[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 6174-6182]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2634, JUBILEE ACT FOR RESPONSIBLE 
             LENDING AND EXPANDED DEBT CANCELLATION OF 2008

  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on 
Rules, I call up House Resolution 1103 and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1103

       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. 2634) to provide for greater responsibility in 
     lending and expanded cancellation of debts owed to the United 
     States and the international financial institutions by low-
     income countries, 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 Financial Services. 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 Financial Services 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 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. 2634 
     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 Vermont is recognized for 
1 hour.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, 
I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Sessions). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for 
debate only.
  I yield myself such time as I may consume. I also ask unanimous 
consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and 
extend their remarks on House Resolution 1103.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Vermont?

[[Page 6175]]

  There was no objection.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, House Resolution 1103 provides 
for consideration of H.R. 2634, the Jubilee Act for Responsible Lending 
and Expanded Debt Cancellation, under a structured rule. The rule 
provides 1 hour of general debate controlled by the Committee on 
Financial Services. The rule also makes in order four amendments 
printed in the Rules Committee report, each of which is debatable for 
10 minutes. The rule provides for one motion to recommit, with or 
without instructions.
  Madam Speaker, structured, responsible debt relief has been proven to 
be one of the most effective methods of fighting global poverty. In 
1996 the World Bank and the IMF, the International Monetary Fund, 
developed the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries, or HIPC, Initiative to 
provide debt relief to the world's most impoverished nations. The 28 
countries that participated in this program have been spending the debt 
relief on good things in their country for the very poor people, on 
education and health. In the first 10 years of the program, the IMF and 
the World Bank provided $62 billion of debt relief, cutting the 
countries' debt by an average of two-thirds.
  The results speak for themselves. The participating countries now 
spend four times as much on health, education, and social services as 
they do on paying back debt. Tanzania, for instance, has used its money 
from debt cancellation to eliminate school fees for elementary school 
education. Think about it. The poorest countries, their kids were 
having to pay fees to go to elementary school, something that's not 
even required here, while Zambia eliminated fees for health care in 
rural areas. Multilateral efforts in Niger reduced debt from 76 percent 
of their gross domestic product, and think about that, 76 percent of 
the gross domestic product was used in debt relief, in 2002 to 14 
percent in 2006. With that savings Niger has been able to make 
investments in health and education. They've reduced the infant 
mortality rate, cut it in half. Primary school completion has increased 
from 16 to 28 percent, and access to drinkable water increased from 40 
percent for the people in Niger to 69 percent.
  The bill that this rule will bring to the floor today will build on 
this record of quantifiable success to expand efforts to reduce the 
debts owed by impoverished nations. This legislation makes debt 
forgiveness immediately possible for nine countries that meet the 
standards of the Jubilee Act. This is not a giveaway program.

                              {time}  1130

  These nations are among the poorest in the world with per capita 
incomes of less than $3 a day, $1,065 a year. Countries initially 
eligible under this legislation for debt relief would include Cape 
Verde, Georgia, Kenya, Mongolia and Vietnam.
  But as I mentioned, the Jubilee Act does not give countries that 
borrowed money a free ride with debt forgiveness. It includes strict 
parameters to ensure that the participating countries: one, have 
transparent and effective budget processes; two, do not support 
terrorism; three, cooperate in international counternarcotic efforts; 
and, four, uphold human rights standards.
  In addition, funds made available as a result of loan forgiveness 
must be directed toward antipoverty programs, and countries must 
publish an annual report to be accountable on how those funds were 
spent.
  These criteria ensure the loan forgiveness funds are used wisely and 
well. They provide an incentive for noneligible countries to reduce 
corruption and improve human rights practices so they may, one day, 
become eligible for debt forgiveness.
  Fifteen additional countries, including Bangladesh, Nigeria and 
Zimbabwe would be eligible for debt cancellation upon making required 
reforms.
  This is the brand of leadership that America needs more of where we 
are doing our share, but we are working with our allies and where we 
are using the incentive of debt forgiveness. Many of these debts, 
incidentally, were taken by kleptocrats who formerly ruled in these 
countries, and now these countries are trying to free themselves of the 
yoke of this terrible leadership. This debt forgiveness program allows 
us, working with our allies, the IMF and the World Bank, to give them a 
boost.
  Finally, Madam Speaker, it must be noted that because the 
international financial institutions like the World Bank and the IMF 
are expected to pay the bulk of the debt relief, the tremendous 
improvements that can be achieved under this bill come at a very 
reasonable cost to the U.S. taxpayer.
  The cost of America canceling bilateral debt for the countries 
initially eligible is estimated to be $197 million. That is less than 
what we spend for 14 hours in Iraq, just to put it in perspective. 
However, this bill does not actually authorize any debt cancellation. 
It authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to enter into negotiations 
to cancel debt. Any debt cancellation agreement reached by the 
Secretary returns to Congress for our approval. In fact, the 
Congressional Budget Office has scored this legislation at no cost to 
the taxpayers.
  Debt reduction has been proven to be one of the most effective, both 
cost effective and socially effective, ways to achieve significant 
reductions in global poverty.
  I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I want to thank my friend, the gentleman 
from Vermont, for the time that he is yielding me to discuss H.R. 2634, 
the Responsible Lending and Expanded Debt Collection Cancellation Act 
of 2007. This legislation follows on the heels of legislation passed 
just 2 weeks ago providing aid to mostly African and Caribbean 
countries to fight AIDS and promote development programs in 
underdeveloped countries, including programs to improve food, water, 
the treatment of other infectious diseases, poverty alleviation 
programs, microcredit, schools and teachers, legal aid, agricultural 
assistance and biomedical research.
  Today's legislation would follow up on this enormous prior financial 
commitment by further reducing or eliminating the debt obligations of 
the world's poorest nations. It attempts to accomplish this goal by 
creating a framework to having the debts of low-income countries owed 
to the United States and to international financial institutions 
eliminated.
  To do this, this bill authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to 
negotiate the full cancellation of these countries' debts with the 
Paris Club, the IMF, and the World Bank, and to reach agreements on 
future creditor transparency and responsible lending.
  It improves oversight by ensuring that countries receiving this debt 
relief have economies that are capable of redirecting their debt 
services payments, and requires a GAO audit of countries where illegal 
loans may have been made. Finally, it includes a sense of Congress that 
the U.S. should pay off $600 million worth of arrears to multilateral 
development banks.
  Madam Speaker, no one in this body disputes the worthiness of this 
goal that is enshrined within this legislation. The reduction of global 
poverty and suffering around the world is a laudable goal, and it is 
certainly in our national interests to combat conditions that may breed 
the hopelessness and poverty that allows dictators and terrorists to 
thrive.
  So it is doubtlessly important that the most heavily indebted poor 
countries be relieved of these kinds of crushing debt that prevents 
their future development, self-sufficiency and the improvement of their 
citizens' lives.
  This policy should be implemented, along with other policies that 
increase public sector investment and decrease the barriers to trade 
with these countries, as well as ensuring that the countries eligible 
for this relief do not encourage terrorist activities or abuse human 
rights.
  I am surprised, however, that Speaker Pelosi didn't see the irony in 
scheduling this step forward for developing nations on the first 
legislative week

[[Page 6176]]

after handing them a serious defeat by turning off the fast track 
authority for the Colombia Free Trade Agreement. In other words, here 
we're trying to help poor countries and now the decision is made that 
we won't engage in trade with them that would help their countries also 
grow economically free.
  While giving the most heavily indebted countries relief from crushing 
and unserviceable debt is necessary to increase their future 
development, it is simply not sufficient. The economies of these 
countries must be more integrated with the rest of the globe to provide 
their citizens with real choices and development alternatives for their 
future, and increased trade with America is a great way of 
accomplishing this.
  So while I appreciate the Financial Services Committee's efforts on 
the issue of improving conditions for the world's poorest countries, I 
remind my colleagues that development does not occur in a vacuum, and 
that by postponing the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, we have 
effectively told all of these countries, people who should be our 
friends and we should be concerned about more than just their debt, but 
about their economic viability, we've said that Congress is less 
concerned about promoting trade with them and growing their economies 
than it is with complying with the demands of labor union bosses in an 
election year.
  I encourage the Democrat leadership to take a long-term and more 
holistic view of global poverty, recognizing that these cycles of 
abject poverty cannot be broken without creating the conditions that 
encourage private sector investment, such as respect for contracts and 
rule of law and that it also encourages international trade.
  Madam Speaker, I believe that a broader policy of understanding 
poverty and the United States' role in helping to make our world better 
would include trade and would include encouraging the private markets 
around the world.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), the chairman of the Financial 
Services Committee.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I am pleased that we 
appear to have a very broad consensus in favor of this. My friend from 
Texas is right. There is no one single answer to the problems of 
poverty. But I am pleased that we have agreement that this is an 
important part of it.
  We have some history here that argues for this bill. In the year, I 
think it was 2000, we in this House passed a bill on the floor over 
some objection from the administration at the time, the Clinton 
administration, and from some of the House leadership. But we passed a 
bill to begin the process known as the HIPC, the heavily indebted poor 
country debt relief, and it has worked very well. And for those who 
think that these enterprises are doomed to failure, we can point to 
many successes in HIPC. And we did this in a way so that countries that 
had not lived up to what should have been their part of the bargain 
didn't get the benefit.
  The time has now come to do this again. And if this is done right, 
relieving countries of debt--debt that was often incurred by prior 
undemocratic and repressive regimes, and they will be primarily African 
but not entirely--relieving these countries of debt does as much to 
promote education and reduce poverty as anything else we can do.
  I think it is particularly noteworthy on this day when His Holiness 
the Pope is in our city that we received a letter from the Most 
Reverend Thomas G. Wenski, the Bishop of Orlando, who is chairman of 
the Committee on International Policy of the United States Conference 
of Catholic Bishops. He strongly supports the bill, and I ask that that 
be introduced into the Record now, along with a letter from the Jubilee 
Coalition, the Jubilee Network, many religious and civic organizations, 
and the NAACP.

         Committee on International Justice and Peace; Department 
           of Justice, Peace and Human Development, U.S. 
           Conference of Catholic Bishops,
                                    Washington, DC, April 9, 2008.
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative: As Chairman of the Committee on 
     International Policy of the United States Conference of 
     Catholic Bishops (USCCB), I urge you to support the Jubilee 
     Act for Responsible Lending and Expanded Debt Cancellation of 
     2007 (HR 2634).
       Inspired by the call of our late, beloved Pope John Paul 
     II, USCCB has long been a strong advocate of lifting the 
     heavy burden of debt from the backs of millions of people 
     living in the world's poorest countries. As Pope Benedict XVI 
     makes his first Apostolic Visit to the United States, it is 
     fitting that Congress show support for this important 
     initiative that would help alleviate the debt burden of some 
     of our poorest brothers and sisters around the world.
       As you know, since 1999 major new debt relief initiatives 
     have been adopted by the international community. These 
     initiatives have resulted in the reduction of the debt of 22 
     poor countries by over $60 billion. Another 19 countries are 
     receiving, or are potentially eligible to receive, billions 
     more in debt cancellation. These reductions are freeing up 
     substantial funds each year for expenditures in education, 
     health and other investments essential for improving the 
     lives of poor people.
       Despite this progress, a substantial number of needy 
     countries are not eligible for the existing debt relief 
     initiatives. HR 2634 represents a major new step towards 
     correcting this deficiency and making debt cancellation a 
     reality for virtually all very poor countries that have 
     participatory processes and financial management systems 
     sufficient to assure that debt cancellation savings will be 
     used to benefit the poor. We urge you to complete the 
     unfinished business of poor country debt relief and support 
     HR 2634.
           Sincerely yours,

                                             Thomas G. Wenski,

                                                Bishop of Orlando,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                                September 4, 2007.
       Dear Member of Congress: As organizations committed to 
     ending global poverty, we write to urge you to co-sponsor the 
     Jubilee Act for Responsible Lending and Expanded Debt 
     Cancellation of 2007 (H.R. 2634). The Jubilee Act safeguards 
     the gains made by debt cancellation to date and expands 
     eligibility for cancellation to countries that need it to 
     meet the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
       Debt cancellation is a proven way to reduce poverty. The 
     debt cancellation supported by Congress in 1999 and 2005 has 
     reached more than two dozen countries in Africa and Latin 
     America. This year, Zambia is using its savings of $23.8 
     million on agricultural projects and to eliminate fees for 
     health care in rural areas. Uganda is using the $57.9 million 
     freed by debt cancellation to increase spending on primary 
     education, malaria control, health care and infrastructure.
       But significant challenges remain. First, the IMF and World 
     Bank continue to urge impoverished nations to adopt policies 
     including privatization of essential services and 
     liberalization of trade in sensitive sectors in exchange for 
     debt cancellation or new aid, the net effect of which can be 
     to limit spending on public services. Today, IMF/World Bank 
     conditions are holding up much needed debt cancellation for 
     eligible countries including Haiti, the Democratic Republic 
     of Congo, and Liberia. These economic conditions are 
     undermining the benefits of debt cancellation and hurting the 
     poor; the Jubilee Act would prohibit them. Second, rogue 
     lenders and so-called ``vulture funds'' threaten to 
     compromise the benefits of debt cancellation. The Jubilee Act 
     requires the Secretary of the Treasury to curtail the 
     activity of vulture funds.
       2007 marks the half way point to the MDGs, but we are far 
     from halfway to meeting the goals, especially in Africa. Debt 
     cancellation should be expanded to include countries that 
     need it to meet the MDGs and to fight HIV/AIDS and other 
     diseases. The Jubilee Act would make up to 27 additional low-
     income countries eligible for debt cancellation by the United 
     States, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund 
     provided that they demonstrate their ability to use the money 
     to fight poverty and provide an annual report detailing the 
     use of funds on poverty reduction.
       In order to learn from past errors and ensure more 
     responsible lending, we must address the problem of odious 
     and unjust debts (debts accrued by undemocratic regimes or 
     that did not benefit the population). The Jubilee Act does 
     this by requiring the Comptroller General of the US to 
     undertake audits of debt portfolios of previous regimes in 
     countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and South 
     Africa, where there is accepted evidence of odious loans.
       In order to prevent a continual and wasteful debt/
     forgiveness cycle, it is essential to establish a framework 
     for responsible and transparent lending in the future. The 
     Jubilee Act calls for the development of responsible 
     financing standards where creditors and aid/loan recipients 
     alike adhere to standards to assure transparency and 
     accountability to

[[Page 6177]]

     citizens, human rights, and the avoidance of odious debt, 
     while encouraging the development of renewable energy and a 
     transition away from dependence on oil.
       The U.S. can lead the way to completing the good work 
     already begun on debt cancellation. We urge you to cosponsor 
     H.R. 2634, the Jubilee Act for Responsible Lending and 
     Expanded Debt Cancellation of 2007.
       Sincerely,
       ActionAid International USA.
       AFL-CIO.
       Africa Action.
       Ainsworth United Church of Christ, Portland, Oregon.
       Alliance for Global Justice.
       American Friends Service Committee.
       American Jewish World Service.
       Americans for Informed Democracy.
       Bread for the World.
       Capuchin Franciscans, Midwest Province.
       The Capuchin Province of Mid-America.
       Center of Concern.
       Church World Service.
       Citizens for Global Solutions.
       Conference of Major Superiors of Men.
       DATA--Debt AIDS Trade Africa.
       The Episcopal Church.
       Essential Action.
       Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
       Friends of the Earth US.
       Gender Action.
       Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti.
       Jubilee Justice Task Force of the United Church of Christ.
       Jubilee National Capital Area.
       Jubilee Northwest Coalition, Seattle, Washington.
       Jubilee San Diego.
       Jubilee USA Network.
       Justice, Peace & Integrity of Creation Office of the 
     Wheaton Franciscans.
       Marianists International.
       Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns.
       Medical Mission Sisters' Alliance for Justice.
       Mennonite Central Committee.
       Metanoia Peace Community United Methodist Church, Portland, 
     Oregon.
       Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate, Justice, Peace/
     Integrity of Creation Office.
       Missionary Society of St. Columban (US Region).
       National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 
     (NAACP).
       Nicaragua Network.
       Oil Change International.
       The ONE Campaign.
       Oxfam America.
       Pax Christi USA: National Catholic Peace Movement.
       Presbyterian Church, (USA), Washington Office.
       Priority Africa Network.
       RESULTS.
       SHALOM Network, Dallas Unit of the School Sisters of Notre 
     Dame.
       School Sisters of Notre Dame, Mankato Province.
       School Sisters of Notre Dame-St. Louis Mission 
     Effectiveness Office.
       Sisters of the Holy Cross, Notre Dame, IN.
       Sojourners/Call to Renewal.
       South Bay Jubilee Coalition.
       St. Francis Xavier Jubilee parish, Missoula, MT.
       TransAfrica Forum.
       Union for Reform Judaism.
       Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations.
       United Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries.
       United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and 
     Society.
       Washington Office on Africa.
       Witness for Peace.
       Women's Edge.
                                  ____

         Washington Bureau, National Association for the 
           Advancement of Colored People,
                                   Washington, DC, April 14, 2008.
     Re Support for the Jubilee Act for Responsible Lending and 
         Expanded Debt Cancellation Act of 2007, H.R. 2634.

     Members,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the National Association 
     for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), our nation's 
     oldest, largest and most widely-recognized grassroots civil 
     rights organization, I strongly urge you to support 
     legislation to address the debilitating debt that many 
     countries throughout the world face. While debt is often a 
     necessary tool used for a plethora of economic reasons, 
     unmanageable debt can cripple a country, preventing it from 
     meeting the most basic human needs of its people. 
     Specifically, I urge you to support H.R. 2634, the Jubilee 
     Act, when it comes before you on the floor of the House 
     tomorrow.
       As a signatory to the Millennium Development Goals, the 
     U.S. is charged with helping to alleviate poverty as well as 
     promote education and health throughout the world. H.R. 2634, 
     the Jubilee Act for Responsible Lending and Expanded Debt 
     Cancellation of 2007, would make great strides in freeing 
     resources to achieve these goals through the forgiveness of 
     debts. This crucial piece of legislation would help ease the 
     overwhelming debt burden many countries face while making 
     available funds for these nations to use to provide their 
     citizens with vital resources and services. For example, in 
     countries such as Burundi, Ghana, Honduras, Tanzania and 
     Zambia, money saved from debt relief has been used to improve 
     infrastructure, education, and health care and to increase 
     access to daily necessities of life such as food and clean 
     drinking water.
       While these reports are certainly encouraging, more needs 
     to be done. For example, in Sub-Saharan Africa, the 
     approximate number of people living on less than a dollar a 
     day has actually increased since 1990. If current trends are 
     not reversed, Africa will be the only region in the world 
     where there will be more poor people in 2015 than in 1990.
       Thank you in advance for your attention to the NAACP 
     position. Should you have any questions or comments, please 
     do not hesitate to contact me at my office at (202) 463-2940.
           Sincerely,
                                                Hilary O. Shelton,
                                                         Director.

  Helping countries reduce the debt is a very effective way of giving 
them the tools to go forward with development.
  One other important point here. We have been plagued in the past by 
the international financial community and the judgment of many of us, 
liberal, conservative, Democrat and Republican, unduly injecting itself 
into the decisions in particular countries. Democratic societies should 
not be told from the outside what the water rate should be, what the 
tax structure should be and what education fees should be. And very 
often in the past, these had a very negative effect from the standpoint 
of poverty alleviation.
  Unanimously out of our committee, this bill includes a restriction on 
what is called conditionality of that sort. There will be no 
possibility of using debt relief as a lever for outsiders to impose on 
these Democratic societies choices that ought to be made within their 
society. We do say that the donors, and these are both the individual 
countries and the international financial institutions, should insist 
on a variety of procedural safeguards of democracy, of openness and 
negotiating with the minority.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. We have said that from the standpoint of 
the U.S., in order to be eligible for our help, they will have to 
cooperate with us against human trafficking, against terrorism and 
against illegal immigration. Those are the kind of conditions that is 
appropriate to impose.
  Finally, we should note that this bill obviously does not, as it 
cannot itself, accomplish debt relief. It is a mandate to the United 
States executive branch to begin negotiations. And these negotiations 
must be multilateral, because we do not want to see America give debt 
relief when other countries don't do it and that nullifies the effect. 
And we also want to press the international financial institutions to 
do it using our influence there.
  Today, we take a step widely hailed by particularly those who are 
concerned with the alleviation of poverty in other parts of the world. 
We take the step that does more than any other single step to reach 
that goal.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Massachusetts 
has again expired.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. We have had a problem in the world of 
economic growth occurring in ways that shut out a great majority of the 
people in various countries from the benefit. We need a coordinated 
strategy so that we can have growth, but we can have growth in an 
equitable way. Debt relief is an essential part of that overall 
strategy.
  I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, if I could inquire of my friend of any 
remaining speakers that he has.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I am the last speaker on our side.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the gentleman very much.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas is recognized to 
close.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I would like to put into the Record a 
statement of administrative policy from the White House on this bill.

[[Page 6178]]



    Statement of Administration Policy, H.R. 2634--Jubilee Act for 
       Responsible Lending and Expanded Debt Cancellation of 2008

       (Rep. Waters (D) CA and 104 cosponsors.)
       The Administration has provided strong international 
     leadership on debt relief for the world's most heavily-
     indebted poor countries. Ongoing debt relief initiatives, 
     including the Enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) 
     Initiative and the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative 
     (MDRI), are expected to provide over $100 billion in debt 
     reduction to 32 countries and another eight countries could 
     eventually qualify under these initiatives. To ensure that 
     gains from debt relief are available for the long term, the 
     Administration led efforts in the multilateral development 
     banks to use a debt sustainability framework to determine the 
     appropriate mix of grants and lending. While the 
     Administration believes the goals of this bill are laudable, 
     the Administration does not support H.R 2634 for the reasons 
     stated below.
       The countries to be covered by the bill are managing their 
     debt, and some of the countries that would be covered by this 
     bill are now actively working towards expanded access to 
     international capital markets. Providing debt relief to 
     countries that can service their debt sends the wrong 
     message, and undermines efforts to assist countries in 
     developing sound debt management practices that will allow 
     them to transition gradually toward access to private capital 
     markets.
       Any debt relief should be conditioned on the adoption of 
     policies that promote sound economic practices. Policy 
     conditionality is important and often necessary to ensure 
     that debt relief is used in a manner that will promote 
     economic growth and provide real benefits to the poor.
       The budget impact of such a program would be significant, 
     and would require trade-offs that could affect key foreign 
     policy priorities. The Treasury Department estimates that the 
     budget cost to forgive the $2.5 billion in nominal debt 
     (including loan guarantees) owed to the United States by 
     countries that do not currently qualify under the HIPC 
     Initiative would be approximately $1 billion. This cost 
     estimate assumes that all potentially eligible International 
     Development Association countries would qualify for debt 
     relief in FY 2008 and would change depending on the year that 
     each country qualifies. These countries also owe the World 
     Bank and IMF over $32 billion in nominal debt, in addition to 
     other bilateral and multilateral debts. While the bill calls 
     for international financial institutions to fund debt relief 
     from internal resources, the availability of such resources 
     is very likely to be limited, as recently demonstrated by the 
     requirements for donor funding of the MDRI. Any additional 
     debt relief from the international financial institutions is 
     therefore likely to require substantial additional 
     contributions from the U.S., in addition to the estimated $1 
     billion cost of the bilateral debt relief portion of the 
     proposal. Rather than embarking on expanded debt relief, the 
     United States must focus on fulfilling its current 
     commitments.
       The Responsible Lending Framework described by the bill 
     could also hinder access by poor countries to private 
     capital. The bill calls for the creation of a binding 
     international legal framework for lending by all 
     multilateral, bilateral, and private creditors. While we 
     recognize the goals underlying such a framework--to encourage 
     sustainable lending and borrowing levels--the prospects for 
     such an agreement are doubtful. Given the wide range of 
     international creditors, creation of such a framework would 
     be very difficult and enforcement would be nearly impossible. 
     Finally, the threat of sanctions based on such a framework 
     would likely discourage legitimate creditors from lending to 
     poor countries, further reducing these countries' access to 
     financial markets.
       Finally, H.R. 2634 contains several provisions raising 
     constitutional concerns by purporting to limit the 
     President's ability to conduct the Nation's foreign affairs.

  Madam Speaker, as every American taxpayer is acutely aware, yesterday 
was Tax Day, or the final day for individuals and families to file 
taxes without incurring financial penalties. This is not to be confused 
with Tax Freedom Day, which the Tax Freedom Foundation has defined as 
the day on which the average American has finally earned enough money 
to pay this year's tax obligations at the federal, State and local 
level, which won't arrive this year until next week on April 23.

                              {time}  1145

  In recognition of these two important days on every taxpayer's 
calendar, today I will be asking each of my colleagues to vote ``no'' 
on the previous question to this rule. If the previous question is 
defeated, I will amend the rule to make in order for the House to 
consider H.R. 2734, a comprehensive bill offered by my friend from 
Michigan, Congressman Tim Walberg.
  This legislation repeals the sunset date of the 2001 Economic Growth 
and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act and makes the tax reductions enacted 
by that act permanent. In other words, instead of increasing taxes, we 
would like to make these tax cuts permanent for economic growth and 
development in this country, which will encourage investment and 
thereby grow jobs in this country.
  We have heard today several speakers from the Democrat majority 
question what is wrong with America today, and even blaming President 
Bush for the economic woes that exist. But today the Republican Party 
is saying if we want to do the things that President Bush wants, and I 
think that the American people want, let's make tax cuts permanent to 
ensure that we have job growth and development of companies and 
employers in America.
  It also repeals the termination date for provisions of the 2003 Jobs 
and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, reducing income tax 
rates on dividends and capital gains, because that is how you grow 
jobs. The reverse is happening, which America understands right now, 
and that is the new Democratic majority wants to increase taxes, which 
causes the economy not to stimulate, but to contract, which is exactly 
what is happening now, which is exactly what we understand the new 
policies of the Democratic majority have been about for 17 months.
  At some point, this Democratic majority is going to have to take 
responsibility for the things that happen under their watch, instead of 
just blaming President Bush. President Bush says let's make these tax 
cuts permanent. That is what has worked up to now, and we need to do it 
today.
  We will also amend the Internal Revenue Code to make permanent a tax 
deduction for State and local sales tax. That needs to be done. We have 
done that each of the last 5 years. Also the tax deductions for 
tuition. Let me repeat that; the tax deduction for tuition. Here we are 
on the floor trying to do something for students, to get student loans, 
but yet we will not have a deduction for tuition and related expenses.
  The increased expensing allowed for small businesses. Small business 
is the engine of our economy. That is why Republicans want to make the 
tax cuts permanent, so that we make sure that we allow small businesses 
to grow, not contract.
  And the tax credit for increasing research and development. Research 
and development is how we are going to cure the ills and the problems 
of the world that we see today.
  Instead, the new Democratic majority, now for 17 months, wants to 
increase taxes. They want to take away the deductions for tuition; they 
want to increase taxes on small business; they want to make investment 
very difficult in this country, doubling, if you listen to some of the 
candidates that are on the trail, doubling the capital gains rate. And 
certainly they won't be for increasing research and development. They 
want to tax that.
  Finally, this opportunity today would express the sense of the House 
of Representatives that the Committee on Ways and Means should report 
legislation on or before the end of the year to simplify the Federal 
income tax system.
  Madam Speaker, I can think of no more fitting action for Congress 
during this week between Tax Day and Tax Freedom Day than to provide 
this kind of certainty to the American taxpayer. That is what we should 
be about, is good policy that encourages the opportunity to grow our 
economy and have new jobs.
  By voting ``no'' on the previous question, Members will not be voting 
to kill or delay this debt relief legislation. They will simply be 
voting to provide tax relief, so that we can grow our economy for 
Americans at the same time that we provide debt relief to the world's 
poorest countries. What a wonderful opportunity.
  Madam Speaker, I encourage all my colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle to vote ``no'' on the previous question.
  Madam Speaker, I would also like to ask unanimous consent to have the 
text of the amendment and extraneous

[[Page 6179]]

material appear in the Record just prior to the vote on the previous 
question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I want to point out a couple of 
things. Number one, this legislation comes to you with bipartisan 
support from the Financial Services Committee. There was a recognition 
on that committee between the members on the majority and the members 
on the minority that this Congress had an opportunity to do something 
concrete, something practical, to help the most impoverished countries 
in this world.
  This legislation is practical. It is going to give relief that 
translates into higher literacy rates, lower infant mortality rates and 
better access to education, and it is done at very modest expense to 
the American taxpayer. It also is America working with other countries 
and with international institutions, the IMF and the World Bank, to 
have a positive influence in foreign policy. It makes sense. It is 
bipartisan. It should be done.
  I have to say I disagree with the suggestion of my good friend from 
Texas that we essentially transform this into a debate about extending 
the Bush tax cuts. That is a refrain we are hearing constantly that is 
brought up as a way of taking attention off of the things that we can 
do immediately in the legislation that is before us.
  The fact of the matter is that what we have seen in the past few 
years under the fiscal leadership of the Bush administration is we have 
gone from a record surplus to a record deficit. We have gone from a 
point of paying down our national debt to increasing it to close to $7 
trillion.
  The reality is that this legislation is about one thing and one thing 
only: It is about helping countries where the daily income of its 
citizens is on average $3 a day. That is what it is. We can decide that 
we are going to take concrete action to help those countries move 
ahead, or use this as an opportunity to engage in a debate about 
whether to extend tax cuts, as is being requested by the gentleman.
  So, Madam Speaker, by passing this proposed rule and this bill for 
which it provides consideration, Congress can build on this immensely 
successful debt relief effort we have had on a bipartisan basis and 
started more than a decade ago to provide relief for the world's 
poorest countries. It is an essential tool in the fight on the war on 
poverty.
  Incidentally, it is money well spent. Much less of our money and the 
money of our allies is spent than when we have to engage in military 
conflict. The legislation represents what I believe should be the face 
of American leadership around the globe. I believe the sponsors of this 
legislation believe it will make the world a better place and make the 
world safer and more stable.
  This is a good bill, a bipartisan bill. It enjoys the support not 
only of Chairman Frank and Chairwoman Waters, but of their Republican 
counterparts on the committee, our colleagues Congressman Bachus and 
Congresswoman Biggert. That is why I urge a ``yes'' vote on the 
previous question and on the rule.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong 
support of H. Res. 1103--Rule providing for consideration of H.R. 
2634--Jubilee Act for Responsible Lending and Expanded Debt 
Cancellation of 2007. I also strongly support the underlying 
legislation, H.R. 2634, the Jubilee Act for Responsible Lending and 
Expanded Debt Cancellation, which I am proud to join over 100 of my 
colleagues in cosponsoring. I would like to thank my colleague, 
Congresswoman Waters, for introducing this bill, as well as the 
Chairman of the Financial Services Committee, Congressman Frank, for 
his leadership on this important issue.
  This rule allows for the consideration of four amendments. I am proud 
to support the Manager's Amendment, introduced by Congressman Frank, 
which adds additional conditions to the eligibility criteria for debt 
relief, including complying with minimum standards for eliminating 
human trafficking, cooperating with American efforts to stop illegal 
immigration, and being committed to free and fair elections.
  I also support the amendment offered by my colleague Congressman 
Hastings of Florida. This amendment adds a Sense of Congress stating 
that, due to the current humanitarian and political instability in 
Haiti, including food shortages and political turmoil, the Secretary of 
the Treasury should use his influence to expedite the complete and 
immediate cancellation of Haiti's debts to all international financial 
institutions, or if such debt cancellation cannot be provided, to urge 
the institutions to immediately suspend the requirement that Haiti make 
further debt service payments on debts owed to the institutions. After 
deadly food riots last week in Port-au-Prince, which resulted in the 
death of a Nigerian U.N. peacekeeper, I believe that this amendment is 
both crucial and timely.
  I also support the amendment introduced by my colleague Mr. Weiner. 
This amendment modifies the qualification for ``eligible low-income 
country'' to include those countries that are eligible for both 
International Development Association loans and World Bank loans.
  Countries throughout the world suffer from the heavy burden of debt. 
The inability of nations to escape from these financial commitments has 
profound impacts on any attempts they make at poverty reduction, health 
care, economic development, and sustainable growth. The Highly Indebted 
Poor Countries, HIPCs, the majority of which are located in Africa, are 
particularly crippled by debt. Nearly three years ago, we saw an 
outpouring of support for debt relief as G8 leaders met in Gleneagles, 
Scotland, to pursue a policy of poverty reduction. While some positive 
progress has been made since that meeting, it is absolutely undeniable 
that this is an issued on which a great deal remains to be done.
  Today, we have an opportunity to take a positive and concrete step 
toward ending global poverty by helping needy and deserving low-income 
countries. The Jubilee Act expands existing debt relief programs for 
the world's poorest countries, and it includes measures to ensure that 
the benefits of debt relief are not eroded by future abusive lending.
  Debt relief has, in the past, proved an effective tool to reduce 
poverty in some of the world's poorest countries. Debt relief 
initiatives passed in 1999 and 2005 are benefiting more than two dozen 
countries in Africa and Latin America. Uganda is using the $57.9 
million it has saved from debt cancellation on primary education, to 
ensure a future for its children, as well as much needed improvements 
in malaria control, health care, and infrastructure. Zambia is using 
its savings of $23.8 million on agricultural projects, and to eliminate 
fees for health care in rural areas.
  Debt cancellation has enabled programs in Uganda and Zambia to 
directly help the people of these nations. However, there are many 
impoverished and deserving countries that do not currently benefit from 
debt relief. The International Monetary Fund, IMF, and the World Bank 
continue to place restrictive conditions on debt cancellation, calling 
for policies requiring the privatization of essential services and the 
liberalization of trade in sensitive sectors in exchange for debt 
cancellation. These conditions are currently holding up desperately 
needed debt relief in several eligible countries, including Haiti, the 
Democratic Republic of Congo, and Liberia.
  Madam Speaker, the legislation we are considering today will not only 
bring the benefits of debt cancellation to more countries than ever 
before, it will also ensure that these benefits are felt by all strata 
of society. This bill would direct the Secretary of the Treasury to 
negotiate an agreement with the IMF and World Bank, as well as other 
bilateral and multilateral creditors, to make up to 25 additional low-
income countries eligible for complete debt cancellation. Governments 
of these countries will be required to allocate the money saved through 
debt cancellation to poverty reduction programs, such as initiatives to 
improve economic infrastructure, basic education, nutrition, health 
services, and programs to redress environmental degradation.
  This legislation does not remove all conditions from debt relief 
programs. Countries still must demonstrate transparent and effective 
budget and financial management systems, and they can be excluded from 
debt relief if they do not. In addition, countries committing massive 
violations of human rights are not eligible, nor are countries that 
support international terrorism, have excessive levels of military 
expenditures, or fail to cooperate on international narcotics control. 
The Jubilee Act encourages the developing of responsible financing 
standards, and assures financial transparency and accountability.
  Finally, but perhaps most importantly, the Jubilee Act calls for the 
development of a responsible financing framework for the future.

[[Page 6180]]

Debt forgiveness is a good short-term solution, but to be truly 
effective we must find a way to fix the broken system of international 
lending. Of particular concern to me has been the proliferation of 
vulture funds, which, like their avian namesake, seek to make a profit 
off of already weakened prey.
  Madam Speaker, vulture funds purchase the debt of countries (or 
companies) in financial distress. They then hold out for the full value 
of the debt, plus any interest, which they pursue through litigation, 
much of which takes place in U.S. courts. The inability of nations to 
escape from these financial commitments has profound impacts on any 
attempts they make at poverty reduction, health care, economic 
development, and sustainable growth. The Highly Indebted Poor 
Countries, HIPCs, the majority of which are located in Africa, are 
particularly crippled by debt. Though these countries may not appear to 
be the most profitable prey for vulture funds, which in theory prefer 
to purchase debt that a country has, or may in the future develop, the 
ability to pay, according to reports there are numerous lawsuits 
currently pending against HIPC countries.
  Vulture funds, together with other forms of irresponsible lending, 
undermine international efforts to provide much needed debt relief to 
the world's most indebted poor countries. The Jubilee Act directs the 
Secretary of the Treasury to develop and promote policies to prevent 
bilateral, multilateral, and private creditors from eroding the gains 
of debt relief through irresponsible or exploitive lending. I am 
particularly pleased that this legislation takes this important step 
toward fixing broken systems of international lending.
  Madam Speaker, if we are serious about meeting the Millennium 
Development Goals, we must take concrete steps toward reducing poverty. 
Debt cancellation is a proven way to do this. This legislation has the 
support of numerous organizations doing excellent work around the 
world, including the AFL-CIO, American Jewish World Service, Church 
World Service, DATA--Debt AIDS Trade Africa--Jubilee USA Network, the 
ONE Campaign, Oxfam America, and RESULTS.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this rule, and 
the underlying legislation.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Sessions is as follows:

       Amendment to H. Res. 1103 Offered by Mr. Sessions of Texas

       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 3. That immediately upon the adoption of this 
     resolution the House shall, without intervention of any point 
     of order, consider the bill (H.R. 2734) to make the Economic 
     Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and certain 
     other tax benefits permanent law. 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 chairman and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) 
     an amendment in the nature of a substitute if offered by 
     Representative Rangel of New York, 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 the 
     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. WELCH of Vermont. 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. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 
XX, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question will be 
followed by 5-minute votes on adopting the resolution, if ordered; 
ordering the previous question on House Resolution 1107; and adopting 
House Resolution 1107, if ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 217, 
nays 196, not voting 18, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 192]

                               YEAS--217

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Chandler
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Lincoln
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     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.
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     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)
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     McNulty
     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
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard

[[Page 6181]]


     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Skelton
     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)
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--196

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     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
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Everett
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gilchrest
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hill
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hulshof
     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.
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     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
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Saxton
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shays
     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 (SC)
     Wittman (VA)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--18

     Bono Mack
     Brady (PA)
     Costa
     DeLauro
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Harman
     Mack
     Markey
     Meek (FL)
     Nunes
     Peterson (PA)
     Roskam
     Rothman
     Rush
     Slaughter
     Wexler
     Wilson (NM)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Two minutes are remaining 
on this vote.

                              {time}  1218

  Mr. SAXTON and Mr. BARTON of Texas changed their vote from ``yea'' to 
``nay.''
  Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota and Ms. VELAZQUEZ changed their vote from 
``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 192, had I been 
present, I would have voted ``yea.''
  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. Madam 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 220, 
nays 190, not voting 21, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 193]

                               YEAS--220

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Chandler
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Lincoln
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     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.
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     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)
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     McNulty
     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
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Rohrabacher
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     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)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--190

     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     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
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Everett
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gilchrest
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hill
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hulshof
     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.
     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
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Saxton
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shays
     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
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield (KY)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman (VA)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

[[Page 6182]]



                             NOT VOTING--21

     Aderholt
     Brady (PA)
     Costa
     Cramer
     DeLauro
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Harman
     Mack
     Markey
     Meek (FL)
     Nunes
     Peterson (PA)
     Reyes
     Rogers (AL)
     Rothman
     Rush
     Weldon (FL)
     Wexler
     Wilson (NM)
     Woolsey


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Two minutes are remaining 
in this vote.

                              {time}  1225

  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.

                          ____________________