[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 10330-10334]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1332, SMALL BUSINESS LENDING 
                        IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2007

  Mr. ARCURI. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 330 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 330

       Resolved,  That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 1332) to improve the access to capital 
     programs of the Small Business Administration, and for other 
     purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 
     with. All points of order against consideration of the bill 
     are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule 
     XXI. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall 
     not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the 
     chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Small Business. After general debate the bill shall be 
     considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall 
     be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose 
     of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Small 
     Business now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in 
     the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. All 
     points of order against the committee amendment in the nature 
     of a substitute are waived except those arising under clause 
     9 or 10 of rule XXI. Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, 
     no amendment to the committee amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute shall be in order except those printed in the 
     report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the 
     order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member 
     designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall 
     be debatable for the time specified in the report equally 
     divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, 
     shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject 
     to a demand for division of the question in the House or in 
     the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such 
     amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 
     10 of rule XXI. At the conclusion of consideration of the 
     bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the 
     bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
     adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House 
     on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the 
     bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
     without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with 
     or without instructions.
       Sec. 2. During consideration in the House of H.R. 1332 
     pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of 
     the previous question, the Chair may postpone further 
     consideration of the bill to such time as may be designated 
     by the Speaker.

                              {time}  1430

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York is recognized 
for 1 hour.
  Mr. ARCURI. Madam Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings). 
All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. ARCURI. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
on House Resolution 330.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. ARCURI. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  House Resolution 330 provides for consideration of H.R. 1332, the 
Small Business Lending Improvements Act of 2007 under a structured 
rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate controlled by the 
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Small 
Business. The rule makes in order the substitute reported by the 
Committee on Small Business as an original bill for purpose of 
amendment. The rule makes in order all four germane amendments that 
were submitted to the Rules Committee. And finally, the rule provides 
one motion to recommit, with or without instructions.
  Madam Speaker, this bipartisan legislation, crafted under the 
leadership of my colleague from New York, chairwoman of the Small 
Business Committee, Ms. Velazquez, maintains support of a wide range of 
organizations, including the Independent Community Bankers of America, 
the American Dental Association, the American Veterans, and American 
College of Physicians.
  Small businesses are the backbone of the American economy. In my home 
State of New York, 99 percent of all businesses are small businesses, 
and they employ 52 percent of the nonfarm, private sector workforce. In 
2005, an estimated 62,000 new small firms began operations in New York, 
creating $77 billion in entrepreneurial income for the State of New 
York.
  In my district and across this country, Americans depend on small 
businesses to drive the economy and provide essential everyday 
services. Sadly, it is a constant struggle for many of these 
entrepreneurs just to keep the lights on, as larger companies continue 
to push out the mom and pop businesses in the cities and towns across 
the country.
  My constituents in upstate New York have experienced this loss 
firsthand. I am proud to have the opportunity, as a member of the 
distinguished Rules Committee, to manage this rule for such an 
important piece of legislation for our Nation's small businesses.
  The Small Business Lending Improvements Act will help strengthen our 
Nation's small businesses by updating and streamlining two of the Small 
Business Administration's largest financing programs, the 7(a) and 504 
loan programs.
  This bill will make the 7(a) program more affordable for both 
borrowers and lenders by reducing fees and increasing the SBA guarantee 
on 7(a) loans. It will also modernize the 504 Certified Development 
Company Program by improving the ability of CDCs to liquidate defaulted 
loans and by requiring their local community leaders be included on 
every CDC board of directors. And it will make permanent the Community 
Express Program, providing increased access to capital for socially and 
economically disadvantaged small business owners.
  This bill also establishes two important new 7(a) loan programs, one 
to encourage private health care providers to establish practices in 
federally designated Health Professional Shortage Areas, and one to 
assist our Nation's veterans in starting or expanding a small business.
  Despite an abundance of health professionals, New York State has 102 
communities designated by the Federal Government as Health Professional 
Shortage Areas. Only 16 percent of the physicians practicing in New 
York provide services in these medically underserved areas. According 
to the Department of Health and Human Services,

[[Page 10331]]

the district I am privileged to represent is short nearly 70 dental, 
primary care and mental health practitioners. Further, a handful of 
counties I represent don't even have a resident OB/GYN, forcing 
thousands of women to travel 40 to 50 miles just to seek routine care.
  Madam Speaker, this problem is not confined to upstate New York. Over 
60 million Americans currently live in medically underserved areas 
across the country. The Small Business Lending Improvements Act will 
address this critical shortage by establishing a 7(a) loan program that 
reduces lender and borrower fees by half and increases the government 
guarantee to 90 percent of the doctors and dentists serving Health 
Professional Shortage Areas.
  These financial incentives are critical to encouraging private health 
care providers to establish practices in underserved areas and to 
expand access to quality health care for millions of Americans.
  Madam Speaker, this legislation will also ensure that our returning 
servicemen and women are afforded every opportunity to start or expand 
a small business by establishing a dedicated 7(a) loan program for 
veterans.
  An estimated 900 of New York's Reservists currently deployed in Iraq 
and Afghanistan are self-employed, and another 100 are considered key 
employees within small businesses. The absence of these men and women 
during 12- or 15-month deployments often forces the small businesses 
they own to operate at greatly reduced levels, at times declining to 
near startup conditions by the time the owner returns. An absence due 
to deployment is most detrimental to the smallest towns where many 
Reserve and Guard members operate businesses essential to the 
community.
  The Small Business Lending Improvements Act will help address the 
obstacles faced by small business owners deployed in Iraq and 
Afghanistan by eliminating borrower and lender fees and increasing to 
90 percent the government guarantee for loans to veterans under the 
7(a) program.
  According to American Veterans National Commander Thomas C. McGriff, 
``These lenders fees, which can amount to thousands of dollars, are due 
up front and can deter entrepreneurs from seeking financial assistance 
altogether.''
  Madam Speaker, by creating a lender structure tailored specifically 
for veterans, this bill will encourage entrepreneurship and help to 
repay the enormous debt we owe to our brave men and women in uniform.
  Madam Speaker, it is our Nation's small businesses that keep our 
Nation's economy moving full speed ahead. Let's take this opportunity 
to provide further encouragement for the creation of new small 
businesses and for our Nation's existing small business owners to 
expand
  I am proud to support this bipartisan legislation and encourage my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do the same.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Arcuri) for yielding me the customary 30 
minutes, and I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, the Small Business Administration was originally 
created to assist small businesses which are vital sources of job 
creation and economic growth here in America, but are often 
disadvantaged when it comes to access to capital.
  The Small Business Administration's two largest small business 
finance programs, the 7(a) loan guarantee program and the 504 loan 
program, have assisted thousands of small businesses every year that 
otherwise would not have attained a commercial loan for the purpose, 
amount and on the terms that small business borrowers need.
  The Small Business Lending Improvement Act enhances and streamlines 
these finance programs and makes the 7(a) program more affordable and 
accessible to borrowers and lenders by providing the Small Business 
Administration with the authority to use funds to reduce fees on both 
lenders and borrowers. This bill encourages increased lender 
participation in the 7(a) program by reducing application burdens for 
borrowers and lenders in rural areas and expediting the loan 
consideration time.
  This bill was favorably reported by the Committee on Small Business 
by a voice vote, and it enjoys strong bipartisan support.
  Madam Speaker, our Nation's small businesses are the engine that 
drives our economy. Small business represents 99.7 percent of all 
employers and have generated 60 to 80 percent of new jobs annually over 
the last decade. Clearly, we must act to help our Nation's small 
businesses continue to grow and create job opportunities.
  While I support the underlying Small Business Lending Improvement 
Act, more must be done to help small businesses overcome the challenges 
they face. Congress must act quickly to continue tax incentives for 
small business expenses that spur job creation and grow the economy.
  In the last Congress, I supported the Tax Increase Prevention and 
Reconciliation Act, which extended through 2009 the enhanced section 
179 small business expensing allowance. In 2007 the maximum allowance 
will be $112,000. But in 2010, this maximum amount will plummet to 
$25,000 without an extension of the current law.
  I am disappointed that the Democrat majority has chosen not to 
provide small businesses more significant tax relief in a form that has 
an opportunity to become law. We cannot afford to halt our Nation's 
economic growth and job creation opportunities by letting small 
business tax relief policies expire and become part of the Democrats' 
proposed largest tax increase in American history.
  Congress must also act to provide regulatory relief and make health 
care more affordable for small business employees and the self-
employed.
  Madam Speaker, because of the way health insurance is priced and 
regulated, small businesses usually pay more for similar coverage than 
larger corporations, and I think this is simply unfair. It is currently 
estimated that 60 percent of those without health insurance work for or 
depend on small employers who lack the ability to provide health 
benefits for their workers.
  The high cost of health insurance prevents many small business owners 
from providing health insurance to their employees, and we must look 
for ways to make health care more affordable. One way is to expand 
Health Savings Accounts so that individuals can choose a health plan 
that best meets their needs. Health Savings Accounts allow individuals 
to make their own decisions about their health care, while building, at 
the same time, savings tax free to pay for future medical expenses.
  Another way to make health insurance more affordable and accessible 
is to allow small businesses to join together to use the marketplace to 
buy health insurance as a group. This would provide small businesses 
with greater bargaining power and lower health plan costs that larger 
companies now often afford.
  We must also provide fairness to self-employed individuals who 
purchase their own health insurance, but yet are treated differently 
under the U.S. Tax Code than those who receive health insurance 
benefits from their employer.
  So I call on this new majority to bring forth legislation to the 
House floor that not only makes improvements to small business lending 
programs, as this bill does, but that provides real tax and regulatory 
relief to small businesses and makes health insurance more accessible.
  Madam Speaker, I am disappointed that this House Resolution 330 is a 
structured rule. I am even more concerned that an amendment offered by 
my colleague from Indiana, Mr. Buyer, the ranking member of the 
Committee on Veterans' Affairs, was not made in order by the Rules 
Committee. In fact, it was rejected by the Democrat majority on a party 
line vote.
  Mr. Buyer's thoughtful amendment would authorize Federal contracting 
officials to treat small businesses owned by service-disabled veterans 
under the same rules as those applied to businesses in SBA's 8(a) 
program. Under House Resolution 330, Members

[[Page 10332]]

are denied the opportunity to consider a full range of ideas on this 
floor to the Small Business Lending Improvement Act.
  Accordingly, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against the 
previous question and against House Resolution 330.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, let me say at the outset that I always 
enjoy listening to my colleague from Washington State, Mr. Hastings, 
both on the floor and in the Rules Committee.
  I want to respond to a couple of things he said. He talked about the 
Democrats and taxes. Let me remind him that the biggest tax increase 
that is looming that could impact small businesses is the alternative 
minimum tax, or so-called AMT. And the Democratic majority is actually 
working on a solution so that millions of Americans won't be unfairly 
burdened with that tax. That is an issue that, when the gentleman's 
party was in the majority, they chose not to deal with. And the 
Democrats will deal with that.
  Let me say one other thing, Madam Speaker. It is always interesting 
to hear the gentleman from Washington complain about the rule.

                              {time}  1445

  Let me state for my colleagues, both Democrat and Republican, that 
every single germane amendment that was offered to this bill was made 
in order by the Rules Committee. That is something that very rarely 
happened when the gentleman's party was in the majority. So I think 
this is a good rule.
  He complains that a nongermane amendment was not made in order, one 
that deals not with the issue of loans, which the underlying bill deals 
with, but instead the Buyer amendment deals with contracting. And the 
gentleman says that we need to do this for our veterans. Well, I want 
to do all we can for our veterans, and maybe in the right vehicle we 
can deal with that issue. But I also want to point out to my colleagues 
here in Congress that when the gentleman's party was in control, 
veterans health and veterans benefits were woefully underfunded. I 
mean, we are dealing with scandals at Walter Reed. We are dealing with 
scandals all over the country dealing with veterans health because of 
the inadequacy of the funding that came out of the Republican majority, 
budget after budget after budget after budget.
  The Democrats take control and have literally pumped billions of 
dollars more into veterans programs, including veterans health 
programs. And I will say to the gentleman from Washington that today he 
will have the opportunity, in the conference report on the supplemental 
appropriations bill, to vote for a conference report that adds even 
billions of dollars more to help our veterans. So if people are 
concerned about helping our veterans, then they will have an 
opportunity this afternoon to vote that way.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McGOVERN. I am happy to yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the 
gentleman's yielding.
  Let me first talk about the issue of the structured rule and about 
Mr. Buyer's amendment, which I am going to call for a vote on the 
previous question so we can rectify what we didn't do in Rules last 
night, and that is simply this: The Rules Committee exists to make 
rules for debate on the floor of this House. We, on a regular basis, 
waive the rules for whatever. In fact, we are going to have the 
supplemental budget on the floor, and line 1 of that supplemental rule 
talks about waiving rules.
  So the point is this: If we had had an open rule, as I suggested last 
night, Mr. Buyer could have offered his amendment.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I would like to reclaim my time, if I 
may.
  What the gentleman knows full well is that even with an open rule, 
the Buyer amendment would still not be germane and subject to a point 
of order by any Member of this House. I mean, we have germaneness rules 
for a reason.
  Let me also point out another interesting fact that I think my 
colleagues should remember. The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), 
during the last Congress, time and time and time again went before the 
Republican Rules Committee asking for a waiver on an amendment that 
would repeal the tax cut for the top 1 percent income earners in this 
country, the multibillionaires, if you will, so that those savings 
could be put into veterans programs. He needed a germaneness waiver. 
Time and time and time again, the Republican Rules Committee denied him 
the right to offer that amendment.
  Now, I guess my point is that it is a little bit curious that the 
gentleman voted routinely to uphold the germaneness rules with regard 
to amendments to help veterans in the past, but now somehow is 
complaining that we need a different standard now that they are in the 
minority.
  Madam Speaker, I would simply say that this is a fair rule. Every 
germane amendment that was offered is made in order. Anybody could have 
offered an amendment. And this is something that was very rarely 
afforded to us when we were in the minority. And I think it is a good 
rule.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I wonder if my friend has 
any more requests for time. If he is prepared to yield back, I will 
make my closing statement and then yield back.
  Mr. McGOVERN. I am going to wait with bated breath while the 
gentleman gives his closing statement. I have no further requests for 
time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance 
of my time.
  Let me respond. I appreciate at least the short time that the 
gentleman yielded to me. I wish I could have made my point, but I will 
finish making it here.
  And that is if we had had an open rule, Mr. Buyer could have come to 
the floor and attempted to offer his amendment. Somebody would have 
probably raised the germaneness issue under a point of order, and I 
have all the confidence in the world that the Speaker would have ruled 
it out of order because that is what the rules are.
  But now, because we have established a policy here of going through 
structured rules, we want to give every Member in this body an 
opportunity to see if we should have this amendment considered that 
allows for disabled veterans who have businesses to be treated as 
others would under that section of the SBA Act.
  The second point I want to make in response to my friend's talking 
about tax relief, he talked about this majority's attempt, and I think 
he used the word ``attempt,'' or intention to address the AMT. I agree 
it needs to be addressed. There is a huge cost, as the gentleman knows; 
so we, in the past Congresses, have addressed it. But the tax relief 
issues that I was talking about in my remarks are already in place. 
They are already in place. They have been acted on. They were voted on, 
and the American people have enjoyed the tax relief. And they are going 
to go away if the majority follows at least the proposed budget that 
was passed by this body. It would result in the largest tax increase in 
American history, not only in the one that I cited but in others.
  So with that, the last thing I would like to mention to my friend, 
because he talked about veterans funding, we not only dealt with and 
resolved the concurrent receipt issue, but in the last 6 years, 
veterans funding has increased by 50 percent. We all know that it is 
important that veterans get their due care because of what they have 
given us and our freedoms. So I just want to set the record straight 
that in the last 5 years, there has been a great deal of increase.
  So we will be asking to vote, Madam Speaker, on the previous 
question. I will be asking for a ``no'' vote so that I can amend this 
rule to allow the House to consider an amendment offered by Mr. Buyer 
and provide the appropriate waivers. As I stated before, the Buyer 
amendment would authorize

[[Page 10333]]

Federal contracting officials to treat small businesses owned by 
service-disabled veterans under the same contracting rules as those 
applied to businesses in the 8(a) program.
  Madam Speaker, as I mentioned, the Rules Committee met yesterday, and 
they rejected, on a party-line vote, making it in order.
  Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the 
amendment and extraneous material into the Record immediately prior to 
the vote on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. DeGette). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Washington?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, let me begin by responding to a couple things the 
gentleman from Washington said.
  First of all, on the issue of veterans funding, I don't know too many 
people who will get up and say that the funding under the previous 
majority for veterans was anywhere near adequate. The fact of the 
matter is we have more and more veterans each and every day as a result 
of the wars that we are involved with. The number of disabled veterans 
has gone up, and we have seen the direct impact of underfunding 
veterans health with the terrible tragedy at Walter Reed and so many of 
our other hospitals.
  That is one of the reasons why, when the Democratic majority took 
over this place in January, one of the first items of business was to 
increase veterans health. And in the conference report on the 
supplemental appropriations bill that is coming before us today, there 
are billions of dollars more for veterans health. If you want to help 
veterans, vote for the money. It is not about rhetoric; it is about 
action.
  Secondly, in terms of fiscal policies, I think there was a reason for 
the result in the last elections. I think Americans, Democrats and 
Republicans, were horrified with the fiscal policies of the previous 
Republican majority. We went from huge surpluses under Bill Clinton and 
a huge economic boom under Bill Clinton to now record deficits. We have 
the largest debt in the history of our country. And I think most 
Americans, no matter what their party affiliation is, have been 
justifiably horrified by that result. They want a change. They want 
fiscal responsibility. That is why we are back to pay-as-you-go, and 
that is why we are for responsible tax relief. And that is what the 
Democratic majority is going to pursue.
  Madam Speaker, the Small Business Lending Improvements Act will go a 
long way towards strengthening our Nation's small businesses by 
establishing much-needed improvements to the SBA's primary loan 
programs. Today we have an opportunity to encourage entrepreneurship, 
particularly for those who are socially or economically disadvantaged 
and those who serve our Nation in the Armed Forces, and provide some 
additional opportunities for small business owners looking to expand.
  I want to again commend my colleague from New York (Ms. Velazquez) 
for her leadership in bringing this promising and long overdue 
legislation to the floor.
  I think this is a fair rule. Everybody who wanted to offer a germane 
amendment to this bill could have done so. All the germane amendments 
are made in order. That is somewhat of a departure from the previous 
Congress, where we were routinely handed closed rules. So I would urge 
a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Hastings of Washington is 
as follows:
       (The information contained herein was provided by 
     Democratic Minority on multiple occasions throughout the 
     109th Congress.)

        The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means

       This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous 
     question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. 
     A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote 
     against the Democratic majority agenda and a vote to allow 
     the opposition, at least for the moment, to offer an 
     alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be 
     debating.
       Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of 
     Representatives, (VI, 308-311) describes the vote on the 
     previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or 
     control the consideration of the subject before the House 
     being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous 
     question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the 
     subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling 
     of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the 
     House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes 
     the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to 
     offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the 
     majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated 
     the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to 
     a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to 
     recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said: 
     ``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman 
     from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to 
     yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first 
     recognition.''
       Because the vote today may look bad for the Democratic 
     majority they will say ``the vote on the previous question is 
     simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on 
     adopting the resolution . . . [and] has no substantive 
     legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' But that is 
     not what they have always said. Listen to the definition of 
     the previous question used in the Floor Procedures Manual 
     published by the Rules Committee in the 109th Congress, (page 
     56). Here's how the Rules Committee described the rule using 
     information from Congressional Quarterly's ``American 
     Congressional Dictionary'': ``If the previous question is 
     defeated, control of debate shifts to the leading opposition 
     member (usually the minority Floor Manager) who then manages 
     an hour of debate and may offer a germane amendment to the 
     pending business.''
       Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of Representatives, 
     the subchapter titled ``Amending Special Rules'' states: ``a 
     refusal to order the previous question on such a rule [a 
     special rule reported from the Committee on Rules] opens the 
     resolution to amendment and further debate.'' (Chapter 21, 
     section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues: Upon rejection of the 
     motion for the previous question on a resolution reported 
     from the Committee on Rules, control shifts to the Member 
     leading the opposition to the previous question, who may 
     offer a proper amendment or motion and who controls the time 
     for debate thereon.''
       Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does 
     have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only 
     available tools for those who oppose the Democratic 
     majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the 
     opportunity to offer an alternative plan.
                                  ____


    Amendment to H. Res. 330 Offered by Rep. Hastings of Washington

       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 3. Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
     resolution, the amendment printed in section 4 shall be in 
     order as though printed as the last amendment in the report 
     of the Committee on Rules if offered by Representative Buyer 
     of Indiana or a designee.
       That amendment shall be debatable for 30 minutes equally 
     divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent.
       Sec. 4. The amendment referred to in section 3 is as 
     follows:
       Add at the end of the bill the following:

                        TITLE III--8(a) PROGRAM

     SEC. 301. AUTHORITY TO AWARD CONTRACTS UNDER 8(A) PROGRAM TO 
                   SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS OWNED AND CONTROLLED BY 
                   SERVICE-DISABLED VETERANS.

       Section 8 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(o) Small Business Concerns Owned and Controlled by 
     Service-Disabled Veterans.--
       ``(1) Award of contracts.--The Administrator may award a 
     contract under subsection (a) to a small business concern 
     owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans on the same 
     basis as a contract awarded under that subsection to a 
     socially and economically disadvantaged small business 
     concern.
       ``(2) Annual certification required.--The Administrator 
     shall require each small business concern owned and 
     controlled by service-disabled veterans that is a Program 
     Participant under section 7(j)(15) or that is awarded a 
     contract under subsection (a) to certify, on an annual basis, 
     that such concern is a small business concern owned and 
     controlled by service-disabled veterans within the meaning of 
     section 3(q).
       ``(3) Disadvantaged owner.--For purposes of this section, 
     in the case of a small business concern owned and controlled 
     by service-disabled veterans, the term `disadvantaged owner' 
     means an owner who is a service-disabled veteran.''.


[[Page 10334]]

  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and 
I move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas 
and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________