[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 13]
[House]
[Pages 19245-19249]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF SENATE AMENDMENT TO H.R. 3082, FULL-YEAR 
                  CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2011

  Mr. McGOVERN, from the Committee on Rules, submitted a privileged 
report (Rept. No. 111-675) on the resolution (H. Res. 1755) providing 
for consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 3082) 
making appropriations for military construction, the Department of 
Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 2010, and for other purposes, which was referred to the 
House Calendar and ordered to be printed.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 1755 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1755

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 
     3082) making appropriations for military construction, the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other 
     purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and to consider 
     in the House, without intervention of any point of order, a 
     motion offered by the chair of the Committee on 
     Appropriations or his designee that the House concur in the 
     Senate amendment with the amendment printed in the report of 
     the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. The 
     Senate amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. 
     The motion shall be debatable for one hour, with 40 minutes 
     equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Appropriations and 20 
     minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the motion to final adoption without intervening 
     motion.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts is 
recognized for 1 hour.

                              {time}  1500

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions). 
All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. I 
yield myself such time as I may consume.


                             General Leave

  Mr. McGOVERN. I also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 
5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House 
Resolution 1755.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 1755 provides for consideration of 
the Senate amendment to H.R. 3082. The rule makes in order a motion 
offered by the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or his designee 
that the House concur in the Senate amendment to H.R. 3082 with the 
amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 
the resolution.
  The rule provides 1 hour of debate on the motion, with 40 minutes 
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on Appropriations and 20 minutes equally divided and 
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce. The rule waives all points of order against 
consideration of the motion. Finally, the rule provides that the Senate 
amendment and the motion shall be considered as read.
  Mr. Speaker, today the House will consider the FY 2011 continuing 
resolution legislation that will fund the Federal Government for the 
remainder of fiscal year 2011. Additionally, this bill contains the 
food safety bill, as passed by the Senate, with minor technical 
corrections.
  I am grateful to Mr. Obey and Mr. Dingell for their incredible 
leadership. Both these measures need to be passed. I urge my colleagues 
to support the rule and the underlying legislation.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), my friend, for yielding me such time as I 
may consume today. And I want to thank the gentleman for the 
considerations that he has given me personally and professionally over 
the last year, and I would wish him the very best in this holiday 
season.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to this completely 
closed rule and to the ill-conceived underlying legislation. Week after 
week, my friends on the other side of the aisle continue to bulldoze 
their massive spending and overregulations bill to the floor of the 
House with no Republican input and no regular order. As a matter of 
fact, even today at least one Member of the Democratic Party showed up 
with a darn good idea, and it was slam-dunked ``no'' on a party-line

[[Page 19246]]

basis. By the way, the Republicans voted for that good idea.
  What was promised 4 years ago was that this House would be the most 
open, honest, and ethical Congress, by our current Speaker Pelosi when 
she took the gavel. But this has been the most closed, secretive, one-
sided, and flawed Congress, I believe, in history, matching the 
previous Congress.
  The American people asked for change, and I think they got far worse 
in the election to elect this current Congress. They received a 
Democrat Congress that didn't listen to the American people and a 
Congress that acts on its own interests and not the interests of the 
American people or the taxpayer. And that's why we suffer from such low 
numbers of support by the American people.
  Mr. Speaker, soon that, however, will change. But today it is more of 
the same, and I am here to discuss the rule for the continuing 
resolution, known as a CR, for fiscal year 2011. It also includes the 
food safety bill which has been attached to that CR. So it is not a 
clean bill. My colleagues and I have not even had 24 hours to review 
the text of this legislation. This legislation, once again, continues 
to overspend and overregulate, a common theme over the last two 
Congresses. And we won't even use regular order to establish the 
process.
  The underlying legislation is a CR to keep the government running 
through the rest of this fiscal year. The President has not signed one 
appropriations bill into law for this fiscal year, and our friends, the 
majority Democrats, have provided no budget. So this is their last-
ditch effort to provide funding to keep the government running. Over 
the past 3 years, nondefense, nonhomeland security, and nonveterans 
affairs discretionary spending has increased by a staggering 88 
percent. In the meantime, the Nation's debt has risen to $13.5 
trillion--and that means that there is an additional $4.5 billion in 
deficit spending every single day. There have been back to back yearly 
record deficits day after day after day. The unemployment rate has 
risen--it is now at 9.5 percent--for 18 consecutive months. I might add 
that it rose to 9.8 percent in the latest economic report.
  This CR does nothing to reverse this trend and, instead, continues 
the unsustainable high rate of spending passed by the Democrat 
majority, aided by, supported, and abetted by the President of the 
United States, our President, Barack Obama. This includes more spending 
for Federal agencies that already had seen huge dollar increases with 
the stimulus bill in 2009.
  Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues and I have pledged to cut 
nonsecurity spending back to the fiscal levels of 2008, which would 
save the American taxpayers nearly $100 billion for what will end up 
being the next year of spending. Mr. Speaker, I believe that any 
responsible action by this House of Representatives should have been 
and should be to avoid raising the debt limit by making tough decisions 
today to avoid placing our children and our grandchildren in a further 
diminished position.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe the American people, as they look at their own 
personal circumstances and as they look at the irresponsibility out of 
Washington, unfortunately continue to see taxing, borrowing, and 
spending as a national problem. And that has brought us nothing but the 
results of higher unemployment, more debt, more bankruptcy, more homes 
being lost, and more debt. Americans have called for this endless spree 
to end and for an era of fiscal discipline. I think, once again, even 
though we are after the election, that message continues to fall on 
deaf ears again today.
  This country needs leaders who are willing to make tough decisions, 
fiscal decisions that will empower not only economic stability but also 
bring back to the American people jobs, the opportunity for them to be 
in a competitive marketplace and to understand that America must have 
jobs if we are going to provide our children and grandchildren with the 
future that they can believe in.
  Once again, it is the Congress of the United States that continues to 
lead the effort of us towards higher deficits, higher unemployment, and 
higher problems for people back home. We disagree with that.
  Mr. Speaker, as if the rampant spending wasn't enough, my colleagues, 
once again on the other side of the aisle, had to add what I consider 
to be an unfair and overregulated Senate food safety bill to the 
underlying legislation. Republicans remain committed to legislation 
that ensures the safety and security of America's food. However, this 
legislation comes at a heavy toll on producers and does virtually 
nothing to hold Federal bureaucrats accountable for their role in 
preventing food-borne illnesses. Oh, I'm sure we are going to hear 
about the number of people who get sick every year. We are going to 
blame everything on food processors and that process when, in fact, 
what we need to do is put rules and regulations in place that will 
better people's lives, and to allow the Federal Government to 
effectively work with consumers. That's not what this food safety bill 
does.
  The food safety measures in the underlying bill impose significant 
regulatory and cost burdens on the food processing and food producing 
system.

                              {time}  1510

  It increases costs for food producers and, ultimately, consumers and 
does not require the Federal Drug Administration to spend one 
additional penny on the inspection of food for safety purposes.
  The bill expands the FDA's authority to dictate on farm production 
practices and performance standards. This means Congress is about to 
give the FDA, who is already overworked and has limited resources and 
even less expertise, the specific power to dictate to U.S. farmers how 
best to farm. Our Nation's farmers do not need more Federal Government 
bureaucrats who sit behind a desk in Washington telling them how to do 
their job.
  Additionally, this legislation institutes and expands registration 
requirements for food processing facilities, which essentially amounts 
to a Federal license to be in the food business. This would make it 
unlawful to produce food without a registration license, allowing the 
FDA to suspend a company's registration, once again a big Federal 
empowered government in Washington, D.C., at the expense of jobs and 
the price that consumers have to pay.
  Like any Federal agency, the FDA makes mistakes, yet this bill does 
nothing to ensure agriculture producers don't take massive financial 
losses caused by the mistake of the FDA. For example, in 2008 when the 
FDA mistakenly attributed an outbreak of salmonella to tomatoes, it 
cost the industry $100 million.
  Mr. Speaker, there is no way for us to legislate out of Washington, 
and there is no way to ensure that the FDA will not make such mistakes 
again in the future and wrongly implicate agriculture processing to 
food-borne disease outbreaks that can once again cause severe economic 
losses to the farmers and ranchers of America who cannot only not 
afford them, but who produce the highest quality of safety products 
anywhere in the world to American consumers. This is not going to be 
addressed properly in this legislation. It is simply about empowering 
Federal bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.
  In an article in The Wall Street Journal from December 2, 2010, 
related to the food safety bill, it states that ``food-borne illnesses 
have fallen by nearly one-third over the last decade, largely because 
businesses have already every incentive to police themselves.'' Yet 
this legislation gives the FDA new powers over the 2.2 million farms 
and the 28,000 food producers in America.
  In true fashion, my Democrat colleagues continue to push their own 
agenda, overwhelming the American consumer. They have shut out 
Republicans over the last 4 years, and they continue to shut out common 
sense and the American people. Continuing on the path of reckless 
government spending will only put the United States further in debt, 
burdening future generations.

[[Page 19247]]

  Mr. Speaker, we disagree with taxing, spending, and overregulating. 
Overregulation that increases costs to consumers and food producers 
will add just another fiscal restraint on families, not just in the 
congressional district that I represent, but all across this country. 
Congress must do a better job. We tax too much, we spend too much, we 
regulate too much, and we listen too little in this Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, I think you can count me in that I oppose this rule and 
the underlying legislation.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the gentleman from Texas, 
I thank him for his views. We always appreciate hearing his unique 
point of view. I thought that the election ended several weeks ago, but 
apparently it hasn't.
  But I would just like to say for the record that we are in a 
difficult economy in large part because of the policies that were 
pursued by my friends on the other side of the aisle. We are in this 
debt that we are in now in large part because of tax cuts for mostly 
wealthy people that were not paid for; they took Bill Clinton's surplus 
and turned it into a deficit; a Medicare prescription drug bill that 
was double, triple the cost that it was advertised to be, not paid for; 
and two wars that are not paid for.
  On top of that, when they were in charge, they let the financial 
industries do whatever the heck they wanted to do. They did, and they 
stuck it to the American people, and we are now trying to dig ourselves 
out of this economy.
  I am sorry the gentleman is not for safer food safety measures, but 
let me just point out for the record that while the food supply in the 
United States is one of the safest in the world, each year about 76 
million illnesses occur, more than 300,000 persons are hospitalized, 
and 5,000 die from food-borne illnesses.
  An increasing portion of our food now comes from overseas, I am sad 
to say. Our food safety system was designed 100 years ago and was 
appropriate for a world in which most of our food was grown and 
processed domestically. Meanwhile, the FDA has struggled in recent 
years with outbreaks of food-borne illnesses and nationwide recalls of 
contaminated food from both domestic and foreign sources.
  The food safety bill that we will be voting on today modernizes our 
food safety system to better prevent food-borne illness and respond to 
outbreaks. I can't believe that a food safety bill designed to protect 
the American people is somehow controversial, but everything that we 
propose, everything that this President has proposed they are against, 
so there is nothing new here.
  Again, I would urge my colleagues to support the rule and the 
underlying bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact, I think the gentleman 
from Massachusetts is right. Much of what this President does propose 
and in these last two Congresses what they proposed, Republicans have 
objected to them, and it is for a simple reason: We don't want to 
support the things that don't work. We want to support the things that 
will help the American people not only to have a better economy and to 
take care of themselves, but we are not for growing the size of the 
Federal Government that is in our lives now, a food safety bill that 
will do what I believe is quite the reverse but will be expensive and 
will come at the cost of consumers bettering their ability to have a 
safe food chain.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Cheyenne, Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas).
  Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule on the 
continuing resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, among other things, I object to the inclusion of Senate 
language from S. 1510, the Food Safety Modernization Act.
  Let me be perfectly clear: I believe our Nation has the safest food 
supply in the world. What we have here is another expansion of Federal 
power without benefit of thorough consideration. This is the stimulus 
package, cap-and-trade, ObamaCare all over again.
  Members of the House Agriculture Committee have stood ready and 
willing to work on this legislation. Despite this, the present majority 
leadership tried to pass this under suspension of the rules and lost. 
Failing to learn the lesson of that vote, they then secured a closed 
rule and essentially rammed it through the House.
  Now, in the closing days of this Congress, the Senate has sent us 
their version on a take-it-or-leave-it basis and included revenue 
provisions that, under the Constitution, must originate in the House. 
Faced with this dilemma, once again the present House leadership has 
chosen to short-circuit the legislative process by sticking this 
legislation on the continuing resolution.
  This is the sort of nonsense that Americans rejected just a few weeks 
ago. Why isn't the present majority leadership listening?
  Now, for sure, we may have differences. However, I am confident that 
an open and deliberative process would allow us to resolve these 
differences. Unfortunately, the present leadership has chosen a path 
that denies the minority the opportunity to participate. I am certain 
this is not how they would like to be treated.
  Mr. Speaker, anyone who follows the current events knows that our 
food production system faces ongoing food safety challenges. I just 
want to serve notice that I stand ready to work with my colleagues to 
address those challenges. I must ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on 
the rule so that we can address those issues in regular order.

                              {time}  1520

  Mr. SESSIONS. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman, 
Mr. Lucas, the gentleman who was selected today by the new Republican 
majority this next Congress to be the Agriculture Committee chairman. 
The gentleman, Mr. Lucas, spoke very clearly not only on behalf of 
farmers and ranchers across this country, but really on behalf of a 
group of people who are in the food chain of this country, who all the 
way up through grocery stores and providers of content make sure that 
the food safety lines of this country are properly taken care of.
  There are so many food workers all across this country who have 
established not only high standards as a result of their advocacy for 
not just their job, but the greatest opportunity around the world for 
us to make sure that consumers get the benefit of clean food, the 
opportunity to know more about not only the caloric intake, but to make 
sure that the value of our food is held for consumers at a proper 
price.
  The gentleman, Mr. Lucas, has noted a number of times on the floor 
that this industry, the agricultural industry, and the supermarket 
industry really have taken steps to ensure that their products are not 
only safe and secure, but that consumers have an opportunity to 
understand how to utilize those products when they receive those 
products from a store, perhaps, or where they buy their products. And 
this is part of that chain that I believe that this legislation just 
misuses. And consumers, through their ability to use food, whether it's 
refrigeration, whether it's in cooking procedures, whether it's mixing 
these products, how they would hold these out certainly has a lot to do 
with the food safety and the aspects that come as a result of that.
  Mr. Speaker, you have heard me say it over and over, but the American 
people I think expect something better and different. I must confess 
that in the near future that what we will do when Republicans come to 
the floor this next Congress starting January 5, we will take the 
legislation and run it through committees. We will include feedback and 
ideas from not just Republicans, but also the Democrats who want to be 
a part of this process, who get up and come to this town to represent 
their people, people who have elected them, people who have confidence 
in the way we do things.
  Taxing, spending, overregulating is not the way that this Congress 
should run; and the American people feel that, unfortunately, so 
plainly. Today all

[[Page 19248]]

the way to the end, it is yet another example about how the American 
people see because they hear firsthand about overregulation, excessive 
spending, and continuation of more of the same.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I would ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the 
underlying legislation, to vote ``no'' to stop the reckless fiscal 
policies that not only Speaker Pelosi but the Democratic Party have 
pursued over the last 4 years. Irresponsible not only in terms of the 
fiduciary responsibility that they had to openly discuss with the 
American people, the appropriations process, the budgeting process, but 
perhaps more importantly, I believe what is the responsibility of this 
body to work effectively as a purveyor of the taxpayer money in working 
with the administration.
  All we have done is send them a signal, you go spend all the money 
you want, we will make it available to you, rather than an 
understanding of the give and take of the expectations of performance 
by the American people of where each of these dollars should be spent 
and what we should expect back in return. I think it's always bad when 
a blank check that's filled in is given to somebody without an 
understanding of that. The United States Government should not allow 
this. That will change.
  A vote ``no'' is going to allow farmers and food producers also, 
because this bill is together, it's going to take away their rights, 
it's going to add more rules and regulations, it's going to add more 
government interference, it's going to get in the way of what I believe 
is a food safety issue.
  It's time to end the idea of big government and big spending. We are 
here on the floor again to make sure that the American people 
understand this, that there is a group of people who will certainly see 
things differently.
  But I would like to say, Mr. Speaker, we will show up with better 
ideas. Get ready, hope is on the way.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman again for 
his comments and congratulate him and his party for their election 
victory. I look forward to voting for nothing but open rules next year. 
I also just want to say that we need to pass this rule so we can pass 
the continuing resolution, which is important, and to pass this food 
safety bill.
  And, again, I am baffled by the controversy. Anybody who has watched 
the news over the last several years remembers tainted spinach, tainted 
eggs, recall after recall after recall. The fact is that our food 
safety system in this country needs to be strengthened and modernized. 
Everybody knows that.
  I began my presentation today by listing the thousands and thousands 
and thousands of people who get sick each year from tainted food. And 
my friends on the other side of the aisle stand up, and they are 
standing with the special interests rather than with the consumer. And 
I worry, quite frankly, about the direction of this Congress, because 
they are heart and soul with the corporate special interests, and they 
neglect time and time again the average consumer, the average worker. 
And that is what this bill is about, to protect the consumer from 
tainted food that we get from other countries. Why is this so 
controversial? I don't know.
  So having said that, Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the 
previous question and on the rule.
  Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and 
particularly the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act.
  I want to thank Chairmen Dingell, Waxman and Pallone as well as the 
leadership for making this important legislation a priority.
  The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act will provide the FDA with some 
of the resources and authorities it needs to effectively monitor our 
nation's food supply and prevent outbreaks of food borne illness.
  As chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, I 
have held 13 food safety hearings over the past four years examining 
the failures of the FDA and the food industry to protect our nation's 
food supply.
  The findings of these investigations and related hearings highlighted 
the need for the first major overhaul of our food safety law in 70 
years! Among its key provisions, the bill would establish a national 
food tracing system and provide the FDA with recall authority.
  This food safety bill is not perfect but it is a dramatic improvement 
over current law. I urge the next Congress to look closely at providing 
the FDA a dedicated revenue stream for inspections, requiring country-
of-origin labeling and finally giving the FDA the subpoena power it so 
badly needs.
  Despite the lack of these provisions, this food safety bill is a good 
bill and one that deserves to be passed by the Congress and signed into 
law this year.
  Mr. McGOVERN. 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.
  Mr. SESSIONS. 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 House Resolution 1755 will be followed by 5-minute votes 
on motions to suspend the rules on H.R. 4501, by the yeas and nays; and 
House Resolution 1746, de novo.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 207, 
nays 206, not voting 21, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 619]

                               YEAS--207

     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Connolly (VA)
     Cooper
     Costello
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilroy
     Kind
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kosmas
     Kucinich
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Marshall
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McMahon
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis (CO)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Teague
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--206

     Aderholt
     Adler (NJ)
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Boccieri
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Bright
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Cao
     Capito
     Cardoza
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Chaffetz
     Childers
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Djou
     Donnelly (IN)

[[Page 19249]]


     Dreier
     Driehaus
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Guthrie
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Harman
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hoekstra
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan (OH)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kline (MN)
     Kratovil
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Minnick
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy (NY)
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Nadler (NY)
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Nye
     Olson
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Perriello
     Peters
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden
     Wamp
     Watt
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--21

     Berry
     Bilbray
     Blunt
     Buyer
     Cohen
     Davis (AL)
     Delahunt
     Ellsworth
     Fallin
     Gordon (TN)
     Granger
     Griffith
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Marchant
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mollohan
     Radanovich
     Rush
     Tiahrt
     Wu

                              {time}  1601

  Messrs. BOEHNER, NADLER of New York, CONYERS, SCOTT of Virginia, 
BOYD, THOMPSON of California, and WATT 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.

                          ____________________