteworthy because they signify what can be accomplished 
when industry and the environmental community sit down, talk through 
their concerns, and mutually agree upon a set of changes to the way the 
Corps of Engineers formulates and carries out projects and studies 
within its missions. These programmatic changes will result in better 
studies, better projects, and hopefully, less controversy over the 
final recommendations of the Chief of Engineers.
  Mr. Speaker, the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 was approved 
by both bodies of Congress--the U.S. House of Representatives and the 
United States Senate--with overwhelming, bipartisan consensus. How can 
this legislation merit a Presidential veto?
  For six years, this administration has done nothing to assist in the 
passage of a water resources bill.
  For six years, there have been no draft administration proposals for 
a water resources bill.
  For six years, this administration has done nothing to advance of the 
cause of investment in our nation's water related infrastructure--its 
navigation projects, its flood damage reduction projects, and its 
environmental restoration projects.
  For six years, this administration has been entirely disengaged from 
the water resources development process. Yet, at this late hour, and 
espoused to a newfound, self-ordained fiscal conservatism, the 
President comes to Congress to veto this legislation? This veto is an 
affront to the needs of the American people.
  During the years of consensus building in Congress, there has been no 
participation by this administration to craft legislation to address 
the water resources needs of the nation.
  The President says ``[This] bill lacks fiscal discipline.'' Yet, the 
administration will have an opportunity to influence future funding of 
projects and studies contained in this legislation through the annual 
President's budget request to Congress.
  The President says ``[This] bill does not set priorities.'' Yet, the 
conference report to accompany H.R. 1495 authorizes several, high-
priority projects for investment and restoration of the nation's water 
resources needs.
  First, for farmers and other agricultural industries, internationally 
disadvantaged by aging and inferior locks and dams on the Upper 
Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway System, this legislation 
authorizes the construction of seven new, 1,200-foot locks and other 
navigational improvements that will help move grains and other 
agricultural commodities to market faster and at a reduced cost.
  For the environment, this legislation realizes the decades-long dream 
of restoring the Florida Everglades ecosystem by taking the first steps 
toward undoing the mistakes of the past and ensuring the vitality of 
this internationally recognized environmental treasure for generations 
to come.
  For the communities devastated by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, this 
legislation is essential to fulfilling the President's commitment to 
rebuild the Gulf Coast communities ``even better and stronger than 
before the storm.'' The Water Resources Development Act of 2007 
authorizes the reconstruction of the flood walls and improvements to 
the interior drainage of the City of New Orleans, the closure of the 
Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (``MRGO''), and the initial steps to 
restore the coastal wetlands surrounding the Gulf Coast region.
  For the Great Lakes region, this legislation is crucial to sustain 
and improve the movement of ores from the Iron Range of Minnesota 
through the Great Lakes to international markets. In addition, this 
legislation authorizes the construction of two barriers to halt the 
northward movement of the Asian Carp--one at the Chicago Sanitary and 
Ship Canal, and the other at Lock and Dam 11 on the Upper Mississippi 
River System. These two barriers will help control the movements of 
this voracious fish, and sustain the fisheries of the Great Lakes 
communities.
  This legislation also creates a rapid response authority for the 
Corps and other Federal agencies to control and prevent further

[[Page 29832]]

spreading of viral hemorrhagic septicemia, or the VHS virus in the 
Great Lakes. VHS is an infectious viral disease of fish that has been 
linked to a multiplicity of fish kills. The virus has been a prolonged 
problem in Europe and Japan, and has now been confirmed in Lake 
Ontario, Lake St. Clair, Lake Erie, and the St. Lawrence River. Just 
this past January, it was detected in Lake Huron. With four different 
strains, the VHS virus spreads rapidly. However, it is unclear exactly 
how it spreads. We must study and attack this threat immediately, or 
else we face fish kills in the Great Lakes, a decline in the fishing 
industry, and economic repercussions.
  Mr. Speaker, there are many national priorities in this legislation, 
as well as countless priorities for our local towns, communities, and 
constituents. Yet, why has the President chosen to veto this bill?
  I can only surmise that the President has so far distanced himself 
from the water resources needs of this nation that he fails to 
recognize the importance of this legislation to the American people.
  I urge my colleagues to quickly vote in support of this legislation, 
notwithstanding the Presidential veto, so that we may fulfill the 
commitments that the Federal Government has made to so many, and ensure 
the economic, environmental, and public health of this nation.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I supported this legislation when 
the House considered it originally, and supported it again in the 
revised form resulting from the conference with the Senate.
  And I will support it again today because I think the president's 
veto was misguided.
  Enactment of H.R. 1495, the ``Water Recourses Development Act,'' will 
ensure that important work to protect our lands and water will move 
forward while improving operations of the Corps of Engineers.
  State and local governments in Colorado desperately need the funding 
authorized in this bill for environmental restoration, flood control, 
water supply studies and environmental infrastructure. Unless it is 
overridden, the president's veto will delay or prevent progress on 
important projects including environmental restoration on the South 
Platte River, development of water supply infrastructure in Boulder 
County and the watershed study of Fountain Creek, near Pueblo.
  For the record, I am including a list of all the Colorado projects 
included in the conference report.
  Mr. Speaker, Congress failed to pass a reauthorization of WRDA in the 
107th, 108th, and 109th Congresses. Congress needs to pass this vital 
legislation so we can invest in the necessary long term resources to 
create jobs and address the critical water infrastructure and 
environmental challenges facing Colorado and the nation. I urge my 
colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation and overriding the 
veto of this bill.
  Colorado Projects Threatened by President's Veto: Environmental 
restoration South Platte River in Denver, Colorado; Expedited 
completion of the Watershed study, Fountain Creek, north of Pueblo, 
Colorado; $10,000,000 for the Arkansas Valley Conduit, Colorado; 
$10,000,000 for water supply infrastructure, Boulder County, Colorado; 
$1,000,000 for water and wastewater related infrastructure for the Ute 
Mountain project, Montezuma and La Plata Counties, Colorado; 
$35,000,000 for water transmission infrastructure in Otero, Bent, 
Crowley, Kiowa, and Prowers Counties, Colorado; $34,000,000 for water 
transmission infrastructure, Pueblo and Otero Counties, Colorado.
  A requirement for the United States Geological Survey, in 
consultation with State water quality and resource and conservation 
agencies, to conduct regional and watershed-wide studies to address 
selenium concentrations in the State of Colorado, including studies--
(1) to measure selenium on specific sites; and (2) to determine whether 
specific selenium measures studied should be recommended for use in 
demonstration projects.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, farmers in Missouri and throughout the 
Midwest depend upon our rivers for the transportation of agricultural 
goods and other products important to their businesses. Rivers afford 
producers greater market access, so it is essential that our river 
transportation system runs smoothly and efficiently.
  Earlier this year, the House and Senate approved the Water Resources 
Development Act, a bipartisan bill to authorize funding for America's 
navigation, flood control, and environmental restoration projects. 
Important for Missouri's agricultural community, this long-overdue 
measure would modernize outdated locks and dams along the Mississippi 
River in order to facilitate the movement of commodities to the 
domestic and global marketplace.
  On Friday, the President vetoed the Water Resources Development Act. 
I was extremely disappointed that the President chose to veto this 
bill, which is an investment in rural Missouri and in the sound water 
infrastructure of our entire country.
  On behalf of the Show-Me State farmers I am privileged to represent, 
I am pleased to cast my vote in support of overriding the President's 
veto. I am hopeful it will garner the necessary two-thirds vote and 
that the Other Body will act swiftly so that Congress will enact; the 
water infrastructure bill despite the President's objections to it.
  Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my strong support for 
overriding the President's misguided veto of the Water Resources 
Development Act.
  This bill is long overdue. The projects funded in this bill are 
critical to the health, safety and quality of life in our communities 
around the country. This bill is necessary to better protect Americans 
against severe weather and flooding--and also ensure all Americans have 
access to clean, safe drinking water.
  The President's veto of WRDA is another example of misplaced 
priorities. We continue to spend $10 billion in Iraq, but won't spend 
the money necessary to make sure we never have another Katrina. This 
bill is about saving lives. In my district we have perchlorate 
contamination in much of the drinking water. H.R. 1495 invests money in 
researching and solving this problem--because no parent should ever 
have to worry that their child is going to get sick from drinking tap 
water.
  I urge my colleagues to cast a vote to keep America safe and 
healthy--and override this mistaken veto.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, we must help ensure our communities are 
protected during times of severe flooding that can lead to loss of life 
and destroyed homes and businesses. This summer we have witnessed 
devastating floods all across America, including in central and eastern 
Kansas. Thousands of my constituents lost their homes and their 
businesses, many of which have not yet fully recovered.
  The Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (H.R. 1495) authorizes 
many new projects that will afford our communities protection from 
catastrophic flooding for generations to come. It will also help ensure 
that existing flood control structures are properly cared for so our 
economy can continue thriving in areas currently protected from floods. 
We must prepare for the future rather than merely respond to disasters 
after they occur. Prevention is much better than responding to a 
natural disaster, especially when loss of life occurs.
  A WRDA bill has not been enacted for the past 7 years, which helps 
explain why the price tag is so significant. While I would have 
preferred to see a less expensive authorization bill, I believe it is 
time we move forward with many of the needed flood control projects 
included in H.R. 1495.
  Having witnessed the severe flooding in my district this year, I am 
reminded of the critical need for flood prevention that saves lives and 
protects communities. I have seen first-hand what a flooded community 
looks like when adequate flood control is not provided. And I have seen 
how well Corps of Engineers levees have worked to keep high floodwaters 
out of homes and businesses.
  This is why I support overriding the President's veto. I would have 
preferred for a compromise to be reached with the Administration; but 
in this instance, we need to move forward without further delay in the 
process. Protecting our homes and businesses from flood waters is a bi-
partisan priority that trumps Washington politics.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to question the new 
majority's earmark reform for the 110th Congress.
  On July 31, 2007, I supported and the House of Representatives passed 
S. 1, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007, which 
provides for greater transparency in the legislative process. It is 
with great disappointment that I take this time to recognize the lack 
of this same transparency in the conference report for H.R. 1495, the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2007. This legislation authorizes 
Federal funding for local water and civil works projects that are 
extremely important to the State of Florida, and the Nation as a whole.
  At the start of the 110th Congress the new Democratic majority made 
repeated promises to the American public about their goals for this 
newly led Congress, ensuring ``accountability, honesty, and openness at 
all levels of government.'' It is now November and the unfortunate 
reality is that these promises are not being kept.
  In accordance with House Rules, I submitted a written request letter 
for the authorization of Federal funding for several local water and 
civil works projects in my district to

[[Page 29833]]

the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. The intent of 
the new earmark disclosure rules was to make all earmark requests 
transparent and accessible to the American public. In addition, these 
new rules require the committee to ``identify, on a publicly accessible 
congressional Web site each congressionally directed spending request 
through lists, charts, or other similar means, including the name of 
each requesting Member or Senator.''
  In a recent review of the conference report for H.R. 1495, the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2007, it came to my attention that one of 
the projects authorized in the report, which I requested, Sec. 5158 
(125) the Jacksonville Septic Tank Replacement, did not include my name 
with it, as required. I do not bring this to your attention today 
seeking recognition for doing the job I was sent here to do. However, I 
do bring it to your attention to express my disappointment that the new 
earmark disclosure rules are not being followed properly.
  The American public deserves the accountability, honesty, and 
openness promised to them. Let's ensure that all of our bills conform 
to this standard.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is, Will the House, on 
reconsideration, pass the bill, the objections of the President to the 
contrary notwithstanding?
  Under the Constitution, the vote must be by the yeas and nays.
  Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, this 15-minute vote on passing H.R. 
1495, the objections of the President to the contrary notwithstanding, 
will be followed by 5-minute votes on motions to suspend the rules with 
regard to H. Con. Res. 162, by the yeas and nays; H.R. 3997, by the 
yeas and nays; and H.R. 3495, by the yeas and nays.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 361, 
nays 54, not voting 17, as follows:

                            [Roll No. 1040]

                               YEAS--361

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Cannon
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sali
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)

                                NAYS--54

     Bachus
     Barrett (SC)
     Bilbray
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Brady (TX)
     Broun (GA)
     Burton (IN)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cantor
     Chabot
     Davis (KY)
     Deal (GA)
     Feeney
     Flake
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Hensarling
     Hobson
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jordan
     Kingston
     Lamborn
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     Marchant
     McHenry
     McKeon
     Miller (FL)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Paul
     Pence
     Pitts
     Platts
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Royce
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Stearns
     Tiberi
     Walsh (NY)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--17

     Brady (PA)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Carson
     Chandler
     Cubin
     Ferguson
     Fossella
     Johnson, Sam
     McNulty
     Oberstar
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pryce (OH)
     Tancredo
     Westmoreland
     Yarmuth

                              {time}  1812

  Mr. KINGSTON changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. RAMSTAD and Mr. BARTON of Texas changed their vote from ``nay'' 
to ``yea.''
  So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the bill was passed, the 
objections of the President to the contrary notwithstanding.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Doyle). The Clerk will notify the Senate 
of the action of the House.

                          ____________________