[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 22461-22464]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




     MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 2918, LEGISLATIVE BRANCH 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2010

  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Aderholt moves that the managers on the part of the 
     House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two 
     Houses on the Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 2918 be 
     instructed as follows:
       1. To insist on the provisions contained in section 209 of 
     the House bill.
       2. To disagree to any proposition in violation of clause 9 
     of Rule XXII which:
       (a) Includes any additional funding or language not 
     committed to the conference;
       (b) Includes matter not committed to the conference 
     committee by either House;
       (c) Modifies specific matter committed to conference by 
     either or both Houses beyond the scope of the specific matter 
     as committed to the conference committee.
       3. To not record their approval of the final conference 
     agreement (within the meaning of clause 12(a)(4) of House 
     rule XXII) unless the text of such agreement has been 
     available to the managers in an electronic, searchable, and 
     downloadable form for at least 48 hours prior to the time 
     described in such clause.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XXII, the 
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt) and the gentlewoman from Florida 
(Ms. Wasserman Schultz) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I would like to focus attention upon a couple of important issues 
related to both the bill itself and on the majority's last-minute 
attempts to use this bill as a vehicle for a month-long continuing 
resolution.
  Madam Speaker, we all know the fiscal year expires on September 30, 
which is a week from today. Because the House and Senate have yet to 
complete our annual appropriations work, we must pass a continuing 
resolution--which, of course, we call a CR--to keep the government 
operating in the interim time. If we do not pass a CR, or a continuing 
resolution, our Nation will face a potentially devastating government-
wide shutdown.
  Now I think we all can agree that shutting down the government, even 
in the worst-case scenario, is not the preferred option. However, by 
attaching the CR to this Legislative Branch appropriation bill, the 
majority is forcing Members to choose between voting for our own office 
budgets or voting for a government shutdown. The majority is also using 
this parliamentary gimmick to avoid certain debate or votes on the 
floor that would occur under the normal CR process. This, Madam 
Speaker, is simply not the reasonable or responsible kind of governing 
that our constituents have sent us here to Washington to do.
  In addition, the Leg Branch bill is the first of five appropriation 
bills by both the House and Senate to begin the conference committee 
work process. As the ranking member of the Leg Branch Subcommittee, I 
feel this bill is very important. But moving this bill forward, even 
above homeland security funding, is not the proper way to put a 
priority on meeting the critical needs facing the American people at 
this time.

[[Page 22462]]

  I'm sure my Republican colleagues will have more to say on that issue 
as we move forward in the process. That being said, the motion that I 
bring forward today would prevent any extraneous provisions, including 
a CR, from being attached to the Legislative Branch appropriation bill 
and would require 48-hour viewing before a floor vote occurs.
  Also, Madam Speaker, there is another issue that I do think needs to 
be dealt with as our subcommittee goes to conference. This is the issue 
of staff-led tours in the Capitol. Since the opening of the Capitol 
Visitor Center, many Members have expressed concern over the handling 
of how House staff-led tours are conducted at this time. To address 
this concern, we have included in the House-passed bill section 209, 
which prohibits the elimination or the restriction of staff-guided 
tours of the Capitol, except for security purposes, of course. The 
motion I'm offering today would instruct the House conferees to insist 
on this provision in conference. It is imperative that our staff be 
able to lead tours for our constituents and that our constituents are 
able to properly see this beautiful building, especially allowing it to 
be viewed from different standpoints. Different States have different 
things that they like to point out in the United States Capitol, and I 
think that it is certainly important that we continue to be able to do 
this.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to adopt this motion to instruct.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, while I support some of the 
content of the motion to instruct, essentially what much of it does is 
it ties the hands of the conference committee and really essentially 
would prevent us from being able to ensure that the government would 
continue to run.
  There is precedent for adding unrelated matters in conference 
reports. The leadership on the other side of the aisle did so in 2006, 
and our tradition and our preference in the House is to make sure the 
conferees have as much flexibility as possible to ensure that the 
government can continue to function.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I want to fully support the comments of the 
gentlewoman from Florida. Some of the language in this motion is 
perfectly acceptable, but the most serious defect in the language is 
that it would simply tell the committee that it cannot do what the 
then-majority party did in September 2006.
  In September 2006, the other party--then in the majority--attached 
the continuing resolution to the Department of Defense appropriation 
bill. Only two Republican Members of the House voted against that. Mr. 
Aderholt voted for that process at that time, so did Mr. Lewis, so did 
Mr. Boehner, and so did Mr. Cantor. So it would seem to me considerably 
ill-advised for this House to say that in order to keep the government 
open, we are not allowed to follow the very same procedure which was 
followed by the other side of the aisle and for which the gentleman 
voted.
  I think that's enough said, and I thank the gentlewoman for the time.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I think what needs to be pointed out at 
this point is that as the minority here, we would like to see a clean 
CR passed. We were under the impression that there would be a clean CR 
that would be ready to be voted on tomorrow. There has been no effort 
by the majority to go ahead and bring this for a vote and to pass a 
clean CR. So that's what we would like to do. We would not like to see 
it attached to some other legislative vehicle but to simply pass a 
clean CR to make sure the government stays open. That's why I think we 
should do that, and we have this motion at the desk.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, let me say, there are only two instances in 
which this is not an absolutely straight, clean CR. We do make an 
exception for veterans. We fund them at a higher level than we would 
ordinarily fund them in the continuing resolution. Secondly, we do make 
an exception for the Census because 2010 is coming at us whether we 
agree on this House floor or not. Those are the only two legislative 
items that depart from the traditional CR.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Wisconsin has 
expired.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 
seconds to the gentleman.
  Mr. OBEY. Virtually every judgment made in the contemplated CR is the 
judgment which is simply that of the authorizing committee of 
jurisdiction, and that's what CRs are supposed to do.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. I think it should be noted, the last time this 
happened, we were funding our troops and not funding ourselves. The 
bottom line is that the majority is forcing Members to choose between 
voting for our own office budgets or voting for a government shutdown. 
The majority is also using this parliamentary gimmick to avoid certain 
debate or votes on the floor that would occur under the normal CR 
process.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I think it's important to note that it is entirely appropriate to 
consider amending--at the point that we do--amending the CR to the 
Legislative Branch appropriations bill, which is essentially a 
government function. Our purpose in continuing to pursue that avenue 
would be to ensure that the government can continue to function.
  In addition to that, because the legislative branch essentially has 
no significant differences of opinion, it really was the most 
appropriate vehicle and makes the most sense to utilize as a vehicle.
  With that, I am prepared to yield back if the gentleman is.

                              {time}  1845

  Mr. ADERHOLT. In closing, let me say that I think it's very 
important, again, that we don't force Members to choose between voting 
for our own office budgets and voting for a government shutdown. Why 
are we choosing this particular vehicle for a CR? It is my 
understanding that the Homeland Security bill is also ready to go, and 
to attach it to choosing our own budgets to fund the Federal Government 
I think is a mistake. That's why we're concerned about the direction 
the majority is going on this. Therefore, we have this motion that 
would restrict this from being added to it.
  At this point, we would ask that a clean CR be moved forward and, 
therefore, it would not be attached to the Legislative Branch bill.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Speaker, I rise to object to the process by 
which the majority has brought the continuing resolution to the floor 
of the House of Representatives. While we can all agree that it is 
sometimes necessary to adopt a continuing resolution to keep federal 
government programs running in the new fiscal year as the respective 
Appropriations Subcommittees finalize their conference reports, 
attaching the resolution to the conference report for appropriations 
for the Legislative Branch is inappropriate and a direct attempt by the 
majority to stifle debate in this House.
  Further, Madam Speaker, the majority's action in this instance is 
just one more swipe at the minority in a pattern that began at the 
start of this body's deliberation on Appropriations bills earlier this 
summer. It has continued to stifle debate throughout the process by 
restricting the minority's ability to offer amendments to these 
important funding bills. Over the summer months in which we considered 
all 12 appropriations bills, the majority's structured rules permitted 
the minority to offer just over 100 amendments, of which only 
approximately 50 per cent were on substantive issues directly impacting 
policy and/or program funding levels. That's just 50 amendments on real

[[Page 22463]]

policy, impacting government spending on specific programs across the 
entire federal government.
  Following on this abysmal stifling of Republican amendments on these 
bills, Madam Speaker, next the majority has again found a way to 
prevent meaningful debate on the funding resolution which continues to 
keep the government open by attaching it to the conference report on 
the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill. Since the conference report 
cannot be amended, there was no opportunity for another point of view 
in continuing the government's operations. Madam Speaker, this behavior 
is not merely frustrating, but it also works directly against the very 
backbone of our nation--a democracy with free and open debate on 
issues.
  It is my sincere hope that in the future, Madam Speaker, regardless 
of which party holds the majority in the House, we can change course 
from this current process and instead open these important spending 
bills, including the continuing resolution, to amendment through an 
open process.
  Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I strongly support many provisions in 
H.R. 2918, the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act of 2009, including 
funding for the Census Bureau, the U.S. Capitol Police, the Government 
Accountability Office, GAO, and the Ryan White AIDS Program. I cannot, 
however, support the inclusion of approximately $10.8 billion in war 
funding and as such, I oppose the bill.
  As an ardent supporter of the U.S. Postal Service, USPS, I commend 
the inclusion of provisions in this bill that would reduce the amount 
USPS must contribute to the Postal Service Retiree Health Benefits Fund 
to $1.5 million from $5.4 million, ensuring its survival through the 
end of this month. Congress has a responsibility to the communities it 
represents to ensure that the USPS and the irreplaceable services it 
provides as a universal mail delivery service are maintained.
  This legislation appropriately increases the funding for the U.S. 
Census Bureau to $7.1 billion to ensure that the agency can meet the 
demands of the upcoming census in 2010. The census is vital in 
fulfilling our Constitutional duties under Article 1, Section 2, which 
are intended to ensure that the people have equal representation in 
government at the state and federal level. I also fully support the 
provisions in this bill providing $328 million for the dedicated men 
and women of the U.S. Capitol Police and $572 million for the GAO.
  I strongly oppose the inclusion of funding for the wars in Iraq and 
Afghanistan in this bill. The war in Iraq was based on false 
intelligence and an inaccurate, government sponsored, propaganda 
campaign. This body was given a mandate by the American people in 2006 
to get out of Iraq. Congress has the ability, through the power of the 
purse, to end the occupation of Iraq and bring all troops and 
contractors home immediately. Failure to do so continues to put our 
brave and honorable troops in harm's way.
  I also oppose dedicating more resources to Afghanistan. The people of 
Afghanistan are suffering horribly from 8 years of war. During that 
time, the Afghan central government has become increasingly corrupt and 
has failed to meet the needs of the Afghan people.
  Violence in Afghanistan continues to grow. The United Nations General 
Assembly Security Council reports ``an average of 898 incidents in the 
first seven months of 2009, compared to 677 during the same time frame 
in 2008. Incidents involving improvised explosive devices have risen 
dramatically, to an average of more than eight per day, 60 per cent 
higher than the average during the first seven months of 2008. Complex 
attacks now average one per month compared to one per quarter in 
2008.'' This past August was reported to be the ``deadliest month since 
the beginning of 2009.''
  I am also dismayed by the inclusion of language that unilaterally 
bars all funding for Association of Community Organizations for Reform 
Now, ACORN. I have serious concerns that such language constitutes a 
bill of attainder. The Constitution expressly prohibits Congress from 
legislatively punishing an individual or specific class of people, and 
I believe that this action is an effort to circumvent the protection 
that the Constitution affords to all people and organizations. This 
country has a robust judicial system that has been created precisely 
for this purpose; we ought to let it do its job. If a crime has been 
committed, we should prosecute the people who have committed that 
crime.
  Congress and the American public simply will not tolerate an open-
ended commitment of money and troops while millions of Americans are 
losing their health care, their homes, their jobs, their pensions, 
their investments. I support the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill 
by itself. I cannot support it when it is used as a vehicle for 
perpetuating the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to instruct.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 191, 
nays 213, not voting 28, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 734]

                               YEAS--191

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bright
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Cao
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Chaffetz
     Childers
     Clay
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Donnelly (IN)
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Fallin
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Graves
     Guthrie
     Hall (TX)
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan (OH)
     Kennedy
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kline (MN)
     Kratovil
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marshall
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McMahon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mitchell
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy (NY)
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Nye
     Olson
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Perriello
     Peters
     Petri
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Taylor
     Teague
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden
     Wamp
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NAYS--213

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Adler (NJ)
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boccieri
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Clarke
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Driehaus
     Edwards (MD)
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Gonzalez
     Gordon (TN)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Kagen
     Kaptur
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kosmas
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Massa
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Minnick
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano

[[Page 22464]]


     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis (CO)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--28

     Barrett (SC)
     Bean
     Berman
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Boyd
     Capuano
     Delahunt
     Dicks
     Doyle
     Edwards (TX)
     Granger
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     McGovern
     McKeon
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Pitts
     Richardson
     Sestak
     Skelton
     Smith (NJ)
     Speier
     Stark
     Waxman
     Wilson (OH)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

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

                              {time}  1910

  Messrs. SCOTT of Georgia, STUPAK, Ms. CHU, Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of 
California, Mr. SALAZAR, Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland, Messrs. McDERMOTT, 
FATTAH, LANGEVIN, SARBANES, Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida, Ms. PINGREE 
of Maine, Messrs. CLEAVER and CUMMINGS changed their vote from ``yea'' 
to ``nay.''
  Ms. GIFFORDS, Messrs. GINGREY of Georgia, BURGESS, POSEY, Mrs. 
KIRKPATRICK of Arizona and Mr. McMAHON changed their vote from ``nay'' 
to ``yea.''
  So the motion to instruct was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________