[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 23326-23329]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 3183, ENERGY 
  AND WATER DEVELOPMENT AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2010

  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 788 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 788

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider the conference report to accompany the 
     bill (H.R. 3183) making appropriations for energy and water 
     development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 2010, and for other purposes. All points of 
     order against consideration of the conference report are 
     waived. The conference report shall be considered as read. 
     All points of order against the conference report are waived. 
     The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     conference report to its adoption without intervening motion 
     except: (1) one hour of debate; and (2) one motion to 
     recommit if applicable.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Altmire). The gentlewoman from 
California is recognized for 1 hour.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Sessions). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for 
debate only.


                             General Leave

  Ms. MATSUI. I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 
legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House 
Resolution 788.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. MATSUI. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 788 provides for consideration of the 
conference report for H.R. 3183, the Energy and Water Development 
Appropriations Act for 2010. The rule is a standard conference report 
rule. It waives all points of order against the conference report and 
against the consideration and provides that the conference report shall 
be considered as read. However, I want to point out that although the 
rule waives all points of order, the conference report does not violate 
either clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The resolution provides for 1 hour 
of general debate controlled by the Committee on Appropriations.
  Mr. Speaker, I first want to thank Chairman Obey as well as Mr. 
Pastor for their work to bring this conference report before the House 
today.
  When we think of the long-term health of our country, the Energy and 
Water appropriations bill is one of the most important bills that we 
consider. The conference report before us today will keep communities 
safe from flooding, invest in clean energy and renewable technologies, 
fight nuclear proliferation, and create jobs through infrastructure 
development.
  Without this bill, millions of homes would be exposed to devastating 
floods, clean energy research that will power the next generation of 
money-making technologies will stop, nuclear weapons proliferation 
would pick up again, and the pace of job creation in the clean energy 
sector would slow to a crawl or even stop altogether. These are the 
reasons why today's conference report is so important.
  In the field of energy, the conference report fulfills Congress's 
promise to chart a new path for a national energy policy. The 
conference agreement provides $27 billion for the Department of Energy 
to help fund clean energy development and perform basic scientific 
research. It devotes millions of dollars to solar energy development, 
advanced vehicle technologies, energy-efficient buildings, and biofuels 
that can be grown right here at home.
  When we make our own fuel, Mr. Speaker, we create domestic jobs and 
also take steps toward becoming energy independent. We recognized this 
fact in the Energy and Commerce Committee when we wrote the American 
Clean Energy and Security Act, which is why I'm pleased to see these 
provisions part of today's conference report.
  This appropriations bill also funds a number of applied research 
grants at the Department of Energy for potentially high-reward 
activities like fusion energy, high-energy physics, and biological 
research. Future generations will look back at these investments and 
thank us for having the foresight to recognize that one generation's 
long-term research is future generations' short-term gain.

                              {time}  1200

  Many of my colleagues would be satisfied to know that the conference 
report also devotes resources to fossil fuel-based energy that can 
provide a boost to our energy independence efforts in relatively short 
order. In it, $672 million is provided for research and development 
into things like carbon capture and sequestration, natural gas 
recovery, and unconventional petroleum research activities. This 
research will benefit independent petroleum producers and can also help 
make our country more energy independent for the short term.
  Also to that end, the conference report takes a responsible approach 
toward nuclear energy by investing in fuel cycle research and 
development. By providing more than $700 million for nuclear energy, 
the conferees made the pragmatic calculation that nuclear will be part 
of our energy mix in the short term. But no matter how electricity is 
generated, one challenge we face is delivering it effectively to its 
destination. For this reason, the conference report provides more than 
$100 million to modernize and secure our national electricity grid. By 
almost tripling the amount of funding for grid-connected energy storage 
and cybersecurity, the conferees have recognized how closely our energy 
policy is tied to our national security.
  The energy portion of this conference report is only half the story 
though, Mr. Speaker. For my district and for people living in 
floodplains across the country, this energy and water conference report 
is a major victory. Funding for the Army Corps of Engineers is 
increased over both 2009 levels and over the President's request for a 
total of $5.4 billion. For my constituents, this funding can be a 
matter of life and death. My district is where the Sacramento and 
American Rivers converge. As a result, Sacramento is the most at-risk 
city for major flooding in the United States. More than 440,000 people, 
110,000 structures, the capitol of the State of California and up to 
$58 billion are at risk from flooding in my district alone. Nearly $90 
million of vital funding in this conference report will reinforce 
levees along the American and Sacramento Rivers to keep these national 
assets safe and dry.
  For all of Sacramento, this means safer homes, more secure schools, 
better protected community centers and a higher quality of life. 
According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, Federal levees 
currently provide a 6-to-

[[Page 23327]]

1 return on flood damages prevented when compared to initial building 
costs.
  But the flood protection funding in this conference agreement is more 
than just dollars and cents, Mr. Speaker. When I go home and walk along 
the Sacramento River, and when I look at the houses and schools and 
parks that sit behind the levees, I'm reminded how vital the Energy and 
Water bill is. In many parts of the country, it can mean the difference 
between a thriving city and a disaster area. Flood protection is a 
regional undertaking though. Floodwaters do not stop and start based on 
congressional district boundaries. That is why I am pleased that the 
conference report contains more than $60 million to improve the ability 
of Folsom Dam to protect my constituents who live below it. This money 
will also help the Joint Federal Project to provide greater efficiency 
in managing flood storage in Folsom Reservoir.
  Around the whole country, from Sacramento to the Mississippi River 
Delta, from rural Ohio to the Bronx River Basin, this conference 
agreement protects our communities by investing in our aging 
infrastructure. And when we rebuild our infrastructure, we rebuild our 
economy. The infrastructure funding in this conference report before us 
today will continue this pattern of creating jobs while investing in 
public safety. For that reason, I strongly support the rule and the 
underlying conference report, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. Speaker, again, I want to thank Mr. Obey and the Appropriations 
Committee for their hard work on this conference agreement.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from 
California, my friend, for yielding me the time. I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this closed rule--once again, a 
closed rule--coming out of the Rules Committee and the process that 
brought this bill to the floor. My friends on the other side of the 
aisle for the first time in history shut down the appropriation process 
by placing extremely restrictive rules on every single appropriation 
bill that has come to the floor of the House this year. Chairman Obey 
set an arbitrary timeline to finish the fiscal year 2010 spending 
bills, which has forced the Democrat Rules Committee to limit every 
Republican and Democrat's chance to offer an amendment on the floor.
  Why? For what reason? There are hundreds of good amendments which 
were offered by all of my colleagues which were rejected in this 
unprecedented fashion. Now that this House has finished all the 
appropriation bills, you would think that my friends on the other side 
of the aisle would allow for an appropriate time and an appropriate 
process for consideration of the conference reports, not just come to 
this House floor but for Members to be heard from and for us to go back 
to a process which this House was used to in its precedents for so many 
years.
  But no. Last night the conference report was filed after 6 p.m., I 
believe 6:17, and the Rules Committee met at 7:15 to report out a rule 
for floor consideration. Our Democrat colleagues in the committee 
waived the House rule that requires a 3-day layover of conference 
reports and scheduled a bill on the floor first thing this morning. 
Additionally, just last week this House voted to adopt a motion to 
instruct that stated that the conference report, a bill that we are 
discussing on the floor here today, should be available online in a 
searchable format for at least 48 hours before it's voted on.
  Well, Mr. Speaker, forget the 3-day rule. Forget the 48-hour motion 
to instruct; this House was given just less than 24 hours to review the 
conference report and its changes. I don't know when my Democrat 
colleagues will allow for the open, honest and ethical Congress that 
they once called for, but we're on the floor once again saying, We have 
met the deadline that Chairman Obey wanted. Can we get back to a normal 
process now, a normal process that is not good just for Republicans and 
not just for our Democratic Members but good for this House to follow?
  Mr. Speaker, today we are discussing the Energy and Water 
appropriation conference report for fiscal year 2010. Today it is my 
intention to focus on the increase in spending over last year's level 
and destructive initiatives that the Democrat majority continues to 
pursue that have only killed jobs and led to record deficits. This 
administration and this Democratic Congress promised the American 
public jobs, economic growth, economic recovery, health care, a cleaner 
environment, better education and just a wonderful, wonderful life, all 
contained within their appropriation bills. And the list goes on and on 
with other promises.
  Yet the only thing up to now that they really have accomplished is 
record deficits, record spending and record unemployment numbers all 
across America. The fiscal year 2010 Energy and Water appropriation 
conference report provides $33.5 billion in total funding, which is 
hundreds of millions of dollars above last year's level, and this is in 
addition to the $58.7 billion provided in fiscal year 2009 emergency 
funding just from a few months ago, mostly from the stimulus bill.
  We have seen massive government spending. Now this bill does not 
represent any commitment to fiscal sustainability. More promises, more 
spending, more deficit, more record unemployment. Mr. Speaker, the 
Obama administration promised America, if Congress passed the stimulus 
bill, that unemployment would not go beyond 8 percent, that it would 
create and save millions of jobs. Here we are 8 months later with a 
record 9.7 unemployment rate, the highest in 26 years, and more than 2 
million Americans have lost their jobs since the passage of the $1.2 
trillion ``stimulus employment plan.''
  This summer when discussing the stimulus, Vice President Biden said 
the Obama administration--and I quote--``misread how bad the economy 
was,'' even though as a candidate for President and Vice President both 
of them had been all over the country. They had seen firsthand exactly 
the circumstance this country was in.
  The Obama administration got it wrong. They got it wrong when it came 
to the stimulus, and the American people know they got it wrong also. 
The American people can no longer afford this Democrat-controlled 
House, Senate and White House. We've got to start getting it right, not 
guessing and getting it wrong. Spending hundreds of millions of dollars 
more in addition to the $58 billion additional spending this year is 
not a way to fix the problem. In June of this year, my friends on the 
other side of the aisle passed a cap-and-trade bill that will raise 
prices on energy, goods, and services, and every single hardworking 
American across the country will pay that price.
  In my home State of Texas, the average household can expect to pay 
more than $1,100 a year extra as a result of that legislation. 
Additionally, this legislation could ultimately kill over 1.38 million 
jobs that are in the manufacturing sector of this economy. That's 1.38 
million more jobs.
  Mr. Speaker, some time this month the Democrat-controlled House wants 
to pass sweeping health care reform. Effectively, it will diminish the 
employer-based insurance market and forces 114 million Americans into a 
government-run program. This $1.2 trillion package raises taxes once 
again, raises taxes once again, raises taxes once again, which is what 
this Democratic-controlled Congress is about. Raise $1.2 trillion in 
taxes on individuals and small businesses that do not participate in 
the government plan and $800 billion, which the President talks about 
will be necessary to fund this massive government takeover and will 
result in 4.7 to 5.5 million more private-sector jobs being lost in 
America.
  In July, the Congressional Budget Office director stated that the 
Democratic health care proposal ``significantly expands the Federal 
responsibility for health care costs.'' Mr. Speaker, I thought that the 
goal of health reform was to bring costs down for Americans, not to 
increase the cost, further America toward bankruptcy and to cost 4.7 to 
5.5 million more enterprise system jobs. By the way, those

[[Page 23328]]

are jobs that are not in Washington, D.C.
  The American people know that you cannot spend what you don't have, 
and that's exactly what we are doing here today with the Democratic 
majority. Earlier this month, the Treasury Department released a 
statement reporting that the Federal budget deficit reached a record 
$1.378 trillion and that the national debt reached $11.8 trillion by 
the end of August. This means that since 2007, this Democratic Congress 
has increased the Federal deficit by $1.217 billion and increased the 
national debt by over $3 trillion. What a record.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, I will continue to point out that our 
friends on the other side of the aisle should not tax and spend not 
only this country but also hardworking families into a further economic 
recession.

                              {time}  1215

  My Democratic colleagues need to get a handle on the out-of-control 
spending which they dogged us repeatedly about when we were in the 
majority at far lesser levels.
  Rising unemployment and record deficits cannot be remedied with 
massive increases in spending by Uncle Sam. Huge energy and health care 
costs that raise taxes and kill jobs is not what our economy needs 
right now. Americans need a balance. They need to listen to what is 
happening in Washington only to see that Washington is the problem, not 
the answer. Americans are tightening their belts because they get it. 
Congress should be doing the same thing.
  Mr. Speaker, we have talked today about the process. We have talked 
today about spending. And we have talked about the overall agenda of 
this Democratic majority that is about taxing, it is about spending, it 
is about record unemployment, rather than working on the things that 
the American people, the people back home who sent us here to do our 
job, are working on.
  I encourage a ``no'' vote on this rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I want to remind my colleague on the other 
side of the aisle that we're not debating the American Clean Energy and 
Security Act or the health care reform bill. We are dealing today with 
the conference report for Energy and Water Development.
  And I must say that this is a bill, a conference report, that has 
strong bipartisan support. As far as job creation, this is about 
infrastructure, spending on public safety projects that will save jobs 
across America. As I said before, it's a smart investment, the type of 
smart investment the American people want this Congress to be making at 
this difficult point in our history.
  Our Nation's levees are crumbling, and we're putting public health at 
risk because of things like that. This is the time to invest in 
infrastructure like this.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, the thought process here in Washington is 
that we can solve all the problems that our country has, just trust 
Washington. I think now more than ever we are seeing at the end of this 
year that the leadership in Washington, D.C., the bills that are on 
this floor, the votes which we take virtually every single time, every 
single vote is about more taxes, more spending, more rules and 
regulations that are thrown to the American people with this package 
about how great this is for the American people.
  Yet what happens is that Members of Congress, lots of them in our 
body on both sides, go back home and they listen to the American 
people. And they listen to the American people talk what I think is a 
lot of common sense: common sense about how to fix our health care, how 
to fix our spending, how to fix the unemployment, how to encourage 
manufacturing rather than deleting it.
  Then they look up and see the political agenda of the Democratic 
Party, that in the three biggest political bills that represent the 
Democratic Party we will lose almost 10 million jobs in this country; 
and the political agenda of the Democratic Party, one which this body 
is barreling down that pathway to meet and match, has resulted in 
disaster for people back home.
  So the Republican Party will continue to come to Washington and be 
faithful after listening, and we will go to our committees and we will 
throw our ideas on the floor and ask the committees to vote on them. We 
will continue to have Members come to the Rules Committee that seek 
time, permission to speak about ideas that will better the bills.
  Yet we find that in these instances before the Rules Committee, it 
really doesn't matter. It doesn't matter not just for Republicans, but 
it really doesn't matter to a Democrat either. They will block the best 
ideas that come from the heartland.
  Mr. Speaker, this is not a way to continue. We are once again coming 
to the floor, as I have done all year, and my colleagues David Dreier, 
Lincoln Diaz-Balart, and Virginia Foxx, as we explain the rules and 
explain the Rules Committee, explain what is happening: receiving a 
bill at 3 o'clock in the morning; getting a bill, as we did last night, 
1 hour before the meeting; not even following the rules from a 
resolution we had just the week before about online availability of 
bills.
  Mr. Speaker, no wonder the American people are up in arms and 
insisting that Members of Congress read the bill first; that every 
single Member of this body is given a chance every single time to say, 
I disagree with the direction that the Democratic leadership is taking 
us.
  We need to read the bills. We need to take the ideas from people in 
the heartland, through their Representatives in committees and up in 
the Rules Committee, and make these in order and follow a process that 
the American people, if they were sitting in, would say, Why not take 
more time? Why not understand the bill? Why not cut spending? Why not 
make some commonsense directional issues happen in this Congress? This 
leadership, these bills continue to follow a process that the American 
people are questioning.
  We will continue coming to the floor and politely, on behalf of 
people back home, say that we would hope that we would go back to 
regular processes instead of setting a new record every time for closed 
rules. I think it's important. I think it's important.
  We will keep coming to the floor, and we will dutifully keep speaking 
up, and we will make sure that we are properly representing those 
people who are talking about better process, better direction, and 
doing the things that will work.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding the time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The rule before us today is a fair rule that is aligned with the 
customary practice of the House for rules governing debate on 
conference reports.
  After numerous hearings and constructive negotiations with the 
Senate, the Appropriations Committee has crafted an important and 
balanced bill. It invests in new technologies, scientific research, and 
conservation efforts that are critical to the long-term health of our 
economy and our planet.
  Most importantly for my district, this legislation increases funding 
for the Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation. Every 
dollar is crucial for my constituents in Sacramento as we work to 
improve our water infrastructure, as I know it is to all my colleagues 
in the House with similar bills.
  I want to thank Chairman Obey and Chairman Pastor for recognizing how 
critical this funding is to all of us. We rely upon it to fortify our 
levees, raise our dams, and keep our communities safe and dry.
  This bill also looks to the future by investing in the development of 
a new smart grid to ensure electricity delivery and energy reliability. 
And it makes a strong commitment to renewable energy and scientific 
research.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

[[Page 23329]]

  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on adoption of House Resolution 788 will be followed by 5-
minute votes on motions to suspend the rules on H. Res. 692 and H. Con. 
Res. 151.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 234, 
nays 181, not voting 17, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 749]

                               YEAS--234

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boccieri
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Childers
     Chu
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Driehaus
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Giffords
     Gonzalez
     Gordon (TN)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kosmas
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Marshall
     Massa
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McMahon
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis (CO)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Taylor
     Teague
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--181

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     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
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Fallin
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Griffith
     Guthrie
     Hall (TX)
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan (OH)
     Kanjorski
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Kratovil
     Kucinich
     Lance
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Melancon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Minnick
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy (NY)
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Nunes
     Nye
     Olson
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden
     Wamp
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--17

     Adler (NJ)
     Barrett (SC)
     Capuano
     Carney
     Gingrey (GA)
     Inslee
     Lamborn
     Lujan
     Maloney
     McCarthy (CA)
     Neugebauer
     Pascrell
     Quigley
     Schmidt
     Souder
     Wexler
     Whitfield


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There is 1 minute 
remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1252

  Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. OLSON, Mr. SIMPSON and Mrs. BIGGERT changed their 
vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________