[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 11]
[House]
[Pages 16061-16067]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3999, NATIONAL HIGHWAY BRIDGE 
               RECONSTRUCTION AND INSPECTION ACT OF 2008

  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 1344 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1344

       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. 3999) to amend title 23, United States Code, 
     to improve the safety of Federal-aid highway bridges, to 
     strengthen bridge inspection standards and processes, to 
     increase investment in the reconstruction of structurally 
     deficient bridges on the National Highway System, 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 
     Transportation and Infrastructure. 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 printed in part A of 
     the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution. That amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     shall be considered as read. All points of order against that 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived except 
     those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI. Notwithstanding 
     clause 11 of rule XVIII, no amendment to that amendment in 
     the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those 
     printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules. 
     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 amendment 
     in the nature of a substitute made in order as original text. 
     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. 3999 
     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.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York is recognized 
for 1 hour.
  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-
Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for 
debate only.

[[Page 16062]]




                             General Leave

  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
insert extraneous materials into the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1344 provides for consideration of H.R. 
3999, the National Highway Bridge Reconstruction and Inspection Act of 
2008 under a structured rule. The rule provides one hour of general 
debate controlled by the Committee on Transportation. The rule makes in 
order 11 of the amendments that were submitted to the Rules Committee.
  I would like to thank Chairman Oberstar for his leadership in 
addressing the critical needs of bridges on our Federal highway system. 
I know that this issue is especially close to home for him, and my 
other colleagues from Minnesota, because of the tragedy that occurred 
when the I-35 bridge collapsed in Minneapolis last summer.
  The staggering truth is that one-fourth of all bridges nationwide are 
deficient. Half of all of the bridges in use were constructed in the 
1960s. It is projected that motorist traffic will double in the next 30 
years. In the same time, freight traffic in the U.S. will likely grow 
92 percent in order to accommodate forecasted increases in American 
economic output. Growing demand for the movement of goods and services 
will place an unprecedented strain on our aging system.
  Our communities need the resources to ensure that our families and 
friends don't have to worry about their safety during their morning 
commute to work, quick trip to the grocery store, or the drive to drop 
their children off at school. We owe it to the American public to 
regain their trust in the safety of our bridges and highways.
  Mr. Speaker, the legislation this rule provides for consideration 
will go a long way to regain that trust from the American people. The 
legislation authorizes an additional $1 billion for bridge repair and 
replacement, and setting inspection standards for such bridges. It 
ensures that funds are concentrated on the most pressing bridge safety 
concerns by mandating that priority bridges be inspected annually and 
all other bridges biennially.
  I would also like to take a moment to acknowledge the work of my 
Republican colleague from Texas (Mr. Conaway) and thank him for the 
opportunity to work with him and the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton) 
on an amendment that we will offer here today related to the rusting 
and corrosion damage to bridges. Our amendment expresses the sense of 
Congress that States should prepare corrosion mitigation and prevention 
plans when planning the construction of new bridges or the 
rehabilitation of existing bridges.
  Our amendment calls attention to a serious problem: many of our 
Nation's bridges are simply rusting away because of corrosion. Many of 
our bridges have surpassed their initial life expectancy, yet we rely 
on them to support another 20, 30, 40 years of travel.
  Corrosion is a significant factor in determining the useful life of a 
bridge. Without preventative measures, water penetrates and corrodes 
the steel rebar that reinforces our bridges, causing it to swell and 
fracture the concrete from the inside out. Weather and salt--especially 
in the northeast, where we must salt our roads in the winter--cause 
steel beams to rust and undermine the integrity of the whole structure.
  But corrosion can be reduced by using widely available technology and 
construction methods if they are incorporated into the engineering and 
design phase of the bridge project. Prevention measures range from 
simple steps like selecting more resistant building materials, or using 
coated rebar in concrete structures, to complex methods that cause 
electrical reactions in water to prevent rust from forming. This sounds 
complicated, but the same technology is commonly used by the 
shipbuilding industry to prevent corrosion.
  It is much easier and more cost effective to prevent or limit 
corrosion and rust at the beginning of a project. Corrosion prevention 
and mitigation plans can cost as little as a few thousand dollars to 
prepare during the design phase of a bridge project, but they can save 
municipalities hundreds of millions of dollars down the road in 
replacement and repair costs; delaying the need for maintenance by a 
factor of years. Having these plans up front can extend the life of the 
bridge, thereby saving both lives and millions of dollars in 
unnecessary repairs. I am hopeful that my colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle will support the Conaway-Arcuri-Sutton amendment later today.
  Mr. Speaker, we cannot pass up this opportunity. We rely on bridges 
too much for everyday activities. Thanks to Chairman Oberstar and the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, we can rest a little 
easier knowing that this legislation will make the bridges on our 
national highway system much safer.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would like to 
thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Arcuri) for the time, and I 
yield myself such time as I may consume.
  On August 1, 2007, the deteriorating condition of some of America's 
bridges and infrastructure became tragically apparent when the I-35W 
Mississippi River bridge in Minnesota failed and plunged into the 
riverbank below. We must always honor the victims that were lost in 
that tragic accident.
  We must do all in our power to prevent a similar tragedy from 
occurring again, and that is why I am pleased we are considering the 
underlying legislation, the National Highway Bridge Reconstruction and 
Inspection Act of 2008. The legislation authorizes $1 billion for 
fiscal year 2009 for the Department of Transportation to identify, 
inspect, repair, and if necessary, replace structurally deficient or 
obsolete bridges in the national highway system.
  This legislation is quite important considering that the U.S. 
Department of Transportation reports that one out of every eight 
bridges in the Nation is structurally deficient.
  However, I have some concerns with the way the legislation 
distributes funding. The legislation distributes funding to States 
based on the number of deficient bridges in each State. In other words, 
the more deficient bridges a State has, the more money a State gets. 
Unfortunately, this approach penalizes States that place a high 
priority on maintaining their infrastructure, and rewards States that 
have let their infrastructure fall into disrepair with additional 
Federal funding.
  For example, the State of Florida has a ``maintenance first'' policy 
for infrastructure at the State level. Florida's first priority is 
keeping their existing infrastructure in a state of good repair. As a 
result, the percentage of Florida's bridges that are rated as deficient 
is one of the lowest in the Nation. But rather than be rewarded for its 
responsible funding decisions, Florida is penalized because most of the 
funding that is distributed through this formula will go to States that 
have not properly maintained their bridges and therefore have a very 
high percentage of deficient bridges.
  I would also like to bring the Long Key Bridge in South Florida to 
the attention of Chairman Oberstar. The bridge spans between Long Key 
and Conch Key in the Florida Keys. It was one of the first segmental 
bridges built back in 1981, and allows the entire population of the 
lower keys to evacuate to the mainland before a hurricane. 
Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen, who is with us this afternoon, is concerned 
about this issue and continuously brings it to the attention of all of 
our colleagues.
  The structure was originally built using a V-pier concept creating a 
control point between the segment and the pier cap. Due to the weakness 
of the design, the Florida Department of Transportation is attempting 
to seek funding to replace the V-pier design to a more conventional 
configuration that

[[Page 16063]]

would provide stronger structural integrity. This improvement would 
cost approximately $60 million and would maintain the existing piers in 
the top segments which are in good condition.

                              {time}  1730

  Unfortunately, the Florida Department of Transportation currently 
lacks the funding for this important project, and the necessary 
improvements have been postponed until 2012.
  In this regard I am pleased that the House will have an opportunity 
to vote for the Representative Mario Diaz-Balart amendment. That 
commonsense amendment would add emergency evacuation routes, such as 
Long Key Bridge, to the risk-based priority criteria in the 
legislation.
  Even though I'm pleased that that amendment was made in order, I once 
again note that this rule continues the unfortunate policy of the 
majority's unfairly restricting debate. A total of 21 amendments were 
submitted to the Rules Committee, six majority amendments, 14 minority 
amendments, and one bipartisan amendment. The majority made every 
majority amendment in order, while only allowing four minority 
amendments. In other words, the majority got 100 percent of their 
amendments made in order, while the minority got 28 percent of their 
amendments in order. That's unnecessary and unfair, Mr. Speaker.
  This bill would have much more bipartisan support if the Rules 
Committee had not blocked an important amendment from Ranking Member 
Mica. His amendment would have allowed a State to transfer funding out 
of the highway bridge program only if the State met two strict 
criteria. I understand that Chairman Oberstar is concerned that some 
States have acted responsibly in maintaining their bridges and that he 
seeks to make sure that they change their behavior. But others, such as 
Florida, have done a good job of repairing and maintaining their 
bridges. Unfortunately, since the Mica amendment was not allowed, 
responsible States will, in effect, be punished and their hands tied 
when they attempt to address their unique needs.
  I think it's a missed opportunity, and I hope that since the House 
will not be able to consider the Mica amendment that as the legislation 
continues through the legislative process, these concerns of 
responsible States will be considered.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Salazar), a member of the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee.
  Mr. SALAZAR. I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding, and I 
would like to recognize Chairman Oberstar and Chairman DeFazio for 
their exceptional leadership on this critical infrastructure issue.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3999, the National 
Highway Bridge Reconstruction and Inspection Act of 2008, and urge 
swift passage of this measure. This bipartisan bill goes a long way in 
improving our Nation's aging infrastructure and ensuring that Americans 
are safe and have secure highway bridges to travel on.
  We all remember what happened in Minneapolis last August. Thirteen 
people were killed. Our infrastructure is literally crumbling beneath 
us. This is simply unacceptable. One-half of all bridges in the U.S. 
were built before 1964, and now we have over 72,000 highway bridges 
that are structurally deficient. In Colorado we have 125 bridges that 
need repair; 24 of those bridges are in my district.
  And I have got to remind the gentleman from Florida that Colorado has 
typically been a donor State. After we passed TEA-LU a couple years 
ago, we actually started becoming a State where we can actually get 
some Federal dollars back in reference to those that we send to the 
Federal Government. So in order for us to be able to fix the bridges in 
my district, we need to be able to have Federal funds to do so. We must 
do everything possible to keep our travelers, our constituents safe in 
our highways. By dedicating funding for bridge repairs, this bill 
provides relief for our State transportation departments.
  I would like to submit for the Record these articles that came from 
Cortez Journal and the Aspen Daily that talk about how oil shortages 
have halted road and bridge repair projects, local roads suffer from 
CDOT shortfalls.
  H.R. 3999 will improve the safety and stability of our Nation's 
transportation infrastructure, and I urge my colleagues to support this 
bill.
  I want to thank the gentleman from New York once again for yielding.

                  [From the Aspen Daily, July 17, 2008]

                 Local Roads Suffer From CDOT Shortfall

            ( By David Frey, Aspen Daily News Correspondent)

       Carbondale--Area road and bridge work is suffering the 
     impacts of what state Transportation Department officials 
     call a ``quiet crisis'' of dwindling funds, aging highways 
     and growing traffic.
       Motorists should not hold their collective breath waiting 
     for fixes to some of the area's worsening sections of 
     highway--even those rated as ``poor''--Michelle Halstead, 
     local government liaison for the Colorado Department of 
     Transportation, told Carbondale trustees this week.
       ``For next year, I have zero construction dollars coming 
     from the state or federal level for any projects in my 
     residency,'' said Pete Merdis, CDOT's resident engineer in 
     Glenwood Springs, whose region includes the Roaring Fork 
     Valley.
       That means no money for the Grand Avenue bridge over the 
     Colorado River in Glenwood Springs, whose narrow lanes leave 
     rush hour drivers jockeying for position. The bridge is one 
     of 125 state bridges rated as poor. With a sufficiency score 
     of 47.4 of a possible 100, it is considered structurally 
     sound but functionally obsolete due to the skinny lanes and 
     heavy use.
       It means no money, either, for several stretches of highway 
     considered poor or congested, including Highway 133 at 
     Carbondale, Highway 6 and 24 at Glenwood Springs, and 
     portions of Interstate 70. The Highway 133 project has been 
     budgeted for approximately $1.1 million over the next 27 
     years.
       ``It's a perfect storm--or you can call it a quiet crisis--
     but it's not going to be quiet for much longer,'' Halstead 
     said.
       CDOT has a $65 billion shortfall for projects statewide, 
     she said, despite a lengthening to-do list. Officials have 
     declared 122 bridges structurally deficient. That doesn't 
     mean they're unsafe, Halstead said, but that they require 
     constant maintenance to remain safe. Forty percent of state 
     roads are considered to be in poor condition, and 20 percent 
     are at the end of their surface life. Meanwhile, officials 
     predict 1.5 million more people residing in the state by 
     2020, twice the population of senior citizens by 2025, and 
     double the truck traffic by 2030.
       ``That's the scenario we're rapidly approaching, given the 
     revenues we're forecasting,'' Halstead said.
       CDOT's general fund budget for 2009 has been slashed by 
     $300 million. For 2011, those numbers drop another $200 
     million.
       Much of CDOT's revenue comes from state and federal gas 
     taxes. While gas prices continue to soar, gas taxes remain 
     flat. As rising pump prices start to deter motorists, 
     Halstead said, the state could actually see those dollars 
     decrease.
       Locally, Highway 82 and 1-70 remain priority areas, and 
     some work is scheduled during the next two years, Merdis 
     said.
       A repaving project between EI Jebel and Basalt, delayed 
     because of an asphalt shortage, is still budgeted for next 
     year. The last leg of the Grand Avenue concrete paving 
     project, cut short in 2005 due to cost overruns, is on tap, 
     too. A small project is planned for Highway 82 near Woody 
     Creek. Work on Interstate 70 on either side of Glenwood 
     Springs is scheduled for 2010.
       Some design work is planned, too, Merdis said, but there 
     isn't any money budgeted for the foreseeable future to 
     implement the designs, and no money even for routine 
     maintenance. Improvements to Highway 133, urgently sought by 
     Carbondale officials, are on the list for 2030.
       ``That's the reality of the funding situation that we're up 
     against,'' Merdis said. ``I guess it all depends on the 
     future, what kind of funding mechanism becomes available for 
     future transportation projects.''
                                  ____


                       [From the Cortez Journal]

                Oil Shortage Halts Road Repair Projects

                (By Steve Grazier, Journal Staff Writer)

       National energy supply uncertainty has hit home as 
     Montezuma County is likely to see a 60 percent reduction of 
     chip-seal oil for scheduled road projects in 2008.
       Dean Roundtree, the county's new road and bridge 
     supervisor, said his 230,000-gallon pitch for chip-seal oil 
     has been denied by the county's supplier. The counter offer 
     from SEM Materials to the county was for 90,000 gallons, 
     which is about 39 percent of what was requested, he said.
       ``We could get all our oil in time, but right now there are 
     no guarantees,'' Roundtree said.

[[Page 16064]]

       Chip seal is a surface treatment that is generally used on 
     rural roads carrying lower traffic volumes.
       Top 2008 road priorities, such as upgrades to County Road G 
     in McElmo Canyon, will be completed this year, Roundtree 
     said. However, other projects are likely to be delayed.
       One county road project already shelved this year includes 
     improvements to Roads 16 and 17 near Goodman Point, Roundtree 
     said.
       County Commissioner Larrie Rule cited a letter that came in 
     June from SEM Materials warning the county to expect less 
     road oil this year.
       ``They said they probably won't be able to meet our 
     demand,'' Rule said. ``It looks like they're using everything 
     to go toward diesel fuel to make more money.''
       Colorado Department of Transportation officials said 
     earlier this week that oil shortages are due in part to 
     refineries focusing on more profitable products such as 
     diesel fuel, instead of the liquid used for asphalt and chip-
     seal mix.
       Adding to the complication is a shortage of polymer, which 
     is applied to asphalt to reduce cracking and rutting on 
     roads.
       Jack Nickerson, public works director for the city of 
     Cortez, said a scheduled joint project between the city and 
     the Colorado Department of Transportation to fill potholes 
     along North and South Broadway was canceled last week due 
     mainly to an asphalt shortage.
       On the plus side, the city was able to complete most of its 
     major road upgrades this year, Nickerson said. But a project 
     to resurface Mildred Road is now on hold because the city's 
     asphalt supplier lacks the product.
       ``We have enough (asphalt) to do minor patching but not to 
     do major city projects,'' Nickerson said.
       State transportation officials also noted that an asphalt 
     shortage will delay about three dozen road projects in 2008.
       CDOT spokeswoman Stacey Stegman said the department will 
     give priority to projects on heavily used roads, while other 
     projects will be left incomplete until more asphalt is 
     purchased. She noted that the implications of the shortage 
     could be huge.

  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as 
she may consume to the distinguished representative from Florida (Ms. 
Ros-Lehtinen), who is very concerned on this issue representing her 
constituents.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I thank my good friend from Florida (Mr. Lincoln 
Diaz-Balart) for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the emergency route priority 
amendment, as mentioned by Congressman Lincoln Diaz-Balart, and this is 
the Mario Diaz-Balart amendment, which is provided for in today's rule 
for the National Highway Bridge Reconstruction and Inspection Act.
  I have the unique pleasure, Mr. Speaker, of representing over 265 
miles of pristine Florida coastline from Miami Beach all the way south 
to Key West. But our paradise is complicated by the extreme 
vulnerability to hurricanes, especially in the Florida Keys.
  Over 74,000 Keys residents are dependent on a single evacuation 
route, the Overseas Highway, a part of U.S. Highway 1, which runs many 
miles connecting a series of islands from Key Largo to Key West. A key, 
no pun intended, bottleneck in the evacuation route is the Long Key 
Bridge, which is the second longest bridge, next to the Seven Mile 
Bridge, in this stretch of highway. This is a 2\1/2\-mile-long bridge, 
and it marks the beginning of the approach to the first heavily 
populated Key, Key Largo; so almost all of the Florida Keys residents 
will be coming over this bridge if an evacuation is ordered. The 
Florida Department of Transportation has recently alerted my office to 
the fact that the Long Key Bridge is only rated as ``satisfactory'' in 
its structure. This means that it could be severely damaged in a 
category 3 hurricane.
  As Mr. Diaz-Balart has pointed out in his remarks, the bridge was 
built in 1981, and it allows most of the population of the Florida Keys 
to evacuate to our mainland during hurricanes. If it were damaged in a 
storm, over 50,000 people could be trapped and, indeed, under water 
because most of the Keys are below sea level. Severe damage to the 
bridge would also likely cut off the water supply to most of the 
Florida Keys because it runs along the Overseas Highway.
  Unfortunately, there are no definitive plans to fund the bridge, 
although there is a tentative date of the year 2012. This is because 
the needed improvements would cost $60 million. This includes replacing 
the present V-pier design to a more conventional configuration which 
would provide stronger structural integrity. It would also maintain the 
existing piers and top segments which are in good condition.
  That is why the Mario Diaz-Balart emergency route amendment is so 
important to my congressional district. It's very simple, but it's a 
much-needed change to this legislation. It will emphasize the 
importance of public safety in prioritizing new highway bridge funding 
as well as including emergency evacuation routes as a reason to give a 
specific bridge risk-based priority for rehab or replacements.
  Transportation infrastructure, especially bridges, play an important, 
a vital role during emergency situations, including our many natural 
disasters. In many coastal areas not only in the Florida Keys but, in 
fact, throughout the entire State of Florida and other hurricane-prone 
States, bridges provide the only mainland access for millions of 
residents and visitors alike. The 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons 
emphasized the need for safe emergency evacuation routes when millions 
of Floridians faced mandatory evacuations, including the residents of 
the Florida Keys and other barrier islands.
  This amendment simply emphasizes the importance of public safety as 
well as ensures that Americans have access to safe evacuation routes 
during times of impending disasters, and I hope that our colleagues 
give it their serious consideration.
  I thank the gentleman, my colleague from Florida, for the time.
  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton), a member of the Committee on Rules.
  Ms. SUTTON. I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Arcuri) for his 
leadership on this important measure, and I thank Chairman Oberstar for 
his continued leadership in addressing our Nation's infrastructure.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and the underlying 
bill, and I also want to speak to an amendment that will be offered to 
this bill that is being cosponsored by our leader on this measure here 
on the floor, Representative Mike Arcuri, and Representative Michael 
Conaway. This will help to bring an important sense of Congress to this 
bill. We share a common vision for a solution to prevent future 
disasters by addressing a critical need at the onset of a bridge 
project. I strongly support this bipartisan amendment, which will 
express a sense of Congress that those requesting Federal funds for 
bridge projects present corrosion mitigation and prevention plans.
  Corrosion mitigation and prevention is essential to extend the life 
of our Nation's critical infrastructure and save taxpayers money. In 
2002 the Federal Highway Administration reported the cost of corrosion 
to our highway bridges at $8.3 billion each year. As we unfortunately 
learned when the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis collapsed last August, 
investing in our Nation's infrastructure is no longer a theoretical 
argument. By utilizing experts trained in corrosion prevention, we will 
be reducing future maintenance costs and increasing public safety at 
the same time.
  The University of Akron in my district understands this critical need 
and is creating the first comprehensive corrosion engineering and 
science program in the United States. Their corrosion engineering 
program will train and prepare experts in the field, creating high-
earning engineering jobs by addressing a critically important issue.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment and on the rule and on the 
underlying legislation.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the 
balance of my time.
  I thank again my friend Mr. Arcuri for the time and all who have 
participated in this debate on this rule that brings forth to the floor 
important legislation with regard to the infrastructure in our Nation.
  Transportation is an integral part of our economy, and the underlying 
legislation will help fund some of our critical infrastructure needs by 
providing $1 billion to repair bridges in the national highway system. 
Now, while providing critical funding to repair bridges is an important 
priority for our

[[Page 16065]]

transportation system, we must not ignore the overarching problem 
facing the American transportation system, which is gasoline at over $4 
a gallon.
  For weeks we in the minority have pushed efforts to debate energy 
legislation, but the majority consistently blocks our efforts to 
address one of the most important issues facing the United States 
today. It's time for the House to debate ideas for lowering prices at 
the pump and addressing the skyrocketing cost of gasoline. So today I 
urge my colleagues to vote with me to defeat the previous question so 
the House can finally consider real solutions to rising energy costs. 
If the previous question is defeated, I will move to amend the rule to 
allow for consideration of H.R. 6566, the American Energy Act. This 
legislation provides a comprehensive approach that will increase the 
supply of American-made energy, improve conservation and efficiency, 
and promote renewable and alternative energy technologies.
  Now specifically with regard to the Outer Continental Shelf, this 
legislation provides Florida with 50 miles of permanent protection from 
energy exploration and allows the State the option for an additional 50 
miles of protection.
  Many of us in the Florida delegation came together 2 years ago to 
support this compromise, to support this legislation. I think we've 
been proven right. I think we've been proven right, Mr. Speaker. This 
is a critical issue that needs to be debated by this Congress. It's 
unfortunate that the other side of the aisle refuses to permit even a 
debate on critical issues such as this even after gasoline has reached 
$4 a gallon. It's most unfortunate, Mr. Speaker.
  I ask unanimous consent, Mr. Speaker, to insert the text of the 
amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the 
previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, by voting ``no'' on 
this previous question, Members can take a stand against these high 
fuel prices and we can finally begin a comprehensive energy debate. I 
encourage a ``no'' vote on the previous question.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my friend and 
colleague from the Rules Committee, Mr. Diaz-Balart, for his management 
of this very important bill.
  I would like to say that very few things that we do in the House of 
Representatives are more important than this rule and the underlying 
bill because while energy is important and so many things we deal with 
are very important, nothing is more important than the safety of our 
family and the safety of our children, and that's what this bill is all 
about.

                              {time}  1745

  It is about the safety of our roadways, about our bridges. The crisis 
we face in maintaining safe bridges is just as pressing, if not more, 
than any of the other issues that we face today. We must act now while 
we have an opportunity to restore public faith in our bridges and to 
prevent another tragedy like the collapse of the I-35 bridge last year.
  In my opening remarks, I mentioned that \1/4\ of all bridges 
nationwide are deficient. The State of New York is in even worse 
position with well over 6,000 of its 17,000 bridges rated as 
structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. In my upstate district 
alone, there are over 260 bridges that have been identified by the 
State Transportation Department as structurally deficient, and 9 of 
those are in my hometown of Utica, New York.
  While that reality is troubling, the Congress now has an opportunity 
to take action to address this problem. Again, the legislation in this 
rule provides for consideration authorizes an additional $1 billion for 
Federal bridge programs next year.
  Again, I thank Chairman Oberstar for his leadership and commitment to 
our Nation's infrastructure and the American people.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on 
the rule.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of 
Florida is as follows:

Amendment to H. Res. 1344 Offered by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida 


       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 3. Immediately upon the adoption of this resolution 
     the House shall, without intervention of any point of order, 
     consider in the House the bill (H.R. 6566) to bring down 
     energy prices by increasing safe, domestic production, 
     encouraging the development of alternative and renewable 
     energy, and promoting conservation. All points of order 
     against the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as 
     read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on 
     the bill and any amendment thereto to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate on the bill 
     equally divided and controlled by the majority and minority 
     leader, and (2) an amendment in the nature of a substitute if 
     offered by the Majority Leader or his designee, which shall 
     be considered as read and shall be separately debatable for 
     40 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent 
     and an opponent; and (3) one motion to recommit with or 
     without instructions.
                                  ____

       (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.

  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. 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.

[[Page 16066]]


  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the 
yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair 
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on 
the question of adoption.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 228, 
nays 192, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 522]

                               YEAS--228

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Cazayoux
     Chandler
     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
     Doyle
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Klein (FL)
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Wexler
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--192

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

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (UT)
     Boswell
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Davis, Tom
     Gilchrest
     Green, Gene
     Hayes
     Hulshof
     Jones (OH)
     Kennedy
     Ortiz
     Putnam
     Rush


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members have 2 minutes 
remaining.

                              {time}  1812

  Mr. LAMPSON changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
   Stated against:
  Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 522, I was unavoidably 
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 522, I was unavoidably 
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. 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 228, 
nays 193, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 523]

                               YEAS--228

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Cazayoux
     Chandler
     Childers
     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
     Doyle
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Klein (FL)
     Kucinich
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson

[[Page 16067]]


     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Wexler
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--193

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

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (UT)
     Boswell
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Davis, Tom
     Filner
     Gilchrest
     Green, Gene
     Hulshof
     Jones (OH)
     Kennedy
     Ortiz
     Rush


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes left 
on this vote.

                              {time}  1820

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

                          ____________________