[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 5802-5811]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              HEALTHY COMMUNITIES WATER SUPPLY ACT OF 2007

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 215 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 700.

                              {time}  1244


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 700) to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to extend 
the pilot program for alternative water source projects, with Mr. 
McNulty in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson) and the 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.

                              {time}  1245

  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  I rise today in strong support of H.R. 700, the Healthy Communities 
Water Supply Act of 2007. This important legislation would reauthorize 
appropriations of $125 million for the EPA's alternative water sources 
grant program.
  Mr. Chairman, rapid population growth and development along with an 
increased awareness of the impact of massive water withdrawals and the 
threat of global climate change have forced many local communities to 
explore alternative sources of water.
  H.R. 700 provides one alternative for meeting these future water 
needs by encouraging the testing and implementation of technology that 
reclaim and reuse water from municipal, industrial and agricultural 
needs.
  I applaud the efforts of my colleagues on the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure, Congressman McNerney and 
Congresswoman Tauscher, for their efforts in moving this legislation 
forward and ensuring that communities are able to meet current and 
future water needs.
  This committee approved similar legislation in the 109th Congress, 
and it is my hope this year Congress will finally approve legislation 
and forward it to the President for his signature.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise in support of H.R. 700, the Healthy Communities Water Supply 
Act of 2007. I want to thank the chairwoman and the ranking member, Mr. 
Baker, for their hard work on this particular bill.
  H.R. 700 extends the pilot program under the Clean Water Act for 
alternative water source projects.

[[Page 5803]]

  Growth in population, increasing demands for water, and drought are 
resulting in water shortages in many areas around our Nation, both in 
the west and the east.
  Many communities are finding that their water supply needs cannot be 
met by existing water supplies. As a result, many communities and their 
water resource development agencies are looking at alternative ways to 
alleviate their water shortages and enhance water supplies to meet 
their future water needs.
  This is an important issue not only for my home State of Arkansas but 
for the many other parts of the country facing increasing demands for 
water.
  Adequate water is needed to sustain our country's economic growth and 
viability. Some of the approaches they are looking at involve 
reclaiming, reusing or conserving water that has already been used.
  H.R. 700 provides an authority to help communities meet some of their 
critical water supply needs through water reclamation, reuse, 
conservation and management.
  H.R. 700 authorizes $125 billion for the EPA to make grants to water 
resource development agencies for these sorts of alternative water 
source projects. The program leverages non-Federal resources by 
requiring a non-Federal cash of 50 percent.
  I urge all Members to support this important bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time 
as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney).
  Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairmen Oberstar 
and Johnson and Ranking Members Mica and Baker for their leadership on 
clean water issues and for their work to bring the legislation we are 
considering today to the floor. In addition, I would like to thank my 
colleague and good friend, Mrs. Tauscher, for supporting this 
legislation with me. Mrs. Tauscher and I have adjoining districts in 
California, and we have similar water needs.
  My bill, H.R. 700, the Healthy Communities Water Supply Act of 2007, 
is straightforward and helpful legislation that I hope both parties 
will support.
  Everyone recognizes the need for clean water. It does not matter 
whether you live in a city or in the rural, it does not matter what 
your political persuasion is. We all need clean water. Therefore, it is 
vitally important to identify new water sources for use in agriculture, 
industry and for residential consumption.
  In the past, the State Revolving Loan Funds and Clean Water Act 
construction grants were available for identifying new water sources. 
But communities now increasingly depend on those funds just to provide 
for the maintenance and upkeep of existing water infrastructure, rather 
than finding new and potentially less expensive water supplies.
  H.R. 700 will provide $125 million so that local governments can 
innovate to collect, clean and distribute new sources of water. The 
Healthy Communities Water Supply Act will encourage municipalities, 
public and private water agencies and nonprofit organizations to find 
ways to provide new sources of water.
  For the small investment of Federal funding provided in this bill, we 
can spur innovation in water resources and move towards solving the 
increasingly pressing need to ensure clean water for drinking, for 
family farms, for businesses and for households.
  H.R. 700 encourages innovation by funding pilot projects and forward-
thinking ideas that lead to practical solutions, which can be applied 
across the board. This legislation means jobs in local communities by 
spurring the kind of research that can create new businesses and make 
our towns and cities more livable at the same time.
  The constant threat of drought in the Western States, along with the 
reality of global warming, emphasizes why the Healthy Communities Water 
Supply Act of 2007 is so important. We must begin to investigate 
alternative water sources now, so that we can make strides in ensuring 
that we have water that we need in the future.
  I am hopeful that we can move quickly to pass H.R. 700 and to work 
with the other body so we can provide water relief for our communities.
  Again, I urge all my colleagues to support the Healthy Communities 
Water Supply Act.
  Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time 
as he may consume to the distinguished chairman of the full committee, 
the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar).
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chair of the subcommittee, 
the gentlewoman from Texas, for yielding the time and compliment her 
and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), the ranking member of the 
subcommittee, for developing this legislation and preparing it and 
bringing it so early in the session to the House floor. I also 
appreciate the bipartisan cooperation with the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Mica), the ranking member of the full committee, and it is good to 
have the gentleman from Arkansas on the floor and managing the bill. I 
thank the gentleman for his ever thoughtful approach to legislation.
  This alternative water sources initiative is not something that we 
developed in the course of this Congress. It started way back in 2000, 
in fact, earlier than that, as the committee held hearings over a 
period of several years to raise the visibility of issues of water 
supply and groundwater withdrawals and needs of communities well off 
into the future.
  In fact, I should point out that a former colleague of ours, later 
Speaker, Jim Wright, in 1958 wrote a book entitled, ``The Coming Water 
Famine,'' where then new Congressman Wright gathered enormous amount of 
data about water usage by industry, by agriculture, by homeowners, and 
did a calculation that showed the rising use of water intersecting with 
a line of steady availability.
  All the water there ever was, there ever will be, is available now. 
We will not create new water, and he showed that in the 1980s the lines 
would intersect, and that, at that point, the Nation and the Congress 
need to face up to the need to assure the continuity of availability of 
water supplies, that continued withdrawal of water from the Ogallala 
aquifer that covers west Texas and eastern Oklahoma, a huge area of the 
central portion of the United States, could not continue forever. That 
water would be withdrawn, and there would be no further water 
available, just simply was not replenishing as fast as surface needs 
were drawing upon it.
  That was the background. That was the stimulus for the alternative 
water sources program that our committee included in the Estuaries and 
Clean Water Act of 2000, which passed the House, the Senate and was 
signed into law.
  The legislation was developed to address the concerns by communities 
all across the country over availability of water to meet their future 
requirements, especially in the more arid regions of the country, as we 
have already heard from the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney) 
and Mrs. Tauscher, also from California, who was the initiator of this 
legislation in previous Congresses.
  I have read a great deal about climate change that followed the 
enormous amount of scientific data pouring forth from the international 
geophysical year by the United Nations scientific panel, scientists in 
the U.S. who are reporting on global climate change, and the effect 
that it is having upon weather and the increasing volatility and 
variability of the amount, timing and distribution of moisture, not 
just rainfall but moisture that comes in the form of snow or freezing 
rain. There is consensus among the climatology scientific community 
that the timing, intensity and duration of floods, droughts and high-
intensity storms are going to continue to plague us over the decades 
ahead.
  Pressure for additional sources of drinking water, usable water for 
industry and agriculture will only grow and

[[Page 5804]]

magnify across this country, putting greater pressure on reclamation, 
on reuse, on advanced wastewater treatment, and even on desalination, 
as many countries in the world are doing.
  In the 1970s, there was an experiment by a Saudi prince who chartered 
a vessel to go to Antarctica and harness an iceberg, put a huge plastic 
wrap under that iceberg so it would not melt and had it towed by tug 
boats to a point off the shore of Saudi Arabia. Then they drilled a 
hole in the center of it and pumped the water out for several years to 
bring fresh water to Saudi Arabia. There are not going to be very many 
icebergs left to be towed as the polar caps melt faster than we can 
harness the icebergs.
  Furthermore, that experiment proved enormously expensive. It also 
demonstrated that there is a considerable amount of loss of iceberg 
water capability as the 'berg is towed.
  We have to do much better than just towing icebergs. We create with 
this legislation a modest start on a program to help communities 
provide for their current needs, for household requirements, industrial 
needs, for agricultural uses of water, well off into the future.

                              {time}  1300

  This is but one important step in the long-term effort we must make 
to ensure the availability of water supplies and the viability of those 
water supplies off into the future in this time of highly uncertain 
climate conditions.
  Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the committee chairman's 
comments, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, what time do we 
have left?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from Texas has 18 minutes remaining, 
and the gentleman from Arkansas has 28 minutes remaining.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes 
to the gentlewoman from California, the primary author of the 
legislation, Mrs. Tauscher.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. I thank my friend, Chairman Johnson, for the 
opportunity to speak today in support of the Healthy Communities Water 
Supply Act.
  Mr. Chairman, I can't tell you how pleased I am to have joined my 
good friend and neighbor, Jerry McNerney, in introducing H.R. 700. As 
Californians, Mr. McNerney and I know how precious every drop of water 
is to our communities, our economy, and our way of life.
  Our legislation provides a real Federal commitment to exploring 
alternative water sources now so we can have the water supplies we will 
need in the future. This legislation will reauthorize a critical EPA 
program which was authorized in 2000 by the then Republican-controlled 
Congress.
  Unfortunately, the Republican Congress' commitment to the program and 
water supply reliability ended with words, not deeds. The program was 
never funded, and the EPA never implemented it.
  Fortunately, today is a very new day. This Congress has the 
opportunity to provide local communities with the means to invest in 
critical alternative water source projects.
  By providing a modest $125 million authorization for this EPA 
program, we will help communities plan for their future; and investing 
in innovative projects such as water recycling, water reuse and aquifer 
storage will allow our local communities to use water more effectively 
and efficiently.
  In my own district, these types of projects are already under way and 
will benefit from today's legislation. Projects like the Bay Area 
Regional Water Recycling Program and the Bay Area Regional Desalination 
Project are all advancing alternative water sources now and will be 
able to continue their work through access to these grants.
  If we are effectively to plan for our Nation's future to use critical 
resources, there has to be Federal investment and innovation. The 
passage of H.R. 700 will clearly indicate that this Congress is ready 
to lead.
  Today, some are trying to say that this program is duplicative, that 
these types of projects can already be funded through existing sources. 
First, let me say that we all understand that programs such as the 
Clean and Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Funds can be used for 
alternative water source projects.
  However, in fiscal year 2007, the President's budget cut the Clean 
Water State Revolving Fund by 22 percent, and in the fiscal year 2006 
he recommended that the fund be cut by $370 million.
  So let me ask a simple question: Where will our communities find the 
resources to maintain and improve critical infrastructure and plan for 
the future if the Bush administration and the Republicans in Congress 
keep cutting the funds? It is disingenuous for anyone to claim that 
there are already resources available for these critical water projects 
while they are cutting the funds.
  So it is time for us all to be responsible. It is time to make 
critical investments in water infrastructure which have been neglected 
for all too long, and it is time to ensure our communities can plan for 
their future water needs.
  Mr. Chairman, I hope all of my colleagues will join me in supporting 
H.R. 700, the Healthy Communities Water Supply Act, which was passed by 
a voice vote in the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. I urge 
all of my colleagues to support this very important legislation.
  Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Chairman, again, I rise to support this bill, very 
much so. I want to thank Chairman Oberstar, Chairman Johnson, Ranking 
Member Mica and Ranking Member Baker and their staffs for their hard 
work and the efforts that they put into this.
  Again, I would urge my colleagues to support passage of this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have no further 
requests for speakers. I want to express my appreciation to all of the 
staff of the committee. I ask for support of H.R. 700.
  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support 
H.R. 700, Healthy Communities Water Supply Act of 2007, a 
reauthorization of a Pilot Program for Increasing Usable Water Supply. 
As you well know, this Pilot Program for increasing usable water supply 
was authorized for 2002 through 2004, but the previous majority never 
appropriated any funds and let the authorization expire.
  I want to take this opportunity to remind my colleagues just how 
important it is to supplement existing water supplies by providing 
reliable high-quality sources of water, particularly in areas of the 
country that are under the threat of the desert. In California, 
especially in Orange County, the population is increasing; so is the 
need for water.
  For over 15 years, the Orange County Water District has maintained a 
Groundwater Replenishment System designed to reuse advanced treated 
wastewater to recharge the County's groundwater aquifers and basin. 
This will help them meet the annual water needs of over 144,000 
families that keep growing. Also, the county is barely 3 miles from the 
coast and has an added need to protect the Basin from further 
degradation due to seawater intrusion. To this end, the OCWD under its 
Phase I project provides over 72 million gallons of water per day to 
replenish its aquifers as well as protect them from seawater intrusion 
by pumping water through injection wells. This phase will end in 
September, 2007.
  In Phase II of the project, they will be able to process over 250 
million gallons of wastewater per day and have enough to support the 
recharge effort and combat seawater intrusion. There are currently 30 
such injection wells that can pump water up to 60-100 feet depth.
  The beauty of this project is the collaboration the Water District 
has with the County's Sanitation District (OCSD) who provides the 
wastewater that would have been pumped out to the ocean thereby which 
would have deprived the Water District of the water that is now being 
reclaimed for the replenishment of groundwater aquifers. And the State 
Health Department provides the oversight, to make sure water quality is 
maintained.
  With projects like this, communities such as Orange County will 
benefit tremendously. This OCGW project has attracted experts in public 
water management systems from other States and countries (Japan, Korea, 
and Taiwan) who come to Orange County to look at this

[[Page 5805]]

tertiary system and learn from it. So, this is of national and even 
internatIonal significance. Also, projects like the OCGWR provides for 
the necessary investments to ensure water security for the future.
  This bill will help improve water availability and quality by 
authorizing a total of $125 million to fund projects that increase 
usable water supply by encouraging innovation in water reclamation, 
reuse and conservation. The Orange County Water Reclamation Project is 
a perfect example of such a project and I urge my colleagues to support 
H.R. 700.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I rise in strong support of H.R. 700, the 
``Healthy Communities Water Supply Act of 2007'' which authorizes $125 
million to enhance water supplies in shortage-plagued areas through the 
development of such alternative sources as waste water reuse and other 
water recycling projects. The funding will be used to help finance 
pilot projects to recycle water for drinking and agricultural use in 
states like Texas that have long faced chronic supply shortages amid 
continuing population booms. States would have to pay half the cost of 
the projects.
  Mr. Chairman, the new majority in this House understands that 
ensuring clean water is a top priority for America's working families. 
A clean and healthy environment begins with clean water. H.R. 700 will 
help to make the Nation's water supply cleaner and healthier by 
utilizing alternative water sources such as waste water and recycled 
water. If we explore alternative water supplies now, we take a giant 
step toward ensuring that we will have adequate supplies in the future.
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my full 
support for alternative water supply initiatives and my opposition to 
the bill before us. We have an existing program that is able to provide 
affordable loans to communities to fund such projects--the State 
Revolving Loan Fund (SRF).
  The bill before us is fiscally irresponsible. It takes what was a 
pilot program enacted several years ago and which was never funded and 
turns it into a new, permanent $125 million federal grant program with 
a new bureaucracy to implement it.
  We do not need this program. The existing SRF gives taxpayers a much 
bigger bang for their buck. By establishing a new, permanent grant 
program, today's bill will divert dollars from the SRF leaving fewer 
dollars for the SRF to support a broader spectrum of water projects.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Tierney). All time for general debate has 
expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered read for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                H.R. 700

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Healthy Communities Water 
     Supply Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. PILOT PROGRAM FOR ALTERNATIVE WATER SOURCE PROJECTS.

       Section 220(j) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
     (33 U.S.C. 1300(j)) is amended by striking ``$75,000,000 for 
     fiscal years 2002 through 2004'' and inserting 
     ``$125,000,000''.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. No amendment to the bill shall be in order 
except those printed in the designated place in the Congressional 
Record and pro forma amendments for the purpose of debate. Amendments 
printed in the Record may be offered only by the Member who caused it 
to be printed or his designee and shall be considered read.
  Are there any amendments to the bill?


                Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Kucinich

  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Kucinich:
       Page 2, after line 5, insert the following:
       (a) Eligibility.--Section 220(c) of the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1300(c)) is amended by 
     inserting before the period at the end ``and the entity does 
     not permit the use of its water for retail sale of water in 
     containers of 5.7 gallons (20 liters) or less''.
       Page 2, line 6, before ``Section'' insert ``(b) 
     Authorization of Appropriations.--''.

  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 700, the Healthy Communities Water 
Supply Act, is designed to help communities with current or impending 
water shortages. I support the bill.
  We know that such shortages can have many causes. For example, global 
warming is likely to cause or exacerbate water shortages in the U.S., 
especially in the Southwest. Under those conditions, alternative water 
sources will be more important than ever, but communities all over the 
United States are also fighting to protect their water supplies from 
overpumping by bottled water companies, who are making billions of 
dollars from this public resource. My amendment would remove from 
consideration for these Federal subsidies those areas where bottled 
water companies are contributing to the demise of the water supply.
  According to the International Bottled Water Association, the volume 
of water privatized has increased between 8 and 12 percent every year 
since 2001. In 2006, bottled water companies enjoyed $11 billion in 
revenue from the United States alone. It is estimated that about 25 
percent of the bottled water consumed in the United States comes from 
municipal water supplies.
  The effects of the excessive influence of the bottled water industry 
can go beyond the regional confines of water source depletion and 
environmental destruction. It codifies a preference for corporate 
access to water over public access.
  I represent the Cleveland area, that, like many cities nearby, relies 
on Lake Erie for drinking water. A few years ago, there were two 
instances in which a company received a permit to privatize Great Lakes 
water in bulk.
  In both instances, the projects were abandoned because of the public 
outcry. In response, the Great Lakes States, with assistance from 
Canadian Premiers and other stakeholders, attempted to negotiate the 
conditions under which water could be withdrawn from the lake.
  As the negotiations closed, bottled water companies managed to wedge 
their language into the final agreement. The language also allowed 
virtually unlimited withdrawals for bottled water companies, while 
attempting to protect against other privatization attempts.
  Such unprecedented favoritism can actually represent a giant step 
backwards for the notion of water as a public trust. The loophole 
leaves the entire agreement open to commerce clause challenge or to a 
challenge in the World Trade Organization. If such a challenge were 
successful, there would be no limits to privatization of Great Lakes 
water. It would open the water of the Great Lakes to use by the growing 
and increasingly thirsty regions where they are having water shortages 
and where water shortages make it financially viable to pipe water 
across several States. We would not just be back to square one; we 
would take a giant step backwards.
  This is a classic example, Mr. Chairman, in which greed of the 
bottled water companies is garnering profits at the expense of the 
public. I have not even talked about the overeffect of pumping, like 
the increased cost of finding a replacement source, the loss of 
connected streams, lakes and rivers, the land subsidence, the salt 
water intrusion near coasts that render the water undrinkable, and the 
loss of wildlife habitat.
  Another example is emblematic of conflicts between communities and 
bottled water companies all over the United States. In two small towns 
in New Hampshire, Nottingham and Barrington, a company called USA 
Springs is attempting to drill wells that would pump 310,000 gallons a 
day in an area populated with homes that get their water from small 
private household wells. The community is worried about a loss of water 
supply, loss of water quality, and degradation of nearby wetlands.
  A very conservative estimate said that USA Springs is looking at 
about $303 million per year in revenue from this site alone. With that 
kind of revenue potential, it can be expected they will spend big to 
make this project happen. This is exactly what they are doing. The 
result is that USA Springs is now dangerously close to winning a battle 
that started in 2001.

[[Page 5806]]

  The basic building blocks of life, like water, must be accessible by 
people before corporations, period. When access to the essentials is 
threatened by outside excessive private gain, I will stand firmly in 
defense of the public every time.
  Mr. Chairman, I intend to explore this issue deeply as Chair of the 
Domestic Policy Oversight Subcommittee of the House Committee on 
Oversight and Government Reform. I ask the chairman, my good friend 
from Minnesota, to work with me as Chair of Transportation and 
Infrastructure on the broader issue of water privatization and its 
effects on quality and access.
  I yield to Mr. Oberstar.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. The gentleman raises a very important issue, one that 
has been of deep concern. He raises two aspects of a question, one that 
raises deep concern among communities along the Great Lakes who do not 
want to see waters of the Great Lakes pumped west to quaff the thirst 
of arid western States.
  Several years ago, there was a proposal for a coal slurry pipeline to 
bring coal in a slurry pipeline from the Powder River Basin to the 
western end of Lake Superior to ports of Duluth and Superior; and we 
vigorously opposed it, because that pipeline, if it pumps east, can 
also pump west and could suck water out of the Great Lakes in vast 
amounts.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Kucinich) has expired.
  (On request of Mr. Oberstar, and by unanimous consent, Mr. Kucinich 
was allowed to proceed for 1 additional minute.)
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, subsequently, in a Water Resources 
Development Act, I succeeded with legislation to prohibit any 
withdrawals from the Great Lakes unless there is unanimous agreement 
among the eight Governors and the Province of Quebec and the Province 
of Ontario. That language is current law, but it is not strong enough. 
It really needs to be reinforced. Now that I am in a position to do 
that, we are going to reinforce it.
  The second concern of the gentleman is private companies profiting 
from the public sector provision of water supplies, and I think we 
should find a way in which we can limit the profiteering while not 
interfering with private sector developments.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Kucinich) has again expired.
  (On request of Mr. Oberstar, and by unanimous consent, Mr. Kucinich 
was allowed to proceed for 1 additional minute.)
  Mr. OBERSTAR. For example, the little town of Buhl, population 900 in 
my district, has on its water tank the slogan, ``The Finest Water in 
America,'' and the city began bottling that water for sale. They are 
using their open resources to bottle this water in these little 8-ounce 
and 16-ounce bottles. I wouldn't want to prevent Buhl, which has fallen 
on hard times, from drawing on its resources. But they are using their 
own money to do that.
  What the gentleman is concerned about is a public, federally funded 
process that might stimulate the private sector. I commend the 
gentleman for his concern, and we shall work together to address the 
situation.
  Mr. KUCINICH. I want to thank the chairman for his comments and his 
dedication to the public good. I look forward to working with you on 
this to protect public water supplies and to protect the public's right 
to access.
  Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.


            Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Price of Georgia

  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Price of Georgia:
       At the end of the bill, add the following:

     SEC. 3. REQUIREMENT OF OFFSETS.

       (a) In General.--No authorization of appropriations made by 
     this Act or other provision of this Act that results in costs 
     to the Federal Government shall be effective except to the 
     extent that this Act provides for offsetting decreases in 
     spending of the Federal Government, such that the net effect 
     of this Act does not either increase the Federal deficit or 
     reduce the Federal surplus.
       (b) Definitions.--In this section, the terms ``deficit'' 
     and ``surplus'' have the meanings given such terms in the 
     Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (2 
     U.S.C. 621 et seq.).

  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise with a very simple 
amendment, an amendment of responsibility.
  As you and the House know, H.R. 700 grants $125 million for 
alternative water source projects. It is a program that Congress has 
never funded, may be a very appropriate program. For some in this 
Chamber, $125 million may not be very much money, but for folks in my 
district, and I suspect for folks around this Nation, $125 million is a 
lot of money.

                              {time}  1315

  And, again, while what this bill does may be very important, it is 
important that we also make a statement for financial responsibility. 
This amendment would apply the principle of pay-as-you-go, pay-as-you-
go to any new spending that would be authorized in this legislation.
  Very simple: If you are going to spend money for this project, you 
ought to make it a priority and identify an area where you desire to 
take that money from in order to pay for this project. It is a concept 
that has been embraced by many in this Chamber. In fact, many Members 
on the majority side embraced the pay-as-you-go project in their 
campaigns this past year. In fact, the New Direction for America, which 
was proposed by the majority party in the 109th Congress, says, ``Our 
new direction is committed to pay-as-you-go budgeting. No more deficit 
spending. We are committed to auditing the books and subjecting every 
facet of Federal spending to tough budget discipline and 
accountability, forcing the Congress to choose a new direction and the 
right priorities for all Americans.''
  Mr. Chairman, I agree with that. It is a wise idea. We ought to 
follow that. We ought to follow that in this new Congress.
  I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment. I would respectfully 
suggest that, unless adopted, then the new direction in which we are 
heading is one that will take us in a direction of greater red ink and 
not that of financial responsibility. So I offer this simple amendment, 
this PAYGO amendment to H.R. 700, and I encourage my colleagues to 
support the amendment.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  I appreciate the fashion of the gentleman from Georgia, and I respect 
his consistency. He offered the same amendment yesterday. We had quite 
a thorough and extensive discussion and a recorded vote, which ended 
166-260.
  Again, I appeal to the gentleman, Mr. Chairman, that we are dealing 
with an authorization. Tomorrow we will be dealing with a different 
bill that does result in a direct spending reduction as determined by 
the Congressional Budget Office and for which the committee created an 
offset and reduced the size of the bill.
  This bill, H.R. 700, is not a direct spending bill, and has been so 
verified by the Congressional Budget Office and by the Office of 
Management and Budget. It is not subject to the so-called PAYGO rules. 
An appropriation subsequently could well be subject to PAYGO, but we 
have yet before us the congressional budget process. We have to vote on 
a budget, and then we consider the appropriations. If this legislation 
is enacted in time for the appropriation process, hopefully it could be 
considered and included, and then there is a question of whether it is 
subjected to the PAYGO rules.
  But in its present form, this is an authorization. It is not a direct 
spending. It is not subject, as Congressional Budget Office has ruled, 
to the PAYGO rules. And we made that point yesterday. We make it again 
today. And I rise in opposition to the amendment, but not in opposition 
to the approach

[[Page 5807]]

of the gentleman, who is a true fiscal conservative and wants to ensure 
that dollars are wisely spent and that we are not overspending.
  I assure the gentleman, this legislation, modest as it is in its 
scope of dollars authorized, will be subjected to the rigorous 
oversight of OMB, Congressional Budget Office, procedure and the 
appropriation process in its new course.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike 
the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price), almost to say the same thing we 
said yesterday: He has gotten the appropriations mixed up with the 
authorization.
  This is an authorization committee, and actual funding of these 
programs through the appropriations process, which is where this will 
be more appropriate. A similar manner it was offered yesterday, as we 
said, to H.R. 569, the Water Quality Investment Act, and was defeated 
by 166-260.
  This amendment would require that any authorization of appropriations 
be considered with corresponding offsets regardless of whether the 
program ever receives any funding. It is possible that it won't.
  In the example of the Alternative Water Source pilot program under 
consideration today, a program that again has never been funded through 
the appropriations process, this amendment would require the 
identification of $125 million in offsets, regardless of whether 
appropriations are ever enacted for this program.
  During the first few days of the legislative session, the new 
Democratic majority renewed the PAYGO rules to require the 
identification of offsets to any changes in direct spending by 
legislative initiatives.
  This bill has no effect on direct spending. According to the 
Congressional Budget Office in its analysis of the bill, enacting the 
bill would not affect direct spending or revenues. Therefore, the 
offset requirements of PAYGO are never triggered.
  I also remind my colleagues that the PAYGO provision was allowed to 
expire under Republican control of the House, with no attempt by the 
former Republican leadership to restore its protections to the Federal 
budgetary process. To now claim to be the champions of fiscal 
responsibility and attempt to hold Congress to stricter budgetary 
principles than instituted under their own leadership is a fairly 
hollow argument.
  The gentleman's amendment would require offsets for any authorization 
of appropriations, regardless of its impact on Federal receipts. Were 
the gentleman's amendment adopted, my expectation is that every 
authorization of appropriations, whether it be for clean water, safer 
schools, better health care, or national defense, would require equal 
offsets. This is an inappropriate limitation on the ability of Congress 
to address the needs of the Nation.
  Fiscal responsibility is a noble cause, but not at the cost of 
hindering Congress's ability to meet the needs of our constituents.
  Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment.
  Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I 
yield to the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from 
Arkansas for yielding. I will be very brief.
  I rise to point a couple points of clarification. And I appreciate 
the gentlewoman from Texas and her comments, but she did say that this 
amendment would require finding $120 million of offsets somewhere else, 
regardless of whether there was any money that was ever authorized for 
this particular grant project. In fact, that is not the case.
  On line 4 of the amendment, it says that, ``any other provision that 
results in costs to the Federal Government.'' So it would require that 
the Congress had determined that, yes, there should be money spent for 
these grant projects, and then the equal amount of offset money would 
need to be found.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman 
yield?
  Mr. BOOZMAN. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. I think what I did say is, it is 
not the authorization; it is the appropriations that I spoke about that 
would cause this to happen. It would trigger it. It is not the 
authorization. We are an authorizing committee.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I understand this is an authorizing piece of 
legislation; it is not requiring the money to be spent; and that we 
have the Appropriations Committees to do that.
  But I would suggest to my colleagues that this is a matter of 
principle. It is a matter of principle, and it is a matter of making 
the statement now that we believe that, if we are going to spend money 
for this project and we believe that it is a priority, that we ought to 
find the money elsewhere in order to cover that so that we do not 
increase the deficit.
  I appreciate the gentleman yielding to me.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will 
be postponed.


                Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Sessions

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Sessions:
       Page 2, line 9, after the dollar amount insert ``for fiscal 
     years ending before October 1, 2008''.

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 700 follows an authorization that 
the Republican Congress provided for in the year 2000, which authorized 
$75 million in grants for alternative water source projects.
  We learned that the population growth was causing a number of 
communities to have to explore alternative supplies through 
reclamation, reuse and conservation. And so Congress created section 
220 of the Clean Water Act. This amendment to the Clean Water Act 
required a 50 percent non-Federal cost share. And it expired in 2004.
  Today's legislation doubles this authorization, but the troubling 
part to me is it allows this authorization to continue indefinitely. So 
if this legislation passes, there will be no sunset, no further 
oversight and no review of the effectiveness of these grants. My 
amendment would provide for the expiration of this authorization in 
fiscal year 2008.
  I think it is fiscally responsible and allows Congress to reevaluate 
these grants, and not just leave them forever without oversight.
  Mr. Chairman, at this time I understand that the gentleman Mr. 
Oberstar would wish to engage with me in a colloquy on this amendment.
  I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. The gentleman from Texas, a member of the Rules 
Committee, and I had a discussion about the principle involved in the 
gentleman's amendment in the course of our presentation at the Rules 
Committee for the rule covering this bill. As a result, the gentleman 
has offered an amendment that I think is entirely appropriate. But the 
point at which we are in the consideration of the legislation, and 
given the time it might take for the other body to act on it, would 
create a time frame problem through fiscal 2008. I would suggest that 
the language be changed to reflect two fiscal years from date of 
enactment, so that we have a precise time but that it is linked to date 
of enactment of the act, which then would be a very appropriate way to 
do it.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Reclaiming my time.
  It is my understanding then that the chairman and I have engaged in 
an agreement; that I would withdraw my

[[Page 5808]]

amendment, pending such that he would place within the legislation that 
agreement. And I would agree with that, and I would agree to withdraw 
my amendment. And I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman for his thoughtful presentation 
and the questioning in the Rules Committee, and we will draft language 
in cooperation with the gentleman and include that as we move forward 
to conference with the Senate.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment 
be withdrawn.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.


                 Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Conaway

  Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Conaway:
       Page 2, after line 5, insert the following:
       (a) Selection of Projects.--Section 220(d)(2) of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1300(d)(2)) is 
     amended by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``or whether the project is located in an area 
     which is served by a public water system serving 10,000 
     individuals or fewer''.
       Page 2, at the beginning of line 6, insert the following:
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--

  Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Chairman, for the past decade, within rural 
communities throughout the country, home water bills have increased 
faster than the rate of inflation, and it seems likely that this trend 
will continue. Currently, rural populations across America are being 
forced to comply with extremely costly regulations regarding standards 
that have been set forth by the Environmental Protection Agency.
  Mr. Chairman, I have rural constituents who are currently paying 
upwards of 770 percent more for water service than that of urban 
populations due to regulatory items and the inability to spread these 
costs over a wide basis.
  As deregulations are implemented and aging infrastructures replaced, 
the affordability of water service in rural America will continue to be 
of great concern. Water systems, consumers, administrators and policy 
makers will need to focus on the ability of rural households to pay for 
public water service.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment is not a solution to the underlying 
problem; it is a recognition of the issue and a step in the right 
direction. My amendment would simply add to the considerations for 
these grants recognition of water systems serving 10,000 people or 
less.
  Mr. SHULER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, as water bills continue to rise larger, in the rural 
communities throughout the country home water bills have increased 
faster than the rate of inflation. Over 50,000 community water systems 
serve populations under 10,000. In North Carolina, 95 percent of our 
community water systems service populations of less than 10,000.
  Currently, rural populations across America are being forced to 
comply with costly regulations. At this time, many rural areas have a 
greater percentage of the poverty and lower mean household income.

                              {time}  1330

  This is imposing a major burden on the rural families of America. In 
the same rural communities, some citizens are now paying 770 percent 
more for the water services than that of urban populations.
  The Conaway-Shuler amendment does not call for more money or strike 
existing language. This is a fiscally responsible approach which points 
us in the right direction to take some of the strain off of the rural 
communities as they struggle to provide safety.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Both gentlemen offer an amendment, Mr. Chairman, to our bill that is 
well intentioned to respond to the needs of small communities, to 
assure that communities under a population of 10,000 are not left 
behind, as this program is administered. And I certainly am in 
consonance with that concern.
  There are only maybe four communities in my congressional district 
that have population greater than 10,000. I think of Big Fork, 
population 950, and others of similar size who have needs for water 
resource as great proportionately as do the major metropolitan areas.
  In fact, in a drought in 1988, Minneapolis was trying to encourage 
the Corps of Engineers to draw down the head waters of the Mississippi 
River to increase the flow to Minneapolis while at the same time not 
banning car washes, not banning sprinkling of lawns, not taking other 
water conservation measures and also drawing water from the Jordan 
Basin Reservoir underneath the Twin Cities, a 50-mile diameter basin 
that is water left over from the melting of the glacier 10,000 years 
ago, water that can never be replaced because it is an impermeable 
area.
  And I said, oh, wait a minute. It just happened I was chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Investigation and Oversight; called the Corps of 
Engineers in and made sure they didn't draw any matter down from the 
head waters of the Mississippi River to serve the thirst of Minneapolis 
while at the same time St. Paul was incorporating water conservation 
measures.
  Well, I cite that history to show that I am really sensitive to these 
needs. But we do not want to create in this legislation a preferential 
consideration. And when the gentleman says consider, when the language 
of the amendment the gentlemen are offering says consider, I take this 
to mean a factor to be considered, along with other relevant factors 
and not a set-aside and not a preference.
  May I ask the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway), and I yield to the 
gentleman, to be assured that he concurs in that interpretation.
  Mr. CONAWAY. Yes, sir. This goes into the part of the bill that talks 
about additional consideration. The administrator has wide leeway in 
how they grant these grants, and I would simply like in the Record, in 
the law, that this is one of the things that administrator should take 
into consideration. This in no way binds or ties their hands to any 
particular size of community or use but allows good judgment by the 
administrator and in recognition that rural America is outnumbered on 
this floor. And having those words in this language will be 
particularly important to the constituents I serve who recognize that 
and understand that from time to time you guys have got us outnumbered. 
So it does not set up a preference, but it simply says, here is one 
other criteria to look at when you decide on these questions.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman. Let me ask the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Shuler) whether he shares that viewpoint.
  Mr. SHULER. I most certainly would. In rural America, they struggle 
so often. Although it is not binding, it doesn't cost any more; I would 
certainly like to see this in the amendment.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, when I was elected to Congress, took 
office in 1975, we formed a Congressional Rural Caucus. There were 250 
members. We had a voice on this floor, and a presence on this floor. 
Today there are less than 90 of us representing primarily rural areas, 
so we do have to be watchful for small towns, rural areas. And in the 
spirit of our discussion just concluded, I will accept the amendment of 
the gentlemen.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway).
  The amendment was agreed to.


            Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Price of Georgia

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, the pending 
business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price) on which further proceedings 
were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.

[[Page 5809]]

  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 176, 
noes 256, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 128]

                               AYES--176

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachmann
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Emerson
     Everett
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hulshof
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jindal
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Saxton
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--256

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Lincoln
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Faleomavaega
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Herseth
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Klein (FL)
     Kucinich
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (KY)
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Wexler
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Bono
     Camp (MI)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Hunter
     Keller
     Larson (CT)


                  Announcement by the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised there are 
2 minutes remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1404

  Messrs. KAGEN, GONZALEZ, RODRIGUEZ, DINGELL and TIAHRT changed their 
vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN and Mr. SOUDER changed their vote from ``no'' to 
``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. There being no further amendments, the Committee 
rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Hastings of Florida) having assumed the chair, Mr. Tierney, Acting 
Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, 
reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill 
(H.R. 700) to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to extend 
the pilot program for alternative water source projects, pursuant to 
House Resolution 215, he reported the bill back to the House with an 
amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  The question is on the amendment.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


           Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Price of Georgia

  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. In its current form, I am, yes, sir.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Price of Georgia moves to recommit the bill H.R. 700 to 
     the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure with 
     instructions to report back the same forthwith with the 
     following amendment:

       At the end of the bill, add the following (and conform the 
     table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON THE USE OF FUNDS.

       None of the funds authorized by this Act, including the 
     amendments made by this Act, may be used--
       (1) to lobby or retain a lobbyist for the purpose of 
     influencing a Federal, State, or local governmental entity or 
     officer; or
       (2) to pay for expenses related to the membership of any 
     individual or entity in an organization or association.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Georgia is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his motion.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to offer this motion 
to recommit. And I am more pleased to commend my Democratic colleagues 
for yesterday's recognition of the motion to recommit. They will 
recognize today's because it is exactly the same motion.
  I think with that recognition came the realization and appreciation 
that motions to recommit are, indeed, substantive moves and they are 
substantive proposals of policy by this House of Representatives.

[[Page 5810]]

  This motion to recommit is one about honesty; it is about honesty in 
the provision of the funds in the bill that is about to be adopted.
  Mr. Speaker, this motion to recommit would reinforce existing Federal 
law by making it clear that none of the funds authorized under this act 
may be used to lobby or retain a lobbyist to attempt to influence 
Federal, State or local governmental officials. It would also expand 
upon existing law by specifically prohibiting Federal funds from being 
used to pay for membership in any association or organization. And, Mr. 
Speaker, as I mentioned yesterday, many of those dues rise to the sum 
of $48,000 to $50,000 or more. The funds should only be used for the 
purposes intended by Congress, namely, identifying alternative water 
source projects.
  And while associations and organizations provide meaningful 
opportunities for collaboration and knowledge dissemination, it would 
not be appropriate to use hard-earned scarce Federal tax dollars for 
such a purpose. Such a diversion of these funds would not only limit 
the amount of funds available for the actual use and construction of 
alternative water source projects, it could indeed constitute an end 
run around the lobbying restrictions since many of these associations 
engage in lobbying activities.
  In recent years, Mr. Speaker, growth in population and increasing 
environmental awareness is causing many communities to explore 
alternative water supplies through reclamation, reuse and conservation. 
And while the Clean Water Act construction grants prior to 1991 and 
State revolving loan funds since 1989 have been available for such 
activities, most expenditures to date have been for more traditional 
wastewater projects and not for enhancing water supplies through 
wastewater reuse and water recycling. For these compelling reasons, we 
need to ensure that all available resources provided through this 
reauthorization are used specifically for the purpose of building and 
improving alternative water source projects for municipal, industrial 
or agricultural uses in areas that are experiencing critical water 
supply needs.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to recognize what they 
recognized yesterday, and that is that motions to recommit are 
substantive policy motions. I urge the adoption of this motion to 
recommit.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, although I am not opposed to the motion, I 
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from 
Minnesota is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, this amendment was offered yesterday by a 
different gentleman from the other side. I just want to read from the 
legislative language in the act.
  Subsection F: Uses of Grants. ``Amounts from grants received under 
this section may be used for engineering, design, construction and 
final testing of alternative water source projects designed to meet 
critical water supply needs. Such amounts may not be used for planning, 
feasibility studies, for operation, maintenance, replacement, repair or 
rehabilitation.'' Although we do not specifically prohibit use of funds 
for lobbying, no such authorization is permitted. Nonetheless, the 
gentleman proposes to close a potential opportunity for money to be 
diverted, and, therefore, we are prepared, as yesterday, to accept the 
gentleman's motion.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and 9 of rule XX, this 
15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by 5-minute 
votes on passage of H.R. 700, if ordered, and adoption of House 
Resolution 202.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 427, 
nays 0, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 129]

                               YEAS--427

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     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
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Jordan
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     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
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sali
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sestak
     Shadegg
     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
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor

[[Page 5811]]


     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Bono
     Camp (MI)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Hunter
     Larson (CT)
     Scott (GA)

                              {time}  1436

  Ms. WOOLSEY, Mr. RANGEL and Mr. NADLER changed their vote from 
``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the motion to recommit was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the instructions of the House 
on the motion to recommit, I report the bill, H.R. 700, back to the 
House with an amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment:
       At the end of the bill, add the following (and conform the 
     table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON THE USE OF FUNDS.

       None of the funds authorized by this Act, including the 
     amendments made by this Act, may be used--
       (1) to lobby or retain a lobbyist for the purpose of 
     influencing a Federal, State, or local governmental entity or 
     officer; or
       (2) to pay for expenses related to the membership of any 
     individual or entity in an organization or association.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 368, 
nays 59, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 130]

                               YEAS--368

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Cannon
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     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
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Herseth
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     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 (NY)
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     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
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sali
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--59

     Akin
     Bachmann
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Bilbray
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Brady (TX)
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Campbell (CA)
     Cantor
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Deal (GA)
     Feeney
     Flake
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gingrey
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Mack
     Marchant
     McHenry
     Miller (FL)
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Paul
     Pence
     Pitts
     Price (GA)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Smith (NE)
     Stearns
     Tancredo
     Thornberry
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Bono
     Camp (MI)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Hunter
     Larson (CT)
     Tanner

                              {time}  1445

  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________