[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 6945-6961]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                 COAST GUARD AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1126 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, 
H.R. 2830.

                              {time}  1240


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole

[[Page 6946]]

House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 2830) to authorize appropriations for the Coast Guard for 
fiscal year 2008, and for other purposes, with Mrs. Jones of Ohio 
(Acting Chairman) in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier 
today, amendment No. 6 printed in part B of House Report 110-604 
offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) had been disposed 
of.


                 Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Markey

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 
printed in House Report 110-604.
  Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part B amendment No. 7 offered by Mr. Markey:
       At the end of title VII add the following:

     SEC. 708. REVIEW OF LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS FACILITIES.

       (a) Notice of Determination.--Consistent with other 
     provisions of law, the Secretary of Homeland Security must 
     notify the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission when a 
     determination is made that the waterway to a proposed 
     waterside liquefied natural gas facility is suitable or 
     unsuitable for the marine traffic associated with such 
     facility.
       (b) Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Response.--The 
     Federal Energy Regulatory Commission shall respond to the 
     Secretary's determination under subsection (a) by informing 
     the Secretary within 90 days of notification or at the 
     conclusion of any available appeal process, whichever is 
     later, of what action the Commission has taken, pursuant to 
     its authorities under the Natural Gas Act, regarding a 
     proposal to construct and operate a waterside liquefied 
     natural gas facility subject to a determination made under 
     subsection (a).

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1126, the gentleman 
from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chairman, it's good to see you back up in the Chair 
again. I'm glad that you have returned up there.
  I would like to thank, first of all, Chairman Jim Oberstar, a great 
chairman of the Transportation Committee for his excellent work; 
Chairman Bennie Thompson for his perspicacious leadership; to Chairman 
John Dingell, whose omniscient and ubiquitous presence on so many 
issues is always an essential ingredient in passing legislation of this 
magnitude.
  And I encourage all of my colleagues to ensure that this commonsense 
provision, which will ensure that siting decisions for proposed LNG 
facilities are coordinated and informed by homeland security 
considerations.
  My amendment requires the Department of Homeland Security to notify 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission of the Homeland Security 
Department's determination of whether the waterway to a proposed 
liquefied national gas facility is suitable for the marine traffic 
associated with the proposed facility.
  The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in turn must respond to the 
Department of Homeland Security within 90 days or at the conclusion of 
any available appeals process of what the action the commission will 
take on the LNG application.
  My amendment does not dispute the need for more LNG. We need more 
LNG. What my provision says is that before we build a new LNG facility, 
we must first make sure we are not creating a giant terrorist tiger. In 
Boston, we've always known that the LNG facility on land in my 
congressional district was a huge potential fire hazard. But after the 
September 11 attacks, when we learned how many terrorists had actually 
gotten off the LNG ships themselves in Boston coming in from overseas, 
we learned that it was a huge potential terrorist tiger.
  In the face of this kind of risk, my provision mandates that we 
should have the Homeland Security Department involved at the beginning 
when any new LNG facilities are being proposed so that the department 
can assess the potential homeland security risk of building one of 
these facilities before we blindly move forward to put more LNG 
terminals in various parts of the country.
  The need for coordination between the Coast Guard and the commission 
was recently reinforced in Fall River, Massachusetts. In Fall River, 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved the construction of 
an LNG facility in 2005. Two years later, the Coast Guard determined 
that the waterway was not suitable for the marine traffic associated 
with it. So we have a situation where the FERC has approved a license 
for the LNG facility that the Coast Guard says, 2 years later, 
shouldn't be built because the waterway to the facility is not 
suitable.

                              {time}  1245

  But despite this action by the Coast Guard, which effectively blocks 
the facility, the FERC license remains in place. This lack of 
coordination makes no sense.
  There currently is an interagency agreement among the FERC, the Coast 
Guard and the Office of Pipeline Safety that is supposed to coordinate 
efforts on the siting of LNG facilities and safety and security issues 
associated with proposed sites. But as the review process for the 
proposed LNG facility in Fall River makes clear, more structure and a 
timeline is needed to make sure that there is better coordination so 
that the FERC is not approving proposed facilities only to have the 
Coast Guard, years later, reject the proposals due to concerns over the 
suitability of the waterway to the facilities.
  At this point, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the 
time in opposition, though I do not intend to oppose the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Minnesota 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. It was truly delightful to hear the discourse of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts, perspicacious, omniscient. It is rare 
that tediological inquiries occur in this body. And for that reason, it 
is rare to hear such felicitous language used in discourse on the 
floor, especially important on this aftermath, the day after the 444th 
celebration of the birth of Shakespeare. I thank the gentleman for his 
distinguished presentation.
  Madam Chairman, I would be happy to yield to the distinguished 
gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the chairman for yielding. We are also 
prepared to accept this amendment. We think it's a good amendment.
  Although I was very taken by the gentleman from Massachusetts' prose, 
I would indicate we did have a pretty extensive hearing in the Coast 
Guard Subcommittee on this particular bridge and this waterway up in 
Fall River. I'm never caught short about the imagination of the 
Massachusetts delegation.
  Just to be clear, the FERC approval of that site was based upon one 
bridge. After the delegation applied for the construction of a new 
bridge and there was a proposal to demolish the old bridge 100 yards 
from the new bridge, the Massachusetts delegation has fallen in love 
with this old bridge. As a result, it is not a navigable waterway. That 
was the basis for the Coast Guard's decision in this matter. I 
congratulate Mr. Markey for not only his good amendment but also the 
Massachusetts delegation in general for their ingenious work.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MARKEY. How much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 1 minute.
  Mr. MARKEY. The purpose of my amendment is not the prevention of LNG 
facilities, but rather to promote coordinate between the Coast Guard 
and the FERC in siting. We have two other offshore facilities which we 
are also going to be licensing in Massachusetts. We need more LNG. We 
just want to make sure that there is good policy, good sense, good 
coordination.

[[Page 6947]]

  Again, it's my great honor to have the support of the polysyllabic 
professor of transportation legislation, the gentleman from Minnesota, 
who has a mastery of the English language that when the Congressional 
Record is reviewed, no matter how many compound, complex sentences that 
he utters, they always parse. And that's a special gift that the 
chairman has. In the area of transportation that is so complex, we need 
people with those abilities to be able to put together complex policies 
as he does. I thank the gentleman.
  Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman for those thoughtful remarks.
  I yield the balance of our time to the distinguished Chair of the 
Coast Guard Subcommittee, Mr. Cummings.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Madam Chairman, how much time do we have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman has 3\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Madam Chairman, I rise in full support of this 
amendment. It is another one of those makes-sense amendments that 
strengthens the legislation.
  We have a situation here where currently, under an existing 
memorandum of understanding between FERC and the Coast Guard, the Coast 
Guard already provides the results of its waterway suitability reports 
to FERC. This amendment would simply codify that practice. The 
amendment would then require FERC to inform the Secretary of the 
actions the commission has taken regarding the proposed terminal's 
application.
  It simply makes sense. We've got to have the Coast Guard and FERC 
working together. Of course the Coast Guard determines suitability of 
the waterway leading into the location where the LNG is going to be, 
and then of course FERC takes a look at other things. So the 
combination of them working together is so very, very, very important, 
and so we wholeheartedly support the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
  The amendment was agreed to.


        Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. Zoe Lofgren of California

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 
printed in House Report 110-604.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at 
the desk.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part B amendment No. 8 offered by Ms. Zoe Lofgren of 
     California:
       At the end of title VII add the following:

     SEC. __. USE OF SECONDARY AUTHENTICATION FOR TRANSPORTATION 
                   SECURITY CARDS.

       The Secretary of Homeland Security may use a secondary 
     authentication system for individuals applying for 
     transportation security cards when fingerprints are not able 
     to be taken or read to enhance transportation security.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1126, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Zoe Lofgren) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  My amendment is a simple one. It allows the Secretary of the 
Department of Homeland Security to use a secondary authentication 
system to verify the identity of individuals who are applying for 
transportation worker identification credentials when those individuals 
have failed in their biometric verification due to the quality of their 
fingerprints.
  Since this is the Department of Homeland Security, these credentials 
are called TWICs. And it is necessary currently, in the bill and under 
law, to have your fingerprints taken to enroll to get this TWIC. 
However, and this is very interesting, Stanford University has done the 
research. It turns out that about 5 percent of the population is unable 
to have their fingerprints taken. Now the reasons for this can be many; 
genetics, age, there is an ethnicity component, illness, hard labor. 
And when that happens, what that means is that individuals who would 
otherwise need the card will not be able to get the card unless this 
amendment is adopted.
  I'll give you an example of an individual who has been impacted. 
George Thomas of Houston, Texas. Mr. Thomas is 85 years old and he is 
the president of Higman Marine Services. Higman Marine has been in the 
inland towing business since 1917. When Mr. Thomas applied for his TWIC 
card, he was told that his skin was too thin to have his fingerprints 
read and to come back in a couple of months to apply again. Well, what 
happens to Mr. Thomas, his company, and all his employees? What happens 
to his business without the president able to comply with TWIC 
requirements through no fault of his own?
  The TWIC procedure already requires TSA to send pertinent parts of 
the enrollment record to the FBI as well as within the Department of 
Homeland Security so that appropriate terrorist threat, criminal 
history and immigration checks can be performed. This amendment 
authorizes the Secretary of DHS to perform a secondary check if a 
person's prints cannot be read instead of telling them to come back in 
a couple of months. This would mean an additional check of the name, 
but in the future, when the technology has been accepted for broad use, 
it could also include the use of other biometrics, such as iris, facial 
or retina scans, voice recognition and the like. It merely gives 
discretion to the Secretary to either do the name check, or use 
alternative biometrics.
  The point of this amendment is to enhance security, but also to allow 
workers who are applying for TWIC to avoid being rejected unfairly.
  I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment as 
well as the underlying bill. I would like to thank the chairman, Mr. 
Oberstar, and also Mr. Cummings for their wonderful work on this bill.
  Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to control 
the time in opposition although I will not oppose the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Ohio is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Chairman, we're prepared to accept this 
amendment, although I must say we have concerns about the overall 
effect the language will have on the requirements under the 
Transportation Worker Identification Credential program and port 
security levels in general.
  As we all know, and the committee has received voluminous testimony, 
TWIC readers will not be available for some time. However, in my 
opinion, we should not relax identification requirements once the 
readers are in place in our Nation's ports. The evidence at the 
committee is that we're not dealing with an unknown universe of 
individuals, we're dealing with a universe anywhere from 750,000 to 1.5 
million people who will eventually come and require a TWIC card.
  I look forward to working with Representative Zoe Lofgren and commend 
her on behalf of this 85-year-old gentleman, and others, for bringing 
this matter to our attention. I look forward to working with Chairman 
Oberstar and Chairman Cummings and Representative Zoe Lofgren in the 
conference to perhaps tweak the TWIC language and make sure that we're 
not saying that, in fact, the alternative identification measures are 
biometric, and they're not saying that we're going to use someone's 
driver's license as a substitute for those procedures.
  I look forward to the conference, and would be happy to yield to the 
chairman for his observations on the amendment.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I share those 
concerns.
  Lockheed Martin, which has the contractor responsibility for issuance 
of TWIC cards, has reported that fingerprint rejection rate due to poor 
print

[[Page 6948]]

quality has been in the range of 2 percent. If you happen to be one of 
those 2 percent, then you really have a problem. And so that requires 
those who are rejected to keep coming back to an enrollment center. And 
the amendment would alleviate mariners from having to make several 
trips.
  I remember myself, when I was working my way through college, I was 
working at a concrete block factory. I eventually wore out gloves and I 
said I can't afford any more gloves, so I just moved the concrete 
blocks with my hands until eventually I had such thick calluses I had 
no fingerprint whatever, no markings on any of my fingers. It took 
months afterwards, back in college, to shed those calluses. So I can 
imagine workers on the docks and all having similar problems. And I 
think this relief for mariners will be very, very beneficial.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I would ask the distinguished chairman of the 
subcommittee if he has any observations.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I support this amendment, also.
  Under section 7-105 of title 46, United States Code, the Department 
of Homeland Security is required to issue a biometric credential to 
individuals who are authorized to have unescorted access to secure 
areas, vessels and facilities. And some people are unable to accomplish 
that. I was just talking to my aid, who said that she went to see the 
rollout and they didn't pick up her fingerprints, which was a bad day 
for them. And so I think we have to address this.
  We will work to ensure that this amendment would not alter the 
standards in which a TWIC is issued in any way; however, we need to 
provide options for individuals whose fingerprints, like my aid's, 
cannot be used to authenticate the cards.
  I strongly support the amendment, and we will tweak the TWIC. I thank 
the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the chairman and reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. At this point, I would also like to 
thank Chairman Thompson of the Homeland Security Committee for his hard 
work on this bill.
  I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment 
offered by Representative Zoe Lofgren. As you know, in order to obtain 
a TWIC, a port worker must be fingerprinted. The problem is that it's 
not always possible to get an image of the person's fingerprint, as has 
been mentioned a few minutes ago. From excessive sweating to dry skin, 
all of that can impede the capture of a useable fingerprint. Dry skin 
is a common occurrence, age, genetics, disease can also cause dry skin. 
We need to address this.
  As you know, the TSA is supposed to issue credentials to at least 
850,000 workers by the end of September. Because of these limitations, 
we need to have a plan, TSA needs to have a plan, and this is why this 
amendment is important. A person's skin should not prevent them from 
getting credentialed for a job that they need. I urge support of this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Who seeks time?
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Chairman, I would reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I would indicate to the gentlelady that if you're 
prepared to close, I will yield back when you're done.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Before I yield back, let me just note 
that I have no motivation to weaken the security of the----
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman will suspend.
  The Chair would note that the gentlewoman from California has the 
right to close.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Then I am happy to yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1300

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Because the gentleman is not managing time in 
opposition, the proponent has the right to close.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I just want to be clear as we move forward, Madam 
Chairman. This has happened a couple of times. And I am not questioning 
the ruling of the Chair, but a couple of times, the chairman of the 
committee, Mr. Oberstar, has risen to claim time in opposition without 
being opposed to the amendment and has claimed the right to close, and 
I just want to make sure we're all squared away.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The assertions of a Member from the floor are 
not rulings.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. No. You're doing a great job and making great 
rulings. I just want to be clear as we move forward, because we have 
about six more amendments. It is my understanding that the chairman 
closed because he was defending the position of the committee, which 
I'm doing. If that's not the ruling of the Chair, I'm happy to live 
with the ruling of the excellent Chair, but I just want to make sure 
we're squared away.
  But in the meantime, I'm yielding back my time.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Chairman, I will just note there 
is not much of a closing. We are in agreement on this amendment. I 
appreciate the support. I look forward to working further on this.
  Certainly, we don't want to weaken our security, but we don't want 
hardworking people who just can't get their fingerprints taken to be 
put out of a job. So we are of one mind on this. I thank the committee, 
all the Members.
  Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Zoe Lofgren).
  The amendment was agreed to.


           Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Bishop of New York

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9 
printed in House Report 110-604.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part B amendment No. 9 offered by Mr. Bishop of New York:
       At the end of title VII add the following:

     SEC. __. REPORT ON STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 
                   AUGMENTATION OF COAST GUARD RESOURCES WITH 
                   RESPECT TO SECURITY ZONES AND UNITED STATES 
                   PORTS.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard 
     is operating shall submit to the Committees on Transportation 
     and Infrastructure and Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committees on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 
     of the Senate a report on the extent to which State and local 
     law enforcement entities are augmenting Coast Guard resources 
     by enforcing Coast Guard-imposed security zones around 
     vessels transiting to, through, or from United States ports 
     and conducting port security patrols. At a minimum, the 
     report shall specify-
       (1) the number of ports in which State and local law 
     enforcement entities are providing any services to enforce 
     Coast Guard-imposed security zones around vessels transiting 
     to, through, or from United States ports or to conduct 
     security patrols in United States ports;
       (2) the number of formal agreements entered into between 
     the Coast Guard and State and local law enforcement entities 
     to engage State and local law enforcement entities in the 
     enforcement of Coast Guard-imposed security zones around 
     vessels transiting to, through, or from United States ports 
     or the conduct of port security patrols in United States 
     ports, the duration of those agreements, and the aid that 
     State and local entities are engaged to provided through 
     these agreements;
       (3) the extent to which the Coast Guard has set national 
     standards for training, equipment, and resources to ensure 
     that State and local law enforcement entities engaged in 
     enforcing Coast Guard-imposed security zones around vessels 
     transiting to, through, or from United States ports or in 
     conducting port security patrols in United States ports (or 
     both) can deter to the maximum extent practicable a 
     transportation security incident (as that term is defined in 
     section 70101 of title 46, United States Code);
       (4) the extent to which the Coast Guard has assessed the 
     ability of State and local law

[[Page 6949]]

     enforcement entities to carry out the security assignments 
     which they have been engaged to perform, including their 
     ability to meet any national standards for training, 
     equipment, and resources that have been established by the 
     Coast Guard in order to ensure that these entities can deter 
     to the maximum extent practicable a transportation security 
     incident (as that term is defined in section 70101 of title 
     46, United States Code);
       (5) the extent to which State and local law enforcement 
     entities are able to meet national standards for training, 
     equipment, and resources established by the Coast Guard to 
     ensure that those entities can deter to the maximum extent 
     practicable a transportation security incident (as that term 
     is defined in section 70101 of title 46, United States Code);
       (6) the differences in law enforcement authority, and 
     particularly boarding authority, between the Coast Guard and 
     State and local law enforcement entities, and the impact that 
     these differences have on the ability of State and local law 
     enforcement entities to provide the same level of security 
     that the Coast Guard provides during the enforcement of Coast 
     Guard-imposed security zones and the conduct of security 
     patrols in United States ports; and
       (7) the extent of resource, training, and equipment 
     differences between State and local law enforcement entities 
     and the Coast Guard units engaged in enforcing Coast Guard-
     imposed security zones around vessels transiting to, through, 
     or from United States ports or conducting security patrols in 
     United States ports.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1126, the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Bishop) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Let me start by thanking Chairman Oberstar and Chairman Cummings and 
Ranking Member LaTourette for their leadership and tireless advocacy on 
behalf of the Coast Guard. I would also like to express my gratitude 
for the invaluable service provided by our exemplary Coast Guardsmen 
and women every day.
  My amendment would require the Coast Guard to study the extent to 
which State and local law enforcement augment Coast Guard resources by 
enforcing Coast Guard-imposed security zones around vessels transiting 
to and from U.S. ports and conducting port security patrols. The 
amendment requires the Coast Guard to study and clarify their 
relationship with local law enforcement, the standards set to ensure 
that local law enforcement of Coast Guard security zones can deter a 
security incident. The amendment also seeks to identify the differences 
in law enforcement authority, particularly boarding authority, between 
the Coast Guard and local law enforcement. This amendment is necessary 
given evidence that the Coast Guard is overextended around the country.
  A 2007 GAO report states that the assistance the Coast Guard already 
receives from State and local law enforcement is vital to meet security 
requirements with limited resources.
  Some may point to this as a vindication of local law enforcement's 
ability to share in the responsibilities of protecting hazardous cargo 
from potential threats. I would argue that the GAO has shed a light on 
a more fundamental issue: a lack of adequate Coast Guard resources and 
a potential new role for local law enforcement that has historically 
been reserved for the Coast Guard. This issue requires increased 
scrutiny.
  After 9/11 and the absorption of the Coast Guard by the Department of 
Homeland Security, considerable strain was placed on Coast Guard 
resources. This shortfall is apparent as dozens of LNG proposals across 
the country compete for Coast Guard resources to make waterways 
suitable for hazardous cargo. The Coast Guard on several occasions has 
expressed its concerns to Congress about the proliferation of LNG 
proposals that require extensive Coast Guard oversight. The limited 
public discussion about who should provide these resources has led to 
unanswered questions. Is this something that should be passed on to the 
consumer through the price of goods? Is this a local responsibility? Is 
this a Federal responsibility? This amendment begins the dialogue 
necessary to clarify what ratio of responsibility is appropriate to 
protect hazardous cargo.
  It is vital to maritime security to determine the role local law 
enforcement should play in protecting hazardous cargo so that, as 
policymakers, we can determine exactly what the Coast Guard needs to 
protect and preserve America's waterways.
  Madam Chairman, I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim time 
in opposition to the amendment, even though I am not opposed.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Minnesota 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I want to start by thanking the Chair and the 
Parliamentarian for clarification of a rule of the House that somehow 
escaped my understanding, and it was interesting to have that 
explanation. I apologize to the gentleman from Ohio if we had some 
missteps even to the advantage of the committee.
  Of course, I support the amendment, as I said at the outset. It's a 
study and report amendment to provide a critical assessment of how much 
the Coast Guard has done to establish standards for State and local law 
enforcement units that perform maritime patrols and the extent to which 
law enforcement can meet those standards. I think it's useful to have 
that information.
  Madam Chairman, I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the chairman very much for yielding.
  Madam Chairman, we have no objection to the amendment and are pleased 
to accept it. I want to congratulate Mr. Bishop, a valued member of the 
committee and the subcommittee.
  This will require the Coast Guard to report on the use and 
qualification of State and local officials used in a security 
capacities at LNG facilities.
  I would just remark parenthetically that I assume that the chairman 
was able to close because he is much more revered in the institution 
than I am, and I accept that and I also agree with that assessment.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman. I think we got away with one for 
a while.
  Madam Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
distinguished Chair of the subcommittee.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  Madam Chairman, I fully support this amendment by Mr. Bishop, the 
Vice Chair of our subcommittee.
  This amendment would require the Coast Guard to detail the extent to 
which State and local law enforcement entities are augmenting Coast 
Guard resources by conducting port security patrols and by aiding in 
the enforcement of Coast Guard-imposed security zones around vessels 
entering our ports.
  While I have the utmost respect for State and local law enforcement, 
the subcommittee is concerned that such entities may be undertaking 
maritime patrols to augment the Coast Guard's resources without having 
previously had experience performing law enforcement functions on the 
water and without fully understanding what it takes to respond to the 
unique threats that confront our Nation in the maritime environment.
  The study required by Mr. Bishop's amendment would provide the 
critical assessment that is needed both of whether the Coast Guard has 
established adequate training, resource, and equipment standards for 
State and local law enforcement units performing maritime patrols and 
the extent to which law enforcement can meet these standards.
  I fully support the amendment.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Madam Chairman, let me simply close by 
thanking Chairman Oberstar and Chairman Cummings and Mr. LaTourette for 
their support of this amendment.
  Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by

[[Page 6950]]

the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop).
  The amendment was agreed to.


            Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10 
printed in House Report 110-604.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk 
that has been made in order by the rule.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part B amendment No. 10 offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia:
       Strikes titles X and XI.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1126, the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Broun) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I am offering this amendment because I am concerned about the intent 
and the function of title X and title XI. I would like to seek some 
clarification from the chairman of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure, my friend from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), if he would 
join me in a discussion.
  Mr. Oberstar, with respect to title X, I'm concerned that if we 
transfer 80 percent of the funding for the Coast Guard Administrative 
Law Judge functions to the National Transportation Safety Board, the 
Coast Guard will not be able to manage the appeals process of any of 
the truck, rail, and port workers who might be denied the 
Transportation Worker Identification Credential, or TWIC, card. My 
concern is that we will create a bottleneck in the appeals process, 
effectively slowing TWIC appeals and preventing American workers from 
gainful employment while appeals are adjudicated.
  Can you assure us that when this bill emerges from conference that 
you will make sure that the Coast Guard retains sufficient resources to 
address the expected TWIC appeal workload resulting from the million 
workers that are applying?
  I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Certainly it's our intention to protect the resources of the Coast 
Guard. We will work to assure that when a bill emerges from conference 
that there will be sufficient change, that we will not elevate one 
mission above any other critical Coast Guard mission.
  And as further clarification, it was simply a request from NTSB that 
at least for 1 year we transfer adequate funds to start off. So the 
legislation limits that transfer of dollars to 1 year, and we will work 
to assure the strengthening of that language to make sure that that's 
only for 1 year. And then in the meantime, as I said in an earlier 
discussion on this matter, we will go to the Appropriations Committee, 
I hope in a bipartisan effort, to ask them to provide sufficient 
additional funding for the Coast Guard to continue to carry out its 
missions.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank you for that assurance. It's certainly 
a huge issue, as far as I'm concerned, as we deal with Homeland 
Security and TWIC cards. So I greatly appreciate the chairman's 
assurance of that, and I'm looking forward to that bipartisan effort. 
We, unfortunately, don't have enough bipartisanship and bipartisan 
effort here; so I thank the chairman for that.
  Reclaiming my time, Madam Chairman, with respect to title XI, I'm 
concerned that the current language might give the appearance of 
elevating the Coast Guard's marine safety mission above its other 
critical missions, such as search and rescue, national defense, and 
port security.
  Can you confirm for me, Mr. Chairman, that it is not your intent to 
elevate this one mission above other missions that are critical for the 
Coast Guard?
  I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Again I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  It is certainly not our intent to elevate marine safety. Marine 
safety is one of several functions of the Coast Guard. But as I said in 
earlier debates, when Mr. Young, then chairman of the committee, and I 
were at the White House at the earliest stages of creating the 
Department of Homeland Security, we raised this issue at the White 
House and said, You're not making clear enough distinction between the 
homeland security role of the Coast Guard and the other functions, 
search and rescue, marine safety, aid in navigation, and so on. So 
we're now providing that clear delineation, assuring there are adequate 
resources, providing additional personnel to the Coast Guard, the first 
really substantial increase in Coast Guard personnel since I came to 
Congress in 1975. And I'm really insistent on this, that we do not 
elevate above that but that we clearly delineate the marine safety 
function of the Coast Guard.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Certainly that's important.
  And reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for his assurances, and 
I appreciate his willingness to engage in this dialogue to clarify the 
intent of these two titles and his commitment to work with me in 
conference to ensure that the Coast Guard has the authorities and 
resources it needs to secure our homeland.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I just wanted to say that we are very concerned, as you are, and 
please note that no TWIC applicants have requested an ALJ hearing as of 
April 13.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Georgia's time has expired.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Chairman, I would like to claim the time in 
opposition to the amendment even though I am not opposed and would 
continue to yield to the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Ohio is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Madam Chairman, I want to join with Chairman Oberstar in strongly 
opposing this amendment. But we do plan to work with the gentleman on 
this.
  Title X grants mariners a ``change of venue'' when they appeal the 
suspension and revocation of their professional credentials from an 
Administrative Law Judge system controlled by the very same Coast Guard 
that is seeking to take their credentials to a system located in a 
neutral agency, the National Transportation Safety Board.

                              {time}  1315

  I note that title X would move only Coast Guard suspension and 
revocation cases to NTSB. All other cases currently heard by the Coast 
Guard ALJ, including cases from TSA, would be unaffected by title X. I 
know that the concerns have been raised by the gentleman and that the 
changes proposed in title X would leave the Coast Guard ALJ program 
without the resources to handle the TSA, but we certainly question 
that. However, I note that the cases heard by the Coast Guard's ALJ for 
TSA and for other agencies, like NOAA, are heard on a cost 
reimbursement basis. Title X would continue to allow agencies to 
reimburse the Coast Guard ALJ for the costs associated with 
adjudication of those cases
  Further, I'd note that since TSA was established, that agency has 
filed 504 civil penalty cases with the Coast Guard ALJ, 60 cases remain 
pending, a total of 230 cases did not proceed to an adjudication. 
Orders granting motions for a decision were issued in 156 cases, and 
dismissal orders were granted in four cases.
  Finally, let me say this. No TWIC applicants have requested an ALJ 
hearing as of April 13, though there have been 230 enrollments, and 
they started enrolling back in October of 2007. Decisions and orders 
were issued in only 54

[[Page 6951]]

cases, which would be an average of about nine cases per year.
  So, again, we have the same concerns, and I hope you understand why 
this even came about, because we have some very painful testimony from 
mariners about how they felt that the system was already set up against 
them before they got into the hearing room. And we had testimony from 
Administrative Law Judges who were concerned that an atmosphere of 
unfairness was being pushed upon them by those who may have been above 
them.
  So I think that the ranking member and I and other members of our 
committee agreed that we needed to do something, and we thought this 
was the best vehicle. We have the same concerns that you have.
  With that, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. My concern was that the GAO is going to 
investigate any improprieties within the current Administrative Law 
Judge System, and that GAO report hasn't been completed. This just 
seems premature. That is what drew my concern, and I appreciate the 
chairman's assurances.
  With that, I have got one more statement.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Reclaiming my time for a minute, it is my 
understanding that the gentleman from Georgia is going to ask unanimous 
consent to withdraw his amendment, and I want to express my 
appreciation because the amendment, from my perspective, is 
problematic. We do concur in the concerns that have been expressed in 
the colloquy between the chairman and Mr. Broun, and I want to 
congratulate Dr. Broun as another new Member of the House who has 
really stepped up to the plate and brought important issues before this 
body.
  I would tell the gentleman that we did have some pretty illuminating 
hearings on the Administrative Law Judge, and the current Acting 
Chairman and I both served as prosecuting attorneys, she was also a 
judge, and I would tell you that my experience, and I think she would 
echo this, is that people can accept when they come into a forum if 
they lose, as long as they believe that they have lost fairly. The 
testimony that we received was that there are a number of people that 
don't have that feeling going in. It was our hope by making this small 
adjustment that even when they are ruled against, they will say, I got 
my day in court.
  That was the objective. I do appreciate the gentleman's concern. I 
promise him that we will continue to work on it as it goes to 
conference.
  I would be happy to yield once again to the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chairman, I submit for the Record two 
letters, a statement from the Commandant of the Coast Guard, as well as 
the letter from TSA stating their concern on these titles.

         U.S. Department of Homeland Security, United States Coast 
           Guard,
                                   Washington, DC, April 23, 2008.
     Hon. James L. Oberstar,
     Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
         House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Oberstar: On April 18, the Committee filed 
     with the Rules Committee an amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute to H.R. 2830, that would be retitled the ``Coast 
     Guard Authorization Act of 2008.'' During numerous meetings 
     and staff-level discussions over several months, we have 
     described how a number of provisions that appear in this 
     amendment would compromise organizational efficiency and 
     operational effectiveness, diminish my command and control, 
     and ultimately reduce the Coast Guard's effectiveness in 
     carrying out its safety, security, and stewardship missions. 
     We have expressed these and other concerns in Department of 
     Homeland Security views letters concerning earlier bill 
     language. The amendment also contains provisions neither 
     previously shared nor discussed with the Coast Guard.
       One provision requiring that the Coast Guard provide 
     security around liquefied natural gas terminals and tankers 
     is contrary to the existing assistance framework, at odds 
     with accepted risk management practices, and would divert 
     finite Coast Guard assets from other high-priority missions. 
     I recommend a broader discussion of security measures for all 
     extremely hazardous cargoes. In the Statement of 
     Administration Policy on H.R. 2830, the Administration has 
     stated that, if the bill is presented to the President with 
     this provision, his senior advisors would recommend that he 
     veto the bill.
       Among the others is one that, while similar to the 
     Administration's proposal, fails to authorize the President 
     to appoint officers to positions of importance and 
     responsibility to accommodate organizational change in the 
     future (Admirals and Vice Admirals). Others, primarily 
     involving our important marine safety mission, would 
     statutorily fix the designation and duties of other senior 
     Coast Guard officials and officials at all levels of command, 
     and prescribe inflexible personnel qualification 
     requirements. Still other provisions would diminish the Coast 
     Guard's capacity to adjudicate merchant mariner licensing 
     matters efficiently and effectively and support other vital 
     security adjudications of the Department of Homeland Security 
     (Appeals to National Transportation Safety Board). Still more 
     provisions would prescribe contracting and acquisition 
     practices for the Deepwater program, thereby increasing the 
     cost of, and adding delay to, the Deepwater acquisition 
     process, as well as circumventing the review and approval 
     authority of Coast Guard technical authorities (Coast Guard 
     Integrated Deepwater Program).
       Among the new provisions is one that dramatically alters 
     admission procedures for the U.S. Coast Guard Academy. While 
     I have discussed Academy admissions several times with 
     Chairman Cummings and we agree that our process should yield 
     successful cadets and reflect our diverse society, the 
     proposed Congressional nomination process deserves full 
     discussion and deliberate consideration. Other new provisions 
     that affect how we execute our missions deserve similar 
     scrutiny. Conversely, the bill omits the Administration 
     proposal for much needed enhanced authority to prosecute 
     those who would smuggle undocumented aliens into the United 
     States by sea (Maritime Alien Smuggling Law Enforcement Act) 
     and the Administration's proposal to protect seafarers who 
     participate in investigations and adjudication of 
     environmental crimes or who have been abandoned in the United 
     States (Protection of and fair treatment of seafarers).
       Over the last year in the course of hearings, personal 
     meetings with you, and regional forums with industry, as well 
     as in my public statements, I have assured you and the public 
     that we share a common objective: a robust marine safety 
     program suited to meet the evolving demands of industry and 
     the marine public. I am already taking aggressive steps to 
     right the balance between our marine safety mission and our 
     other vital responsibilities, and improve the effectiveness, 
     consistency, and responsiveness of our marine safety program, 
     consistent with the framework I presented to you last 
     September. Legislation such as the provisions I describe 
     above was unnecessary to start this process. As I have stated 
     on several occasions, I am the Commandant and am accountable 
     to you to produce the changes needed to improve program 
     performance.
       Including these provisions and others in an Authorization 
     Act that would otherwise be welcome compels me to strongly 
     oppose the bill.
           Sincerely,
                                                       T.W. Allen,
     Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commandant.
                                  ____

         U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Transportation 
           Security Administration,
                                    Arlington, VA, April 22, 2008.
     Hon. Peter T. King,
     Ranking Member, Committee on Homeland Security, House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman King: I am writing to express the 
     Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) strong 
     opposition to Title X--Appeals to National Transportation 
     Safety Board (NTSB) of the manager's amendment to H.R. 2830, 
     the ``Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2007.'' Title X would 
     transfer Coast Guard Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) authority 
     for review of merchant mariner documentation and 80 percent 
     of the Coast Guard ALJ budget to the NTSB. This could have an 
     adverse impact upon the adjudication of TSA's civil 
     enforcement cases and anticipated cases dealing with the 
     Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) 
     program.
       TSA questions whether sufficient legal, administrative, and 
     budget resources will continue to be provided to the Coast 
     Guard to support its remaining ALJ functions, including 
     adjudication of TSA security cases.
       For more than 5 years, TSA has been extremely well served 
     by the Coast Guard ALJs as fair, impartial, and responsive 
     adjudicators in security cases involving individuals in the 
     transportation sector. Under an interagency agreement, Coast 
     Guard ALJs play a major role in TSA's enforcement and 
     security credentialing programs. They adjudicate aviation 
     security civil penalty cases, Hazardous Materials Endorsement 
     (HME) and TWIC denials of requests for waivers and appeals 
     from individuals who have received a

[[Page 6952]]

     Final Determination of Threat Assessment; appeals by air 
     cargo workers who have received a Final Determination of 
     Threat Assessment; and appeals by individuals holding or 
     applying for Federal Aviation Administration certificates, 
     ratings, or authorizations who have received a Final 
     Determination of Threat Assessment.
       In the absence of sufficient ALJ legal and administrative 
     resources at the Coast Guard, TSA does not regard NTSB ALJs 
     as a good alternative. Coast Guard ALJs have substantial 
     expertise in fair adjudication of security programs. NTSB 
     ALJs do not have expertise in transportation security 
     matters. As TSA continually expands the implementation of the 
     TWIC program and the Coast Guard enforces it at our Nation's 
     seaports, TSA and TWIC applicants will benefit from the 
     substantial experience Coast Guard ALJs have in the maritime 
     security environment.
       In addition, Coast Guard ALJs have been sensitive to the 
     challenges faced by individuals representing themselves in a 
     formal administrative process and have worked with TSA to 
     develop simplified procedures.
       TSA and Coast Guard have worked together for years to 
     establish caseload management procedures, agreements, and 
     funding processes to efficiently handle TSA cases. For 
     example, the Coast Guard serves as TSA's Docketing Center for 
     its formal hearing process. Shifting the workload to ALJs of 
     another agency would create a huge setback for TSA 
     enforcement and administration. ALJ coverage, budgeting, 
     processing time, and even geographic availability would have 
     to be reassessed and reestablished, a process that may take 
     several years.
       In addition, TSA's HME and TWIC are fee-based programs. TSA 
     developed its fee models based on Coast Guard cost estimates 
     and processing models. If conditions necessitate TSA's 
     seeking ALJ services outside Coast Guard, this could affect 
     program costs, and consequently, fees for applicants.
       I would appreciate your consideration of TSA's concerns 
     about the potential adverse impact of Title X on the 
     efficient adjudication of important TSA security cases.
       Identical letters have been sent to the Chairman of the 
     House Homeland Security Committee as well as the Chairman and 
     Ranking Member of the House Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure. Please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Claire 
     Heffernan, Acting Assistant Administrator for Legislative 
     Affairs, at (571) 227-2717 if you have any questions about 
     this matter.
           Sincerely yours,
                                                       Kip Hawley,
                                              Assistant Secretary.

  I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.


                Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Cuellar

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11 
printed in House Report 110-604.
  Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part B amendment No. 11 offered by Mr. Cuellar:
       Add at the end the following:

             TITLE __--ADDITIONAL MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

     SEC. __. MISSION REQUIREMENT ANALYSIS FOR NAVIGABLE PORTIONS 
                   OF THE RIO GRANDE RIVER, TEXAS, INTERNATIONAL 
                   WATER BOUNDARY.

       Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of the department in which the Coast 
     Guard is operating shall prepare a mission requirement 
     analysis for the navigable portions of the Rio Grande River, 
     Texas, international water boundary. The analysis shall take 
     into account the Coast Guard's involvement on the Rio Grande 
     River by assessing Coast Guard missions, assets, and 
     personnel assigned along the Rio Grande River. The analysis 
     shall also identify what would be needed for the Coast Guard 
     to increase search and rescue operations, migrant 
     interdiction operations, and drug interdiction operations.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1126, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Cuellar) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  First, I want to thank Chairman Oberstar and also Chairman Cummings 
and the ranking member from Ohio for the work that they have done on 
this particular bill, and also, Chairman Thompson, from the Committe on 
Homeland Security, for the work that they did on this bill together.
  I also understand, Madam Chair, that this amendment is acceptable 
both to the majority and the minority, and it's also bipartisan. I 
believe Congressman McCaul will be speaking on this amendment in a few 
minutes.
  Madam Chair, today the U.S. House of Representatives has an 
opportunity to improve the important and critical mission of the United 
States Coast Guard. One of the Coast Guard's most important functions 
is providing safety and security in international waters. I was born in 
Laredo, Texas. Laredo is located on the international border between 
the United States and Mexico. Our border is divided by the 
international waters called the Rio Grande River.
  There have been many efforts to improve security along the U.S.-
Mexico border. Some of those partnerships between the local and Federal 
Government law enforcement agencies have proven to be beneficial. The 
border security responsibilities shared by law enforcement departments 
are complicated for the first responders from the local communities 
that are located on the international waters of the Rio Grande. The 
safety of the international boundary is a national security concern, as 
the level of violence in Mexico increases and spills across the border. 
Drugs, cash, and people continue to cross the border into the United 
States, despite our efforts.
  I am consistently asked and contacted by local officials in my 
district who are asking for more support in their border security 
effort, specifically for help in patrolling the international waters of 
the Rio Grande. Unfortunately, the local law enforcement agencies and 
the border patrol have limited resources for patrolling the 
international water boundary. As the Rio Grande represents over 1,200 
miles of international border, I believe that it is time to address the 
critical need to provide security on the Rio Grande River and not just 
along the shores of the Rio Grande River.
  My amendment would charge the U.S. Coast Guard to analyze what the 
current mission is along the international waters, including personnel 
and assets assessment. My amendment also asks the U.S. Coast Guard to 
identify what resources will be needed to increase the Coast Guard 
presence along the international boundary.
  Madam Chair, there has been many discussions as to how to best secure 
the United States border along with Mexico. My amendment would simply 
allow us to consider the possibility of increasing the Coast Guard's 
presence in the area of unquestionable, the international waters of the 
Rio Grande River.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Madam Chairman, I ask for unanimous consent to 
claim time, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McCAUL of Texas. I rise in support of this amendment. I want to 
commend my colleague, Congressman Cuellar, for bringing this amendment 
to the floor, and I am honored to support it. He has a great deal of 
expertise in this area. We have traveled to the border towns together, 
both on the United States side and in Mexico, and I met with law 
enforcement on both sides of the aisle and with government officials 
and we served on the United States-Mexico Interparliamentary Group. He 
understands the importance of security at the border, and particularly 
in the post 9/11 world.
  Currently, there is little Coast Guard presence on international 
waterways shared with Mexico. This amendment would require the United 
States Coast Guard to provide an analysis of their mission strength for 
the navigable portions of the Rio Grande River in Texas. The amendment 
also asks the U.S. Coast Guard to identify what resources would be 
needed to increase the Coast Guard's presence along the international 
boundary of the Rio Grande River.
  One of the Coast Guard's most important functions is providing safety 
and security in international waters, and

[[Page 6953]]

the safety of the international border is a national security concern 
as the level of violence in Mexico increases and continues to spill 
across our border. Contraband and undocumented people continue to pass 
and cross the border into the United States, despite our best efforts. 
This amendment may also pave the way for future studies assessing the 
need for Coast Guard presence in other areas of the United States where 
waterways are shared on the border of Mexico and with Canada.
  So having said that, I want to thank my colleague, Mr. Cuellar, for 
bringing this amendment, and I rise in support.
  I yield to my colleague from Ohio.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  We are not opposed to this amendment. We are willing to accept the 
amendment, which requires the Coast Guard to develop mission needs down 
on the Rio Grande. I want to congratulate Mr. Cuellar and Mr. McCaul, 
who looks remarkably like Mr. Fortenberry, for bringing this amendment 
before the House. We accept it.
  Mr. CUELLAR. I just want to thank again the Chairman, Mr. Oberstar; 
Mr. Thompson, Mr. Cummings, the ranking member from Ohio, and of course 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul).
  I yield the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                  Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Kirk

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12 
printed in House Report 110-604.
  Mr. KIRK. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part B amendment No. 12 offered by Mr. Kirk:
       Page 184, line 22, after ``subparagraph (A)'' insert ``or 
     (B).''

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1126, the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Kirk) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. KIRK. I rise in strong support of the underlying legislation, 
which provides critical protection for our Nation's waterways. For the 
first time, this legislation requires ballast water treatment of ships 
entering the Great Lakes, which claim to have no ballast water on 
board. These ships were previously not subject to any exchange or 
treatment requirements, and that created a massive loophole through 
which invasive species were introduced in our precious Great Lakes. I 
am very happy that this provision, similar to one I authored with Mr. 
Emanuel in H.R. 801, will close this dangerous and expensive loophole 
that, unfortunately, has so radically changed the Great Lakes 
environment.
  However, there is another loophole which currently exists in the bill 
which could help spread endemic diseases affecting a myriad of Great 
Lakes fish. Viral hemorrhagic septicemia, or VHS, is a highly 
contagious viral disease that caused a significant number of fish 
deaths in North America since its introduction just in 2005. This virus 
is only present in four of the five Great Lakes so far, and threatens 
to cost billions of dollars to the region in lost fishing and tourism 
revenue.
  While the bill currently requires foreign ships to treat their 
ballast tanks in order to prevent new diseases from entering the Great 
Lakes, it exempts vessels from treating their ballast tanks when they 
operate exclusively inside the Great Lakes. This is a loophole which 
should be closed in the event of an emergency pathogen outbreak. While 
the Great Lakes ships do not introduce new pathogens into the lakes, 
they can fully transmit a disease from one lake to another. Currently, 
Lake Superior is not yet infected with VHS.
  My amendment would close the loophole by providing the Secretary of 
Agriculture with the authority to request that Great Lakes vessels 
install ballast water treatment systems approved by the Coast Guard, 
should the Secretary deem it necessary in order to prevent the spread 
of an infectious disease from one Great Lake to another. The amendment 
is supported by the Healing Our Waters, Great Lakes Coalition.
  I want to thank the chairman and ranking minority member, my 
colleague from Ohio, for working with me on this very important 
amendment. It's crucial that we provide the Department of Agriculture 
with the authority to prevent the spread of VHS to a lake like Lake 
Superior and to give them the authority to slow down or stop the spread 
of other infectious pathogens. We must provide officials with all the 
necessary tools that they need to protect this critical ecosystem, the 
crown jewel of the Midwest environment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1330

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the 
time in opposition, though I do not intend to oppose the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Minnesota 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I want to thank the distinguished 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk) for offering this amendment. It does 
indeed correct a technical mistake and oversight in drafting the bill. 
There should have been a cross-reference as we inserted one provision 
in the bill so that the interlake transfer of ballast water would have 
been covered. Unfortunately, it was an oversight that the legislative 
counsel did not catch in time, and our committee staff found it after 
the manager's amendment had been already presented. So through the 
vigilance of the gentleman from Illinois and his concern for interlake 
transfer, we certainly accept this provision.
  I am very happy to report that not only did we deal with invasive 
species in the WRDA bill, but also in this Coast Guard bill. It is the 
first time we have enforcement language on invasive species and 
interlake transfer. As the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) said 
earlier today, this is a bad day for invasive species. This is another 
bad moment for invasive species.
  I also want to mention that either next week or the following week I 
have a meeting, the subject of which I have already discussed with Mr. 
LaTourette, with one of our major interlake shipping companies and 
other entities to put in place this shipping season a control pilot 
program for ballast water for lakers. The lakers present a more 
complicated challenge on ballast water exchange because they have four 
or five times as many ballast chambers as do the salties coming into 
the Great Lakes, and dealing with the volume of water and the number of 
ballast chambers and the treatment technology, it becomes much more 
complicated for interlake shipping.
  We are going to address that this summer. We are going to put in 
place a pilot program and explore all of the treatment methodologies 
and equipment and chemicals and how to treat those chemicals before 
they are again discharged back into the waters of the Great Lakes. And 
the viral hemorrhagic septicemia issue is chief among those. I think 
science still doesn't know how to address it. But it and other such 
assaults upon this one-fifth of all the fresh water upon the face of 
the Earth is vital. We make an assault upon it in this legislation, and 
we are determined to follow it through.
  I thank the gentleman for his amendment.
  I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  Madam Chairman, we wholeheartedly support this amendment and 
congratulate the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk) for his catch and 
for his unwavering diligence and vigilance on Great Lakes water quality 
issues. Those of us that have the pleasure to represent districts that 
are near or abut the Great Lakes know the damage that has been done by 
invasive species, both plants, animals and pathogens. The gentleman's 
amendment improves upon our bill.

[[Page 6954]]

  As I said before during general debate, I am so proud of this 
committee's work on this ballast water exchange program. It really is a 
shining example of how Members of both parties can come together and do 
the right thing and the noble thing, and that, of course, all begins at 
the top with Chairman Oberstar's leadership.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I yield to the chairman of the 
subcommittee.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I want to thank the gentleman for the amendment. 
Without a doubt, it makes the bill better. I too am very proud of what 
we have been able to accomplish with regard to ballast water. We have a 
duty to protect our environment, and this goes a long ways towards it.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Again, it is not just the Great Lakes, it's the 
saltwater ports as well. Our colleagues on the west coast for many 
years, I remember in the seventies and eighties, were saying, what are 
you worried about invasive species for? Then curious creatures began to 
appear in the waters of the ports on the west coast from ballast water 
discharged in those ports from vessels leaving the Pacific Rim, from 
Japan to Korea to the South China Sea. So this is a unified effort 
here.
  Mr. KIRK. Madam Chairman, just to conclude, the West has the Grand 
Canyon as its crown jewel of the environment. Florida has the 
Everglades. But for us in the Midwest, it is the Great Lakes.
  We have seen a failure to properly manage shipping in the past 
introduce a number of alien species. Our environment has suffered from 
the introduction of the lamprey eel, the rock goby, the fishhook flea, 
and now viral hemorrhagic septicemia. This legislation is essential to 
slow down the assault on the Great Lakes with these new species 
introduced into our critical ecosystem.
  I want to thank my colleagues from Minnesota and from Ohio for 
joining together with this critical legislation, and urge adoption of 
the amendment.
  Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13 
printed in House Report 110-604.


          Amendment No. 14 Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14 
printed in House Report 110-604.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part B amendment No. 14 offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of 
     Texas:
       At the end of title VII add the following new section:

     SEC. __. ASSESSMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECURITY CARD 
                   ENROLLMENT SITES.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall prepare an assessment of the enrollment sites for 
     transportation security cards issued under section 70105 of 
     title 46, United States Code, including--
       (1) the feasibility of keeping those enrollment sites open 
     24 hours per day, and 7 days per week, in order to better 
     handle the large number of applications for such cards;
       (2) the feasibility of keeping those enrollment sites open 
     after September 25, 2008;
       (3) the quality of customer service, including the periods 
     of time individuals are kept on hold on the telephone, 
     whether appointments are kept, and processing times for 
     applications.
       (b) Timelines and Benchmarks.--The Secretary shall develop 
     timelines and benchmarks for implementing the findings of the 
     assessment as the Secretary deems necessary.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1126, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, as I indicated in the 
general debate, this is an exercise in unity as relates to the safety 
and security of the Nation and, of course, the reauthorization and the 
emphasis of the specialness of the Coast Guard. I am delighted to come 
from the fourth largest city in the Nation and to have a very large 
port that benefits from the outstanding service of the U.S. Coast 
Guard.
  I want to thank Chairman Oberstar for not only his eloquence, but his 
long-standing history and knowledge of what we needed to do in this 
Congress, the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Cummings, and as well 
the distinguished, as they all are distinguished, ranking member of the 
full committee, the distinguished gentleman from Ohio, working on this 
along with my full committee chair, Mr. Thompson. I serve as the 
Subcommittee Chair on Transportation, Security, and Infrastructure 
Protection. We have had a number of opportunities to work together. So 
we are filled with tasks, and those tasks must be addressed.
  I rise in support of the legislation. My amendment is a simple but 
important addition to this vital legislation, which I believe can be 
supported by every Member of the House.
  My amendment calls for the Secretary of Homeland Security to prepare 
an assessment of the enrollment site for the Transportation Worker 
Identification Credential, TWIC, which we have heard so much about. 
These cards are issued under section 70105 of Title 46 USC within 30 
days of the enactment of this act.
  The assessment should at a minimum examine the feasibility of keeping 
those enrollment sites open 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, in order 
to better handle the large number of applicants for such cards, the 
feasibility of keeping those enrollment sites open after September 25, 
2008, and the quality of customer service, including the periods of 
time individuals are kept on hold on the telephone, appointments are 
kept, and processing times for applications. We are here to help.
  In our committee, we have heard over and over again, everyone is 
trying to meet the deadline. DHS, the Department of Homeland Security, 
has a deadline. We believe as Members of Congress they should have a 
deadline to secure America, but we must make sure that the deadline is 
realistic in light of the resources and the tools that they have to 
comply.
  Madam Chairman, I continue to receive firsthand accounts from my 
constituents in and around the Nation that deal with the question of 
transportation workers and operators who are frustrated because of 
sometimes the unsatisfactory performance of TWIC enrollment sites.
  I have spoken with a multitude of people from throughout the country 
who have shared with me the great difficulty they experience due to 
administrative obstacles obtaining their TWIC cards. These obstacles 
include the lack of enrollment sites or the difficulty in getting to 
the enrollment sites, making appointments at enrollment sites which are 
not kept, long processing lines for applications, and staying on hold 
for hours on the telephone. While we have made securing our Nation a 
priority, we must ensure we do so in the most productive way.
  Let me just briefly say what we have seen from the State of Texas and 
around the Nation. For example, a marine worker at the Houston Port 
enrolled on December 13, 2007, at the Houston center. To this date, he 
does not have a card. He remained on hold for 4 hours and 10 minutes 
and was finally told by the operator that he would have to return to 
Houston to be fingerprinted again after April. Incidentally, a 
representative of the Higman Marine Services asked the same question 
about the employee. That person was told that they should not return 
until June.
  These inconsistencies in service and information are not helping us 
get our TWIC cards to those individuals, hard-working Americans who 
need to have a job and a TWIC card to work.
  Furthermore, another transportation worker went to the Beaumont 
center about 3 weeks ago to pick up his TWIC after being notified it 
was ready. He traveled from a place in Texas. He was told that the card 
was accidentally shipped to Houston and he could drive 85 miles to pick 
it up. He presently

[[Page 6955]]

does not have a card, and therefore he is not able to move forward. The 
list of incidents go on.
  My amendment calls for the Secretary to assess within a month of the 
enactment these TWIC enrollment sites to determine the feasibility of 
having them open at times when transportation workers can come and 
improve the quality of processing procedures. Furthermore, my amendment 
calls on the Secretary to develop timelines and benchmarks on their 
assessment. Finally, it calls for them to implement any changes 
necessary, including keeping it open 24 hours a day, keeping it open 7 
days a week, but really at the assessment of the Department of Homeland 
Security.
  Workers are trying to do what they are supposed to do. We have to do 
what we have to do. I believe this amendment will help do it better, 
and I believe it is part of the security fabric, and I hope that we 
will pass this amendment.
  Thank you, Madam Chairman, for affording me this opportunity to 
address the Members of the House of Representatives and explain my 
amendment to H.R. 2830, the ``Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2007.'' 
My amendment is a simple but important addition to this important 
legislation, which I believe can be supported by every Member of this 
House.
  My amendment calls for the Secretary of Homeland Security to prepare 
an assessment of the enrollment sites for Transportation Worker 
Identification Credential, TWIC, cards issued under section 70105 of 
title 46, United States Code, within 30 days of the enactment of this 
Act. This assessment should, at a minimum, examine: the feasibility of 
keeping those enrollment sites open 24 hours per day, and 7 days per 
week, in order to better handle the large number of applicants for such 
cards; the feasibility of keeping those enrollment sites open after 
September 25, 2008; and the quality of customer service, including the 
periods of time individuals are kept on hold on the telephone, whether 
appointments are kept, and processing times for applications.
  Madam Chairman, I continue to receive firsthand accounts from my 
constituents in Houston and from other transportation workers and 
operators around the country regarding their frustrations and the 
unsatisfactory performance of TWIC enrollment sites. I have spoken with 
a multitude of people from throughout the country who have shared with 
me the great difficulties they experienced due to administrative 
obstacles in obtaining their TWIC cards. These obstacles include the 
difficulty of going to enrollment sites, making appointments at 
enrollment sites which are not kept, long processing times for 
applications, and staying on hold for hours on the telephone. While we 
have made securing our Nation a priority, we must ensure that we do so 
in the most effective and efficient way possible.
  I would like to reiterate only few of the obstacles that workers have 
faced in my State of Texas as well in my district of Houston. For 
example, a marine worker enrolled at the Houston Port enrolled on 
December 13, 2007. To this date, he still does not yet have a TWIC 
card. He remained on hold for 4 hours and 10 minutes and was finally 
told by the operator that he would have to return to Houston to be 
fingerprinted again after APR. Incidentally, a representative of Higman 
Marine Services, Inc., asked the same question about their employee, 
and she was told that he should not return until June. This blatant 
inconsistency in service and information is simply unacceptable. 
Furthermore, another transportation worker went to the Beaumont center 
about 3 weeks ago to pick up his TWIC after being notified it was 
ready. He traveled from Hemphill, TX (117 miles) and was told that the 
card was accidentally shipped to Houston and he could drive there (85 
miles) to pick it up. He presently does not have his card. The list of 
incidences in which workers have to continually overcome structural 
impediments is too long for me to name. It is from my concern for these 
workers that I have introduced my amendment.
  That is why my amendment calls for the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to assess, within a month of this Act's enactment, these TWIC 
enrollment sites to determine the feasibility of having them open at 
times where transportation workers can come and to improve the quality 
of their processing procedures. Furthermore, my amendment calls on the 
Secretary of Homeland Security to develop timelines and benchmarks for 
implementing the findings of the assessment as the Secretary deems 
necessary. By identifying the areas in which enrollment sites for 
homeland security cards are ineffective and inefficient and creating a 
timeline through which to implement necessary changes and benchmarks to 
ensure their progress and accountability, we will make this nation a 
safer place--accessible to labor and operators alike.
  In short, Madam Chairman, my amendment can be summed up as follows: 
for those who have confidence in how these TWIC enrollment sites are 
administering this program, my amendment offers vindication. For those 
who are skeptical and have seen firsthand the problems apparent at 
these enrollment sites, my amendment will provide the information 
necessary to rectify the causes for their frustrations and a way 
forward to ensure that the results of this assessment are actually 
implemented.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to control 
the time in opposition, even though I am not opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Ohio is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Chairman, I want to congratulate the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for her thoughtful amendment. 
We are willing to accept her amendment, which will require the 
Department of Homeland Security to assess measures that may encourage 
maritime workers to accelerate application rates for the TWIC card. We 
all know a deadline is looming.
  The only observation I would make so that no one is under a 
misapprehension, nobody has been prevented from working yet, because 
the TWIC requirements don't go into effect until September. But we 
support the gentlewoman's amendment. We think it is a thoughtful 
amendment.
  I would be happy to yield to the chairman of the full committee for 
his thoughts.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman for yielding and the gentlewoman 
for offering the amendment and her deep concern, which we share on the 
committee, for those maritime workers.
  Madam Chairman, 230,000 applied and 64,000 have actually received 
their cards. There is a bottleneck at TSA principally in printing out 
those cards, and the amendment just provides a margin of safety and a 
time to accomplish the objective.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I am happy to yield to the chairman of the 
subcommittee for his observations.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I thank the gentleman for yielding. We have convened 
two hearings, Madam Chairman, in the Coast Guard Subcommittee on the 
TWIC card. Our most recent hearing was held in January after the 
enrollment process had been underway for a few months.
  During that hearing, we heard about some of the glitches that 
individuals attempting to enroll have encountered. Such glitches are 
unacceptable when workers must pay $132.50 and take time off from work 
to obtain a card that they are required to have to do their job and to 
provide for their families.
  TWIC is an essential part of our post-security regime and is intended 
to ensure that those who pose a threat to our maritime infrastructure 
do not gain access to the secure areas of vessels or port facilities.

                              {time}  1345

  However, enrollment must be conducted as seamlessly as possible to 
cause the least burden to those workers. And I want to thank Ms. 
Jackson-Lee for her amendment. It helps to make our bill a better bill.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. It is my understanding that the gentlelady's time has 
expired. I learned the hard way today that I don't have the right to 
close. But I would be happy to yield the balance of our time to the 
sponsor of the legislation, Ms. Jackson-Lee.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I just want to thank all of you, and I 
believe that this is the right step. The action item is that they 
should implement the process of their study to make it work for our 
various mariners so that they can be part of the security of America. I 
ask my colleagues to support the amendment.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page 6956]]

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Stupak

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15 
printed in House Report 110-604.
  Mr. STUPAK. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part B amendment No. 15 offered by Mr. Stupak:
       At the end of title IV add the following new section:

     SEC. __. LAND CONVEYANCE, COAST GUARD PROPERTY IN MARQUETTE 
                   COUNTY, MICHIGAN, TO THE CITY OF MARQUETTE, 
                   MICHIGAN.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Commandant of the Coast 
     Guard may convey, without consideration, to the City of 
     Marquette, Michigan (in this section referred to as the 
     ``City''), all right, title, and interest of the United 
     States in and to a parcel of real property, together with any 
     improvements thereon, located in Marquette County, Michigan, 
     that is under the administrative control of the Coast Guard, 
     consists of approximately 5.5 acres, and is commonly 
     identified as Coast Guard Station Marquette and Lighthouse 
     Point.
       (b) Retention of Certain Easements.--In conveying the 
     property under subsection (a), the Commandant of the Coast 
     Guard may retain such easements over the property as the 
     Commandant considers appropriate for access to aids to 
     navigation.
       (c) Limitations.--The property to be conveyed by subsection 
     (a) may not be conveyed under that subsection until--
       (1) the Coast Guard has relocated Coast Guard Station 
     Marquette to a newly constructed station;
       (2) any environmental remediation required under Federal 
     law with respect to the property has been completed;
       (3) the Commandant of the Coast Guard determines that 
     retention of the property by the United States is not 
     required to carry out Coast Guard missions or functions.
       (d) Conditions of Transfer.--All conditions placed within 
     the deed of title of the property to be conveyed under 
     subsection (a) shall be construed as covenants running with 
     the land.
       (e) Inapplicability of Screening or Other Requirements.--
     The conveyance of property authorized by subsection (a) shall 
     be made without regard to the following;
       (1) Section 2696 of title 10, United States Code.
       (2) Chapter 5 of title 40, United States Code.
       (3) Any other provision of law relating to the screening, 
     evaluation, or administration of excess or surplus Federal 
     property prior to conveyance by the Administrator of General 
     Services.
       (f) Expiration of Authority.--The authority in subsection 
     (a) shall expire on the date that is five years after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
       (g) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the property to be conveyed under subsection 
     (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to the 
     Commandant of the Coast Guard. The cost of the survey shall 
     be borne by the United States.
       (h) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Commandant of the 
     Coast Guard may require such additional terms and conditions 
     in connection with the conveyance authorized by subsection 
     (a) as the Commandant considers appropriate to protect the 
     interests of the United States.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1126, the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. STUPAK. Madam Chairman, my amendment will facilitate a simple 
land transfer between the U.S. Coast Guard and the city of Marquette, 
Michigan.
  The Coast Guard is currently located at the Coast Guard Station 
Marquette and Lighthouse Point in Marquette County on nine acres of 
land east of the Marquette Maritime Museum. This facility was 
originally constructed in 1891, and is the oldest of all U.S. Coast 
Guard lifesaving facilities in the Nation.
  The Coast Guard is in the process of relocating to a new location 
just south of the Marquette Maritime Museum. This location will bring 
the Coast Guard closer to where their boats are docked and will help 
the Coast Guard respond to emergencies more quickly.
  The City of Marquette sold this property for the new facility, 1.5 
acres on the waterfront, to the Coast Guard for $1. In addition, the 
City of Marquette has committed $170,000 to reroute bike trails, make 
roadway improvements and other necessary infrastructure improvements in 
order to prepare the property for the new Coast Guard facility.
  On April 7, 2008, the City of Marquette signed the official documents 
to turn over the City property to the Coast Guard. Upon moving to this 
new property, the Coast Guard will vacate their existing location.
  My amendment will convey the property of the old Coast Guard facility 
to the City of Marquette. This is a straightforward amendment. The 
Coast Guard supports the conveyance of the existing property to the 
City. The City of Marquette is also in support of the land transfer, 
which would assist in accomplishing the goals outlined in the City's 
strategic Harbor Master Plan.
  The Coast Guard Station in Marquette plays a vital role in responding 
to emergencies in the City of Marquette, the surrounding area, and on 
Lake Superior. This land transfer will facilitate a continued Coast 
Guard presence within the Marquette area. Without a well-equipped and 
state-of-the-art Coast Guard Station in Marquette, there would be 
virtually no presence of the Coast Guard between Sault Ste. Marie and 
Houghton, Michigan, which represents a stretch of at least 300 miles of 
shoreline on Lake Superior. This is a win-win for the Coast Guard and 
the City of Marquette.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this amendment, and I 
encourage members to vote for final passage of the Coast Guard 
Authorization Act.
  Vote ``yes'' on the Stupak amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition to 
the amendment, though I do not oppose it.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Minnesota 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. The amendment is very limited in nature, very specific, 
to deal with the transfer of property that will not take place until 
the Coast Guard has relocated the station at facilities that are yet to 
be built. It will also not take place until environmental cleanup has 
occurred on the existing site. And that is important. The commandant 
has determined that retention of property is not required to carry out 
any other Coast Guard mission. So protection for the Coast Guard, 
protection for the City and the cleanup provisions, and it is a very 
beneficial amendment.
  I want to address another matter, the concern of the gentleman from 
Michigan about the transfer of excess property to the Christian 
Cornerstone Academy, a land transfer that is supported by the Coast 
Guard, by the Academy, and the community of Sheboygan. We had already 
filed the manager's amendment at the time that this issue came to the 
attention of the gentleman from Michigan, and it was not possible to 
include that in the manager's amendment nor in the amendments 
considered by the Rules Committee.
  But I do want to assure the gentleman that we will work to accomplish 
the purposes of this land transfer as we get into conference with the 
other body. Or, should such language be included by the other body in 
their version of the Coast Guard, which is now working its way to the 
floor of the other body, that we should expect to meet in conference 
and recognize the special needs in this matter. The Coast Guard 
executed a 10-year, no cost lease for the construction of the 
Cornerstone Christian Academy in Sheboygan. The lease has been 
renegotiated to fair market value. The Coast Guard has deemed 6 acres 
of the property as excess, if I have described the matter rightly.
  I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. STUPAK. I thank the distinguished chairman.
  The gentleman is correct, not only on Marquette but on the Christian 
Cornerstone Academy. We have been working to transfer this excess land. 
It

[[Page 6957]]

would have been a straightforward transfer and supported by the Coast 
Guard to Christian Cornerstone Academy in the Sheboygan community.
  I appreciate the chairman's willingness to work with us to have this 
inserted either at the Senate level or in conference. And, as always, I 
appreciate the gentleman's knowledge and wisdom on Coast Guard and 
Great Lakes issues, and look forward to continuing to work with him on 
this and thank him for his courtesies on this amendment.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield to the distinguished ranking member of the 
subcommittee.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  We are also willing to accept the gentleman from Michigan's 
amendment, which authorizes the conveyance of property and the light 
station to Marquette, Michigan. This provision follows the standard 
language that has been used by the committee in other light station 
conveyances in previous years.
  I would just note, I know the chairman of the full committee 
represents very hearty folk. When he came to Akron and said that it was 
41 below, I think, at International Falls, I also know the gentleman 
from Michigan, having gone to school in Michigan representing the UP, 
represents very hearty folk. And so I hope we not only give them what 
he wants in Marquette, but Sheboygan as well, because they deserve it 
because it is really cold.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield to the Chair of the subcommittee, Mr. Cummings.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I heartily support the amendment of Mr. Stupak.
  The amount of land being conveyed here under this amendment is only 
5.5 acres, and I believe it is appropriate that once the Coast Guard 
leaves this site, the land and the lighthouse be made available to a 
local municipality that can preserve these resources and utilize them 
for the public purpose.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. STUPAK. Madam Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. STUPAK. I thank the gentleman from Minnesota for his work to 
craft the Coast Guard Authorization Act, and for recognizing the need 
for a Coast Guard presence on the Great Lakes.
  The Coast Guard Cutter ACACIA was decommissioned on June 7, 2006, 
after over 60 years of service to this country. The ACACIA has been 
stationed in Charlevoix, Michigan since 1990.
  The ACACIA provided essential navigational and search and rescue 
services in the northern Great Lakes. This work is important for the 
safety as well as for businesses and individuals that rely on the Great 
Lakes. This year's cold winter showcased the need for a cutter presence 
when Beaver Island once again had to make an emergency call to the 
Coast Guard to break ice for a shipment of fuel for the island. This, 
unfortunately, is a common occurrence during the cold winter months, 
and this winter was exceptionally long and cold.
  It is important that this new Coast Guard cutter or similar asset be 
stationed in Charlevoix. To facilitate this, I worked closely with the 
chairman to include language in the Coast Guard Authorization Act 2006 
to require the Coast Guard Station to sustain icebreaking vessel 
capabilities in the Great Lakes. Unfortunately, the Coast Guard has 
ignored congressional intent.
  I appreciate the chairman's support in our efforts, and I look 
forward to working with the chairman and ranking member, and the chair 
of the Coast Guard subcommittee, to ensure that the Coast Guard honors 
congressional intent and provides adequate icebreaking services in the 
Northern Great Lakes.
  I yield to the chairman for comment.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I share the gentleman's concern for adequate 
icebreaking capability on the Great Lakes. We have the new icebreaker 
Mackinaw. The Coast Guard has smaller harbor icebreakers. But they 
simply are not sufficient to keep channels open. This past shipping 
season, the Coast Guard failed to send the Mackinaw upstream, up lake, 
to keep channels open for shipping of iron ore to lower lake steel 
mills.
  I assure the gentleman, I will work diligently with the Coast Guard 
to keep their attention focused on our needs for icebreaking capability 
on the Great Lakes. On the Chesapeake Bay, I said to the chairman of 
the subcommittee, you don't have that problem. It doesn't freeze over.
  Mr. STUPAK. I thank the gentleman for his words. I thank the work 
from the chairman on all Coast Guard and Great Lakes issues. I thank 
Mr. Cummings and Mr. LaTourette for their help and support.
  Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                  Announcement By the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments printed in part B of House Report 
110-604 on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following 
order:
  Amendment No. 4 by Mr. Poe of Texas.
  Amendment No. 5 by Mr. McNerney of California.
  The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. The 
second electronic vote will be conducted as a 5-minute vote.


                     Amendment No. 4 Offered by Poe

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Poe) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 408, 
noes 1, not voting 27, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 220]

                               AYES--408

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Altmire
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Buchanan
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.

[[Page 6958]]


     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Jordan
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Norton
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sali
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sestak
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Wexler
     Whitfield (KY)
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman (VA)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--1

       
     Paul
       

                             NOT VOTING--27

     Alexander
     Andrews
     Blackburn
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Campbell (CA)
     Cramer
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Doggett
     Everett
     Faleomavaega
     Feeney
     Higgins
     Hulshof
     Kind
     LaHood
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     McCrery
     Nadler
     Pascrell
     Porter
     Pryce (OH)
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Udall (NM)
     Waxman
     Weller

                              {time}  1421

  Messrs. MILLER of North Carolina and ISSA changed their vote from 
``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Mc Nerney

  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Jackson of Illinois). The unfinished 
business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney) on which further 
proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice 
vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 408, 
noes 0, not voting 28, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 221]

                               AYES--408

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Altmire
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Buchanan
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Jordan
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Norton
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Putnam
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sali
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sestak
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Wexler
     Whitfield (KY)
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman (VA)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--28

     Alexander
     Andrews
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Campbell (CA)
     Cramer
     Doggett
     Everett
     Faleomavaega
     Feeney
     Higgins
     Hulshof
     LaHood
     Loebsack
     Marshall
     Nadler
     Pascrell
     Porter
     Pryce (OH)
     Radanovich

[[Page 6959]]


     Reynolds
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Udall (NM)
     Weller
     Yarmuth


                  Announcement by the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Approximately 2 minutes remain 
in this vote.

                              {time}  1430

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall vote 221, I was unavoidably 
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment in the nature 
of a substitute, as amended.
  The amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended, was agreed 
to.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Serrano) having assumed the chair, Mr. Jackson of Illinois, Acting 
Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, 
reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill 
(H.R. 2830) to authorize appropriations for the Coast Guard for fiscal 
year 2008, and for other purposes, pursuant to House Resolution 1126, 
he reported the bill back to the House with an amendment adopted by the 
Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment 
reported from the Committee of the Whole? If not, the question is on 
the amendment.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Chabot

  Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. CHABOT. Yes, in its current form.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Chabot moves to recommit the bill H.R. 2830 to the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure with 
     instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith 
     with the following amendment:
       At the end of title IV add the following:

     SEC. __. EXTENSION OF EXEMPTION.

       Section 3503(a) of title 46, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking ``2008'' and inserting ``2018''.

  Mr. CHABOT (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that the motion be considered as read.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Ohio?
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I object.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk continued to read.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, this motion is really quite simple. It 
continues the will of Congress, a will dating as far back as 1968 to 
allow the Delta Queen to operate within the inland waters of the United 
States. It's an exemption that's been granted by Congress on a number 
of occasions, eight times to be exact, most recently in 1996. However, 
unless it is renewed this year, this national treasure will be forced 
ashore unnecessarily. And unfortunately, an important chapter in our 
Nation's history will close.
  For those who may be unfamiliar with the Delta Queen, and this is her 
right here, and its significance to this Nation, let me give you a 
brief history of what the Delta Queen is and is not. The Delta Queen is 
a symbol of our Nation's past serving as the last overnight operational 
steam paddle wheeler. She represents where we started as a Nation and 
our trials and tribulations and our progress over the years.
  The Delta Queen is a registered national historic landmark and is a 
member of the National Maritime Hall of Fame. She is part of the 
greatest generation, honorably serving our country during World War II, 
first as a Navy barracks and later transporting servicemen to and from 
the Navy shipyards docked in the San Francisco harbor.
  The Delta Queen provides jobs to American families and is a critical 
source of revenue for local communities, opening up towns and 
communities located along the Ohio, Missouri, and Mississippi Rivers 
such as Ashland, Kentucky; Gallipolis, Ohio; and Clarksville, Indiana, 
to tourists and allowing mom-and-pop businesses to flourish.
  Contrary to what some opponents to this motion would have you 
believe, the Delta Queen is not a safety risk. In fact, the Delta Queen 
is inspected by the United States Coast Guard more than six times a 
year and has operated since 1968 without significant incident.
  Indeed, when Congress first created the inland water exemption from 
fire retardant regulation, it recognized that vessels such as the Delta 
Queen would never be more than a short distance from shore, 
circumstances much different than ocean liners and other vessels that 
traverse the oceans.
  House Report 93-289 indicates that an inclusion of this was 
inadvertent. That's why Congress has granted this exception eight times 
since 1968. Eight times. Moreover, despite its exemption, the Delta 
Queen has, and continues to operate, in accordance with the safety 
notification requirements set forth in section 3503(b) of the United 
States Code and the Coast Guard.
  In addition, the Delta Queen has gone above and beyond these 
requirements, installing state-of-the-art fire and smoke detection and 
sprinkler systems, as well as mandating fire training for its crew, all 
of which have been approved by the Coast Guard. Every single stateroom 
on there has sprinklers within it. In fact, just last month, the owners 
of the Delta Queen replaced the vessel's boiler at the request of the 
Coast Guard. And just last month, the Delta Queen was most recently 
inspected by the Coast Guard and was given a clean bill of health.
  Mr. Speaker, I don't understand why continuing the Delta Queen's 
current exemption for an additional 10 years has generated such 
opposition. In fact, last session, this body unanimously supported this 
exemption, passing it by a voice vote. Just last year we did this exact 
thing that I am asking to be done today. Unfortunately, it was stalled 
over in the Senate.
  I can only conclude that the opposition that we're seeing is not 
really about the Delta Queen. It's really about a labor dispute. If 
this is true, why should the American people be victims, losing access 
to this national landmark? Why should American jobs be lost? Why should 
local businesses be literally ruined all because of a labor dispute? I 
hope that unions do not have that type of influence here in Washington 
or here in this Congress.
  Let's put all of the politics aside and do the right thing here, and 
I urge my colleagues to stand up for the Delta Queen right here. 1926, 
no major incidence since that entire time. And there is no reason why 
we shouldn't save this historic ship here. Keep part of our history 
alive here by supporting this motion. This really ought to be 
bipartisan, and I urge you to support this motion to recommit.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Minnesota is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I enormously respect the distinguished and 
amiable gentleman from Ohio, the weight-lifting champ of the House gym. 
When he walks on the floor, the weights quiver and shake in awe of his 
appearance.
  He has been an advocate for the Delta Queen even back to last fall 
when I was in the Bethesda Naval Hospital for an operation to correct a 
long-standing injury to my neck. He sent a sheet cake with the Delta 
Queen emblazoned upon it to remind me of his diligence and of his 
enthusiasm for the Delta Queen. I could only eat one slice of it, but I 
assured him that the staff at the hospital, who had no idea what the 
Delta

[[Page 6960]]

Queen was all about, appreciated this sheet cake from the very 
distinguished and caring gentleman from the State of Ohio.
  But labor has nothing to do with this issue. I haven't heard from a 
single person in any labor union about this matter.
  The Delta Queen was built in 1926 and carried 174 passengers, 88 
state rooms. It has extensive wood superstructure. It has extensive 
wood interior and furniture, and for those reasons, the Coast Guard 
will not certify this vessel. Opposition is clear. The combustible 
construction of the vessel presents an unacceptable fire risk that 
cannot be mitigated by the addition of fire-suppression measures, says 
the Coast Guard.
  As such, the Coast Guard's position remains unchanged. The Delta 
Queen should be prohibited from operating with overnight passengers.
  Since May 28, 1936, the United States has required that passenger 
vessels be constructed essentially of fire retardant material. In the 
interest of maritime safety, the Coast Guard, continuing their quote, 
has consistently opposed legislation to prolong the service of the 
Delta Queen. A vessel constructed of wood operating in the overnight 
passenger trade presents an unacceptable fire risk to its passengers 
and crew.
  It goes on at great length.
  The Delta Queen can operate in daytime but not at night.
  In the operation of the trade on the Mississippi River, the worst 
disaster in history occurred, fire onboard a paddle wheeler. Yes, in 
the 19th century, but 1,700 people died 100 yards from shore.
  On March 22 of this year, of this year, the Delta Queen had a fire in 
the generating room requiring the use of their fixed C02 
extinguishing system. Fortunately, no one was injured. The generator 
shorted, caused flames to shoot out the generator end.
  Earlier this month, the Queen of the West, this April, a similar 
paddle wheel operated by the very same company that owns and operates 
the Delta Queen had a fire in the engine room, required evacuation of 
177 passengers and crew. Three crew members were treated for smoke 
inhalation.

                              {time}  1445

  Last year, in May, the Empress of the North, another excursion vessel 
operated by the same company owning the Delta Queen, ran aground in 
southeast Alaska, evacuating over 200 passengers and crew; fourth 
grounding of that vessel in less than 4 years.
  Now I can understand those who live along the Mississippi River, 
which starts nearly in my district all the way down to the Gulf, but 
friends, we would never stand for limiting safety on a 747 aircraft. 
And over a decade ago, a foreign airline was trying to remove over- 
wing exits from a 747. Congressman Bill Clinger, Pennsylvania's ranking 
Republican on the Committee on Aviation with me, we stopped them from 
doing that. We stopped the FAA from allowing that risk to safety. We 
should stop this risk to safety here. Fire at night is terrifying. 
Oppose the amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was 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 passage.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 195, 
noes 208, not voting 28, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 222]

                               AYES--195

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Altmire
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Buchanan
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Clay
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Fallin
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foster
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gilchrest
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hill
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jefferson
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jordan
     Keller
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kuhl (NY)
     Lamborn
     Latham
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Loebsack
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marshall
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Melancon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Sali
     Saxton
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield (KY)
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman (VA)
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--208

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Brady (PA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Clarke
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Lincoln
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emanuel
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Klein (FL)
     Kucinich
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     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
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Skelton
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tauscher
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Udall (CO)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--28

     Alexander
     Andrews
     Biggert
     Blackburn
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Campbell (CA)
     Costello
     Cramer
     Doggett
     Everett
     Feeney
     Higgins
     Hulshof
     LaHood
     McNulty
     Nadler
     Pascrell
     Porter
     Pryce (OH)
     Radanovich
     Rush

[[Page 6961]]


     Ryan (WI)
     Slaughter
     Udall (NM)
     Weller
     Wynn
     Yarmuth


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes 
remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1504

  Messrs. BISHOP of Georgia, LINCOLN DAVIS of Tennessee, PERLMUTTER, 
and ENGLISH of Pennsylvania changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. HARE changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 395, 
noes 7, not voting 29, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 223]

                               AYES--395

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

                                NOES--7

     Coble
     Duncan
     Flake
     Nunes
     Paul
     Rogers (KY)
     Tancredo

                             NOT VOTING--29

     Alexander
     Andrews
     Blackburn
     Boyd (FL)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Buyer
     Campbell (CA)
     Costello
     Cramer
     Doggett
     Everett
     Feeney
     Higgins
     Hulshof
     LaHood
     McNulty
     Miller, George
     Nadler
     Pascrell
     Porter
     Pryce (OH)
     Radanovich
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Udall (NM)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Yarmuth

                              {time}  1513

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

                          ____________________