[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 12588-12640]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2010

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1500, I call up 
the bill (H.R. 4899) making emergency supplemental appropriations for 
disaster relief and summer jobs for the fiscal year ending September 
30, 2010, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendments thereto, 
and offer the motion.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the Senate 
amendments.
  The text of the Senate amendments is as follows:

       Senate amendments:
       Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:

     That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in 
     the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes, namely:

                                TITLE I

                               CHAPTER 1

                       DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

                          Farm Service Agency

           agricultural credit insurance fund program account

       For an additional amount for gross obligations for the 
     principal amount of direct and guaranteed farm ownership (7 
     U.S.C. 1922 et seq.) and operating (7 U.S.C. 1941 et seq.) 
     loans, to be available from funds in the Agricultural Credit 
     Insurance Fund, as follows: guaranteed farm ownership loans, 
     $300,000,000; operating loans, $650,000,000, of which 
     $250,000,000 shall be for unsubsidized guaranteed loans, 
     $50,000,000 shall be for subsidized guaranteed loans, and 
     $350,000,000 shall be for direct loans.
       For an additional amount for the cost of direct and 
     guaranteed loans, including the cost of modifying loans as 
     defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, as follows: guaranteed farm ownership loans, 
     $1,110,000; operating loans, $29,470,000, of which $5,850,000 
     shall be for unsubsidized guaranteed loans, $7,030,000 shall 
     be for subsidized guaranteed loans, and $16,590,000 shall be 
     for direct loans.
       For an additional amount for administrative expenses 
     necessary to carry out the direct and guaranteed loan 
     programs, $1,000,000.

                  Emergency Forest Restoration Program

       For implementation of the emergency forest restoration 
     program established under section 407 of the Agricultural 
     Credit Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2206) for expenses resulting 
     from natural disasters that occurred on or after January 1, 
     2010, and for other purposes, $18,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That the program: (1) 
     shall be carried out without regard to chapter 35 of title 
     44, United States Code (commonly known as the ``Paperwork 
     Reduction Act'') and the Statement of Policy of the Secretary 
     of Agriculture effective July 24, 1971 (36 Fed. Reg. 13804), 
     relating to notices of proposed rulemaking and public 
     participation in rulemaking; and (2) with rules issued 
     without a prior opportunity for notice and comment except, as 
     determined to be appropriate by the Farm Service Agency, 
     rules may be promulgated by an interim rule effective on 
     publication with an opportunity for notice and comment: 
     Provided further, That in carrying out this program, the 
     Secretary shall use the authority provided under section 
     808(2) of title 5, United States Code: Provided further, That 
     to reduce Federal costs in administering this heading, the 
     emergency forest restoration program shall be considered to 
     have met the requirements of the National Environmental 
     Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) for activities 
     similar in nature and quantity to those of the emergency 
     conservation program established under title IV of the 
     Agricultural Credit Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.).

                      Foreign Agricultural Service

                     food for peace title ii grants

       For an additional amount for ``Food for Peace Title II 
     Grants'' for emergency relief and rehabilitation, and other 
     expenses related to Haiti following the earthquake of January 
     12, 2010, and for other disaster-response activities relating 
     to the earthquake, $150,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended.

                    GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER

       Section 101. None of the funds appropriated or made 
     available by this or any other Act shall be used to pay the 
     salaries and expenses of personnel to carry out a biomass 
     crop assistance program as authorized by section 9011 of 
     Public Law 107-171 in excess of $552,000,000 in fiscal year 
     2010 or $432,000,000 in fiscal year 2011: Provided, That 
     section 3002 shall not apply to the amount under this 
     section.

[[Page 12589]]

       Sec. 102. (a) Section 502(h)(8) of the Housing Act of 1949 
     (42 U.S.C. 1472(h)(8)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(8) Fees.--Notwithstanding paragraph (14)(D), with 
     respect to a guaranteed loan issued or modified under this 
     subsection, the Secretary may collect from the lender--
       ``(A) at the time of issuance of the guarantee or 
     modification, a fee not to exceed 3.5 percent of the 
     principal obligation of the loan; and
       ``(B) an annual fee not to exceed 0.5 percent of the 
     outstanding principal balance of the loan for the life of the 
     loan.''.
       (b) Section 739 of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food 
     and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriation 
     Act, 2001 (H.R. 5426 as enacted by Public Law 106-387, 115 
     Stat. 1549A-34) is repealed.
       (c) For gross obligations for the principal amount of 
     guaranteed loans as authorized by title V of the Housing Act 
     of 1949, to be available from funds in the rural housing 
     insurance fund, an additional amount shall be for section 502 
     unsubsidized guaranteed loans sufficient to meet the 
     remaining fiscal year 2010 demand, provided that existing 
     program underwriting standards are maintained, and provided 
     further that the Secretary may waive fees described herein 
     for very low- and low-income borrowers, not to exceed 
     $697,000,000 in loan guarantees.

                               CHAPTER 2

                         DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

       National Telecommunications and Information Administration

                              (rescission)

       Of the funds made available under the heading ``National 
     Telecommunications and Information Administration'' for 
     Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Program in prior years, 
     $111,500,000 are rescinded.

                  Economic Development Administration

                economic development assistance programs

       Pursuant to section 703 of the Public Works and Economic 
     Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3233), for an additional amount 
     for ``Economic Development Assistance Programs'', for 
     necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long-term 
     recovery, and restoration of infrastructure in States that 
     experienced damage due to severe storms and flooding during 
     March 2010 through May 2010 for which the President declared 
     a major disaster covering an entire State or States with more 
     than 20 counties declared major disasters under title IV of 
     the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
     Assistance Act of 1974, $49,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended.

            National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

                  operations, research, and facilities

       For an additional amount for ``Operations, Research, and 
     Facilities'', $5,000,000, for necessary expenses related to 
     commercial fishery failures as determined by the Secretary of 
     Commerce in January 2010.

             NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

                              Exploration

       The matter contained in title III of division B of Public 
     Law 111-117 regarding ``National Aeronautics and Space 
     Administration Exploration'' is amended by inserting at the 
     end of the last proviso ``: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law or regulation, 
     funds made available for Constellation in fiscal year 2010 
     for `National Aeronautics and Space Administration 
     Exploration' and from previous appropriations for `National 
     Aeronautics and Space Administration Exploration' shall be 
     available to fund continued performance of Constellation 
     contracts, and performance of such Constellation contracts 
     may not be terminated for convenience by the National 
     Aeronautics and Space Administration in fiscal year 2010''.

                               CHAPTER 3

                    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--MILITARY

                           MILITARY PERSONNEL

                        Military Personnel, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Army'', 
     $1,429,809,000.

                        Military Personnel, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Navy'', 
     $40,478,000.

                    Military Personnel, Marine Corps

       For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Marine 
     Corps'', $145,499,000.

                     Military Personnel, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Air 
     Force'', $94,068,000.

                        Reserve Personnel, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Army'', 
     $5,722,000.

                        Reserve Personnel, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Navy'', 
     $2,637,000.

                    Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps

       For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Marine 
     Corps'', $34,758,000.

                      Reserve Personnel, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Air 
     Force'', $1,292,000.

                     National Guard Personnel, Army

       For an additional amount for ``National Guard Personnel, 
     Army'', $33,184,000.

                       OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

                    Operation and Maintenance, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Army'', $11,719,927,000, of which $218,300,000 shall be 
     available to restore amounts transferred from this account to 
     ``Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid'' for 
     emergency relief activities related to Haiti following the 
     earthquake of January 12, 2010, and for other disaster-
     response activities relating to the earthquake.

                    Operation and Maintenance, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Navy'', $2,735,194,000, of which $187,600,000 shall be 
     available to restore amounts transferred from this account to 
     ``Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid'' for 
     emergency relief activities related to Haiti following the 
     earthquake of January 12, 2010, and for other disaster-
     response activities relating to the earthquake.

                Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Marine Corps'', $829,326,000, of which $30,700,000 shall be 
     available to restore amounts transferred from this account to 
     ``Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid'' for 
     emergency relief activities related to Haiti following the 
     earthquake of January 12, 2010, and for other disaster-
     response activities relating to the earthquake.

                  Operation and Maintenance, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Air Force'', $3,835,095,000, of which $218,400,000 shall be 
     available to restore amounts transferred from this account to 
     ``Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid'' for 
     emergency relief activities related to Haiti following the 
     earthquake of January 12, 2010, and for other disaster-
     response activities relating to the earthquake.

                Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Defense-Wide'', $1,236,727,000: Provided, That up to 
     $50,000,000, to remain available until expended, shall be 
     available for transfer to the Port of Guam Improvement 
     Enterprise Fund established by section 3512 of the Duncan 
     Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     2009 (Public Law 110-417): Provided further, That funds 
     transferred under the previous proviso shall be merged with 
     and available for obligation for the same time period and for 
     the same purposes as the appropriation to which transferred: 
     Provided further, That these funds may be transferred by the 
     Secretary of Defense only if he determines such amounts are 
     required to improve facilities, relieve port congestion, and 
     provide greater access to port facilities: Provided further, 
     That any amounts transferred pursuant to the previous three 
     provisos shall be available to the Secretary of 
     Transportation, acting through the Administrator of the 
     Maritime Administration, to carry out under the Port of Guam 
     Improvement Enterprise Program planning, design, and 
     construction of projects for the Port of Guam to improve 
     facilities, relieve port congestion, and provide greater 
     access to port facilities: Provided further, That the 
     transfer authority in this section is in addition to any 
     other transfer authority available to the Department of 
     Defense: Provided further, That the Secretary shall, not 
     fewer than five days prior to making transfers under this 
     authority, notify the congressional defense committees in 
     writing of the details of any such transfer.

                Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Army Reserve'', $41,006,000.

                Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Navy Reserve'', $75,878,000.

            Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Marine Corps Reserve'', $857,000.

              Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Air Force Reserve'', $124,039,000.

             Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Army National Guard'', $180,960,000.

             Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Air National Guard'', $203,287,000.

                    Afghanistan Security Forces Fund

       For an additional amount for ``Afghanistan Security Forces 
     Fund'', $2,604,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2011: Provided, That such funds shall be available to the 
     Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, for the purpose of allowing the Commander, Combined 
     Security Transition Command--Afghanistan, or the Secretary's 
     designee, to provide assistance, with the concurrence of the 
     Secretary of State, to the security forces of Afghanistan, 
     including the provision of equipment, supplies, services, 
     training, facility and infrastructure repair, renovation, and 
     construction, and funding: Provided further, That the 
     authority to provide assistance under this heading is in 
     addition to any other authority to provide assistance to 
     foreign nations: Provided further, That contributions of 
     funds for the purposes provided herein from any person, 
     foreign government, or international organization may be 
     credited to this Fund, to remain available until expended, 
     and used for such purposes: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary shall notify the congressional defense committees 
     in

[[Page 12590]]

     writing upon the receipt and upon the transfer of any 
     contribution, delineating the sources and amounts of the 
     funds received and the specific use of such contributions: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall, not 
     fewer than 15 days prior to making transfers from this 
     appropriation account, notify the congressional defense 
     committees in writing of the details of any such transfer.

                       Iraq Security Forces Fund

       For the ``Iraq Security Forces Fund'', $1,000,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2011: Provided, That 
     such funds shall be available to the Secretary of Defense, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, for the purpose 
     of allowing the Commander, United States Forces--Iraq, or the 
     Secretary's designee, to provide assistance, with the 
     concurrence of the Secretary of State, to the security forces 
     of Iraq, including the provision of equipment, supplies, 
     services, training, facility and infrastructure repair, and 
     renovation: Provided further, That the authority to provide 
     assistance under this heading is in addition to any other 
     authority to provide assistance to foreign nations: Provided 
     further, That contributions of funds for the purposes 
     provided herein from any person, foreign government, or 
     international organization may be credited to this Fund, to 
     remain available until expended, and used for such purposes: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary shall notify the 
     congressional defense committees in writing upon the receipt 
     and upon the transfer of any contribution, delineating the 
     sources and amounts of the funds received and the specific 
     use of such contributions: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary of Defense shall, not fewer than 15 days prior to 
     making transfers from this appropriation account, notify the 
     congressional defense committees in writing of the details of 
     any such transfer.

                              PROCUREMENT

                       Aircraft Procurement, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement, 
     Army'', $219,470,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2012.

        Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Weapons and 
     Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army'', $3,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2012.

                    Procurement of Ammunition, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Ammunition, 
     Army'', $17,055,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2012.

                        Other Procurement, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Army'', 
     $2,065,006,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.

                       Aircraft Procurement, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement, 
     Navy'', $296,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2012.

                        Other Procurement, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Navy'', 
     $31,576,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.

                       Procurement, Marine Corps

       For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Marine Corps'', 
     $162,927,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.

                    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement, Air 
     Force'', $174,766,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2012.

                      Other Procurement, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Air 
     Force'', $672,741,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2012.

                       Procurement, Defense-Wide

       For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'', 
     $189,276,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.

              Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle Fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For an additional amount for the ``Mine Resistant Ambush 
     Protected Vehicle Fund'', $1,123,000,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2011: Provided, That such funds shall be 
     available to the Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, to procure, sustain, transport, and 
     field Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles: Provided 
     further, That the Secretary shall transfer such funds only to 
     appropriations for operations and maintenance; procurement; 
     research, development, test and evaluation; and defense 
     working capital funds to accomplish the purpose provided 
     herein: Provided further, That the funds transferred shall be 
     merged with and available for the same purposes and the same 
     time period as the appropriation to which they are 
     transferred: Provided further, That this transfer authority 
     is in addition to any other transfer authority available to 
     the Department of Defense: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary shall, not fewer than 10 days prior to making 
     transfers from this appropriation, notify the congressional 
     defense committees in writing of the details of any such 
     transfer.

               RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

            Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test 
     and Evaluation, Navy'', $44,835,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2011.

         Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test 
     and Evaluation, Air Force'', $163,775,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2011.

        Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide

       For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test 
     and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'', $65,138,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2011.

                     REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS

                     Defense Working Capital Funds

       For an additional amount for ``Defense Working Capital 
     Funds'', $1,134,887,000, to remain available until expended.

                  OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS

                         Defense Health Program

       For an additional amount for ``Defense Health Program'', 
     $33,367,000 for operation and maintenance: Provided, That 
     language under this heading in title VI, division A of Public 
     Law 111-118 is amended by striking ``$15,093,539,000'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$15,121,714,000''.

             Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For an additional amount for ``Drug Interdiction and 
     Counter-Drug Activities, Defense'', $94,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2011.

                    GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER

       Sec. 301.  Funds appropriated by this Act, or made 
     available by the transfer of funds in this Act, for 
     intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically 
     authorized by the Congress for purposes of section 504(a)(1) 
     of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 414(a)(1)): 
     Provided, That section 8079 of the Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-118; 123 Stat. 3446) 
     is amended by striking ``fiscal year 2010 until'' and all 
     that follows and insert ``fiscal year 2010.''.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 302.  Section 8005 of the Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Act, 2010 (division A of Public Law 111-118) 
     is amended by striking ``$4,000,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$4,500,000,000''.
       Sec. 303.  Funds made available in this chapter to the 
     Department of Defense for operation and maintenance may be 
     used to purchase items having an investment unit cost of not 
     more than $250,000: Provided, That upon determination by the 
     Secretary of Defense that such action is necessary to meet 
     the operational requirements of a Commander of a Combatant 
     Command engaged in contingency operations overseas, such 
     funds may be used to purchase items having an investment item 
     unit cost of not more than $500,000.
       Sec. 304.  Of the funds obligated or expended by any 
     Federal agency in support of emergency humanitarian 
     assistance services at the request of or in coordination with 
     the Department of Defense, the Department of State, or the 
     U.S. Agency for International Development, on or after 
     January 12, 2010 and before February 12, 2010, in support of 
     the Haitian earthquake relief efforts not to exceed $500,000 
     are deemed to be specifically authorized by the Congress.
       Sec. 305.  Section 8011 of the title VIII, division A of 
     Public Law 111-118 is amended by striking ``within 30 days of 
     enactment of this Act'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``30 
     days prior to contract award''.

                             (rescissions)

       Sec. 306. (a) Of the funds appropriated in Department of 
     Defense Appropriation Acts, the following funds are hereby 
     rescinded from the following accounts and programs in the 
     specified amounts:
       ``Other Procurement, Air Force, 2009/2011'', $5,000,000; 
     and
       ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, 2009/
     2010'', $72,161,000.
       (b) Section 3002 shall not apply to the amounts in this 
     section.
       Sec. 307.  None of the funds provided in this chapter may 
     be used to finance programs or activities denied by Congress 
     in fiscal years 2009 or 2010 appropriations to the Department 
     of Defense or to initiate a procurement or research, 
     development, test and evaluation new start program without 
     prior written notification to the congressional defense 
     committees.

       high-value detainee interrogation group charter and report

       Sec. 308. (a) Submission of Charter and Procedures.--Not 
     later than 30 days after the final approval of the charter 
     and procedures for the interagency body established to carry 
     out an interrogation pursuant to a recommendation of the 
     report of the Special Task Force on interrogation and 
     Transfer Policies submitted under section 5(g) of Executive 
     Order 13491 (commonly known as the High-Value Detainee 
     Interrogation Group), or not later than 30 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, whichever is later, the 
     Director of National Intelligence shall submit to the 
     congressional intelligence committees such charter and 
     procedures.
       (b) Updates.--Not later than 30 days after the final 
     approval of any significant modification or revision to the 
     charter or procedures referred to in subsection (a), the 
     Director of National Intelligence shall submit to the 
     congressional intelligence committees any such modification 
     or revision.
       (c) Lessons Learned.--Not later than 60 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the

[[Page 12591]]

     Director of National Intelligence shall submit to the 
     congressional intelligence committees a report setting forth 
     an analysis and assessment of the lessons learned as a result 
     of the operations and activities of the High-Value Detainee 
     Interrogation Group since the establishment of that group.
       (d) Submittal of Charter and Reports to Additional 
     Committees of Congress.--At the same time the Director of 
     National Intelligence submits the charter and procedures 
     referred to in subsection (a), any modification or revision 
     to the charter or procedures under subsection (b), and any 
     report under subsection (c) to the congressional intelligence 
     committees, the Director shall also submit such matter to--
       (1) the Committees on Armed Services, Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs, the Judiciary, and Appropriations of 
     the Senate; and
       (2) the Committees on Armed Services, Homeland Security, 
     the Judiciary, and Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives.

                               CHAPTER 4

                      DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL

                         DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

                       Corps of Engineers--Civil

                             investigations

       For an additional amount for ``Investigations'', 
     $5,400,000: Provided, That funds provided under this heading 
     in this chapter shall be used for studies in States affected 
     by severe storms and flooding: Provided further, That the 
     Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works shall provide 
     a monthly report to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate detailing the 
     allocation and obligation of these funds, beginning not later 
     than 60 days after enactment of this Act.

                   mississippi river and tributaries

       For an additional amount for ``Mississippi River and 
     Tributaries'' to dredge eligible projects in response to, and 
     repair damages to Federal projects caused by, natural 
     disasters, $18,600,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil 
     Works shall provide a monthly report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate 
     detailing the allocation and obligation of these funds, 
     beginning not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act.

                       operation and maintenance

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance'' 
     to dredge navigation projects in response to, and repair 
     damages to Corps projects caused by, natural disasters, 
     $173,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That the Secretary of the Army is directed to use $44,000,000 
     of the amount provided under this heading for nondisaster 
     related emergency repairs to critical infrastructure: 
     Provided further, That the Assistant Secretary of the Army 
     for Civil Works shall provide a monthly report to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and the Senate detailing the allocation and obligation of 
     these funds, beginning not later than 60 days after enactment 
     of this Act.

                 flood control and coastal emergencies

       For an additional amount for ``Flood Control and Coastal 
     Emergencies'', as authorized by section 5 of the Act of 
     August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n), for necessary expenses 
     relating to natural disasters as authorized by law, 
     $20,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works 
     shall provide a monthly report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate 
     detailing the allocation and obligation of these funds, 
     beginning not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act.

                    GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER


                        emergency drought relief

       Sec. 401. For an additional amount for ``Water and Related 
     Resources'', $10,000,000, for drought emergency assistance: 
     Provided, That financial assistance may be provided under the 
     Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 (43 
     U.S.C. 2201 et seq.) and any other applicable Federal law 
     (including regulations) for the optimization and conservation 
     of project water supplies to assist drought-plagued areas of 
     the West.
       Sec. 402.  Funds made available in the Energy and Water 
     Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 
     (Public Law 111-85), under the account ``Weapons Activities'' 
     shall be available for the purchase of not to exceed one 
     aircraft.

  reclassification of certain appropriations for the national nuclear 
                        security administration

       Sec. 403. (a) Fiscal Year 2009 Appropriations.--The matter 
     under the heading ``Weapons Activities'' under the heading 
     ``National Nuclear Security Administration'' under the 
     heading ``Atomic Energy Defense Activities'' under the 
     heading ``Department of Energy'' under title III of division 
     C of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8; 
     123 Stat. 621) is amended by striking ``the 09-D-007 LANSCE 
     Refurbishment, PED,'' and inserting ``capital equipment 
     acquisition, installation, and associated design funds for 
     LANSCE,''.
       (b) Fiscal Year 2010 Appropriations.--The amount 
     appropriated under the heading ``Weapons Activities'' under 
     the heading ``National Nuclear Security Administration'' 
     under the heading ``Atomic Energy Defense Activities'' under 
     the heading ``Department of Energy'' under title III of the 
     Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-85; 123 Stat. 2866) 
     and made available for LANSCE Reinvestment, PED, Los Alamos 
     National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico, shall be made 
     available instead for capital equipment acquisition, 
     installation, and associated design funds for LANSCE, Los 
     Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico.
       Sec. 404. (a) Section 104(c) of the Reclamation States 
     Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 (43 U.S.C. 2214(c)) is 
     amended by striking ``September 30, 2010'' and inserting 
     ``September 30, 2012'' in lieu thereof.
       (b) Section 301 of the Reclamation States Emergency Drought 
     Relief Act of 1991 (43 U.S.C. 2241) is amended by striking 
     ``through 2010'' and inserting ``through 2012'' in lieu 
     thereof.
       Sec. 405. (a) The Secretary of the Army shall not be 
     required to make a determination under the National Historic 
     Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470, et seq.) for the 
     project for flood control, Trinity River and tributaries, 
     Texas, authorized by section 2 of the Act entitled ``An Act 
     authorizing the construction, repair, and preservation of 
     certain public works on rivers and harbors, and for other 
     purposes'', approved March 2, 1945 [59 Stat. 18], as modified 
     by section 5141 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     2007 [121 Stat. 1253].
       (b) The Federal Highway Administration is exempt from the 
     requirements of 49 U.S.C. 303 and 23 U.S.C. 138 for any 
     highway project to be constructed in the vicinity of the 
     Dallas Floodway, Dallas, Texas.
       Sec. 406. (a) The Secretary of the Army may use funds made 
     available under the heading ``operation and maintenance'' of 
     this chapter to place, at full Federal expense, dredged 
     material available from maintenance dredging of existing 
     Federal navigation channels located in the Gulf Coast region 
     to mitigate the impacts of the Deepwater Horizon Oil spill in 
     the Gulf of Mexico.
       (b) The Secretary of the Army shall coordinate the 
     placement of dredged material with appropriate Federal and 
     Gulf Coast State agencies.
       (c) The placement of dredged material pursuant to this 
     section shall not be subject to a least-cost-disposal 
     analysis or to the development of a Chief of Engineers 
     report.
       (d) Nothing in this section shall affect the ability or 
     authority of the Federal Government to recover costs from an 
     entity determined to be a responsible party in connection 
     with the Deepwater Horizon Oil spill pursuant to the Oil 
     Pollution Act of 1990 or any other applicable Federal statute 
     for actions undertaken pursuant to this section.

                               CHAPTER 5

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

                          Departmental Offices

                         salaries and expenses

       For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'' for 
     necessary expenses for emergency relief, rehabilitation, and 
     reconstruction aid, and other expenses related to Haiti 
     following the earthquake of January 12, 2010, and for other 
     disaster-response activities relating to the earthquake, 
     $690,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That 
     funds appropriated in this paragraph may be used to reimburse 
     obligations incurred for the purposes provided herein prior 
     to enactment of this Act.

                      Office of Inspector General

                         salaries and expenses

                              (rescission)

       Of the amounts made available for necessary expenses of the 
     Office of Inspector General under this heading in Public Law 
     111-117, $1,800,000 are rescinded: Provided, That section 
     3002 shall not apply to the amount under this heading.

                          DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

                             Federal Funds

  federal payment to the public defender service for the district of 
                                columbia

                         (including rescission)

       For an additional amount for ``Federal Payment to the 
     Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia'', 
     $700,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.
       Of the funds provided under this heading for ``Federal 
     Payment to the District of Columbia Public Defender Service'' 
     in title IV of division D of Public Law 111-8, $700,000 are 
     rescinded: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the 
     amounts under this heading.

                           INDEPENDENT AGENCY

                  Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For the necessary expenses of the Financial Crisis Inquiry 
     Commission established pursuant to section 5 of the Fraud 
     Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-21), 
     $1,800,000, to remain available until February 15, 2011: 
     Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount 
     under this heading.

                               CHAPTER 6

                    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

                              Coast Guard

                           operating expenses

       For an additional amount for ``Operating Expenses'' for 
     necessary expenses and other disaster-response activities 
     related to Haiti following the earthquake of January 12, 
     2010, $50,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2012.

              acquisition, construction, and improvements

       For an additional amount for ``Acquisition, Construction, 
     and Improvements'', $15,500,000,

[[Page 12592]]

     to remain available until September 30, 2014, for aircraft 
     replacement.

                  Federal Emergency Management Agency

                            disaster relief

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For an additional amount for ``Disaster Relief'', 
     $5,100,000,000, to remain available until expended, of which 
     $5,000,000 shall be transferred to the Department of Homeland 
     Security Office of the Inspector General for audits and 
     investigations related to disasters.

           United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

       For an additional amount for ``United States Citizenship 
     and Immigration Services'' for necessary expenses and other 
     disaster response activities related to Haiti following the 
     earthquake of January 12, 2010, $10,600,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2011.

                    GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER

       Sec. 601.  Notwithstanding the 10 percent limitation 
     contained in section 503(c) of Public Law 111-83, for fiscal 
     year 2010, the Secretary of Homeland Security may transfer to 
     the fund established by 8 U.S.C. 1101 note, up to 
     $20,000,000, from appropriations available to the Department 
     of Homeland Security: Provided, That the Secretary shall 
     notify the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and 
     House of Representatives 5 days in advance of such transfer.

                             (rescissions)

       Sec. 602. (a) The following unobligated balances made 
     available pursuant to section 505 of Public Law 110-329 are 
     rescinded: $2,200,000 from Coast Guard ``Operating 
     Expenses''; $1,800,000 from the ``Office of the Secretary and 
     Executive Management''; and $489,152 from ``Analysis and 
     Operations''.
       (b) The third clause of the proviso directing the 
     expenditure of funds under the heading ``Alteration of 
     Bridges'' in the Department of Homeland Security 
     Appropriations Act, 2009, is repealed, and from available 
     balances made available for Coast Guard ``Alteration of 
     Bridges'', $5,910,848 are rescinded: Provided, That funds 
     rescinded pursuant to this subsection shall exclude balances 
     made available in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 
     of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
       (c) From the unobligated balances of appropriations made 
     available in Public Law 111-83 to the ``Office of the Federal 
     Coordinator for Gulf Coast Rebuilding'', $700,000 are 
     rescinded.
       (d) Section 3002 shall not apply to the amounts in this 
     section.
       Sec. 603.  The Administrator of the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency shall consider satisfied for Hurricane 
     Katrina the non-Federal match requirement for assistance 
     provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency pursuant 
     to section 404(a) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 
     and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5170c(a).
       Sec. 604.  Funds appropriated in Public Law 111-83 under 
     the heading National Protection and Programs Directorate 
     ``Infrastructure Protection and Information Security'' shall 
     be available for facility upgrades and related costs to 
     establish a United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team 
     Operations Support Center/Continuity of Operations 
     capability.
       Sec. 605.  Two C-130J aircraft funded elsewhere in this Act 
     shall be transferred to the Coast Guard.
       Sec. 606.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     including any agreement, the Federal share of assistance, 
     including direct Federal assistance provided under sections 
     403, 406, and 407 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 
     and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5140b, 5172, and 
     5173), for damages resulting from FEMA-3311-EM-RI, FEMA-1894-
     DR, FEMA-1906-DR, FEMA-1909-DR, and all other areas 
     Presidentially declared a disaster, prior to or following 
     enactment, and resulting from the May 1 and 2, 2010 weather 
     events that elicited FEMA-1909-DR, shall not be less than 90 
     percent of the eligible costs under such sections.
       Sec. 607. (a) Not later than 30 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Assistant Secretary for the 
     Transportation Security Administration shall issue a security 
     directive that requires a commercial foreign air carrier who 
     operates flights in and out of the United States to check the 
     list of individuals that the Transportation Security 
     Administration has prohibited from flying not later than 30 
     minutes after such list is modified and provided to such air 
     carrier.
       (b) The requirements of subsection (a) shall not apply to 
     commercial foreign air carriers that operate flights in and 
     out of the United States and that are enrolled in the Secure 
     Flight program or that are Advance Passenger Information 
     System Quick Query (AQQ) compliant.

                               CHAPTER 7

                          DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

                        Departmental Management

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For an additional amount for ``Departmental Management'' 
     for mine safety activities and legal services related to the 
     Department of Labor's caseload before the Federal Mine Safety 
     and Health Review Commission (``FMSHRC''), $18,200,000, which 
     shall remain available for obligation through the date that 
     is 12 months after the date of enactment of this Act: 
     Provided, That the Secretary of Labor may transfer such sums 
     as necessary to the ``Mine Safety and Health Administration'' 
     for enforcement and mine safety activities, which may include 
     conference litigation functions related to the FMSHRC 
     caseload, investigation of the Upper Big Branch Mine 
     disaster, standards and rulemaking activities, emergency 
     response equipment purchases and upgrades, and organizational 
     improvements: Provided further, That the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     are notified at least 15 days in advance of any transfer.

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

                        Office of the Secretary

            public health and social services emergency fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For an additional amount for ``Public Health and Social 
     Services Emergency Fund'' for necessary expenses for 
     emergency relief and reconstruction aid, and other expenses 
     related to Haiti following the earthquake of January 12, 
     2010, and for other disaster-response activities relating to 
     the earthquake, $220,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That these funds may be transferred by 
     the Secretary to accounts within the Department of Health and 
     Human Services, shall be merged with the appropriation to 
     which transferred, and shall be available only for the 
     purposes provided herein: Provided further, That none of the 
     funds provided in this paragraph may be transferred prior to 
     notification of the Committees on Appropriations of the House 
     of Representatives and the Senate: Provided further, That the 
     transfer authority provided in this paragraph is in addition 
     to any other transfer authority available in this or any 
     other Act: Provided further, That funds appropriated in this 
     paragraph may be used to reimburse agencies for obligations 
     incurred for the purposes provided herein prior to enactment 
     of this Act: Provided further, That funds may be used for the 
     non-Federal share of expenditures for medical assistance 
     furnished under title XIX of the Social Security Act, and for 
     child health assistance furnished under title XXI of such 
     Act, that are related to earthquake response activities: 
     Provided further, That funds may be used for services 
     performed by the National Disaster Medical System in 
     connection with such earthquake, for the return of evacuated 
     Haitian citizens to Haiti, and for grants to States and other 
     entities to reimburse payments made for otherwise 
     uncompensated health and human services furnished in 
     connection with individuals given permission by the United 
     States Government to come from Haiti to the United States 
     after such earthquake, and not eligible for assistance under 
     such titles: Provided further, That the limitation in 
     subsection (d) of section 1113 of the Social Security Act 
     shall not apply with respect to any repatriation assistance 
     provided in response to the Haiti earthquake of January 12, 
     2010: Provided further, That with respect to the previous 
     proviso, such additional repatriation assistance shall only 
     be available from the funds appropriated herein.

                             RELATED AGENCY

            Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For an additional amount for ``Federal Mine Safety and 
     Health Review Commission, Salaries and Expenses''$3,800,000, 
     to remain available for obligation for 12 months after 
     enactment of this Act.

                               CHAPTER 8

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

      Payment to Widows and Heirs of Deceased Members of Congress

       For a payment to Joyce Murtha, widow of John P. Murtha, 
     late a Representative from Pennsylvania, $174,000: Provided, 
     That section 3002 shall not apply to this appropriation.

                             CAPITOL POLICE

                            General Expenses

       For an additional amount for ``Capitol Police, General 
     Expenses'' to purchase and install the indoor coverage 
     portion of the new radio system for the Capitol Police, 
     $12,956,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012: 
     Provided, That the Chief of the Capitol Police may not 
     obligate any of the funds appropriated under this heading 
     without approval of an obligation plan by the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives.

                               CHAPTER 9

                         MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

                      Military Construction, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Military Construction, 
     Army'', $242,296,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2012: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, such funds may be obligated and expended to carry out 
     planning and design and military construction projects not 
     otherwise authorized by law.

                    Military Construction, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Military Construction, Air 
     Force'', $406,590,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2012: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, such funds may be obligated and expended to carry out 
     planning and design and military construction projects not 
     otherwise authorized by law.

          Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Family Housing Operation and 
     Maintenance, Air Force'', $7,953,000.

[[Page 12593]]



                     DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

                    Veterans Benefits Administration

                       compensation and pensions

       For an additional amount for ``Compensation and Pensions'', 
     $13,377,189,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount 
     under this heading.

                    GENERAL PROVISION--THIS CHAPTER

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 901. (a) Of the amounts made available to the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs under the ``Construction, 
     Major Projects'' account, in fiscal year 2010 or previous 
     fiscal years, up to $67,000,000 may be transferred to the 
     ``Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund'' account or may 
     be retained in the ``Construction, Major Projects'' account 
     and used by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for such major 
     medical facility projects (as defined under section 8104(a) 
     of title 38, United States Code) that have been authorized by 
     law as the Secretary considers appropriate: Provided, That 
     any amount transferred from ``Construction, Major Projects'' 
     shall be derived from unobligated balances that are a direct 
     result of bid savings: Provided further, That no amounts may 
     be transferred from amounts that were designated by Congress 
     as an emergency requirement pursuant to the Concurrent 
     Resolution on the Budget or the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
     Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended.
       (b) Section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in this 
     section.


  limitation on use of funds available to the department of veterans 
                                affairs

       Sec. 902. The amount made available to the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs by this chapter under the heading ``Veterans 
     Benefits Administration'' under the heading ``compensation 
     and pensions'' may not be obligated or expended until the 
     expiration of the period for Congressional disapproval under 
     chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred 
     to as the ``Congressional Review Act''), of the regulations 
     prescribed by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs pursuant to 
     section 1116 of title 38, United States Code, to establish a 
     service connection between exposure of veterans to Agent 
     Orange during service in the Republic of Vietnam during the 
     Vietnam era and hairy cell leukemia and other chronic B cell 
     leukemias, Parkinson's disease, and ischemic heart disease.

                               CHAPTER 10

                          DEPARTMENT OF STATE

                   Administration of Foreign Affairs

                    diplomatic and consular programs

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For an additional amount for ``Diplomatic and Consular 
     Programs'', $1,261,000,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2011: Provided, That the Secretary of State may 
     transfer up to $149,500,000 of the total funds made available 
     under this heading to any other appropriation of any 
     department or agency of the United States, upon concurrence 
     of the head of such department or agency and after 
     consultation with the Committees on Appropriations, to 
     support operations in and assistance for Afghanistan and 
     Pakistan and to carry out the provisions of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961.
       For an additional amount for ``Diplomatic and Consular 
     Programs'' for necessary expenses for emergency relief, 
     rehabilitation, and reconstruction support, and other 
     expenses related to Haiti following the earthquake of January 
     12, 2010, $65,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2011: Provided, That funds appropriated in this paragraph 
     may be used to reimburse obligations incurred for the 
     purposes provided herein prior to enactment of this Act: 
     Provided further, That up to $3,700,000 of the funds made 
     available in this paragraph may be transferred to, and merged 
     with, funds made available under the heading ``Emergencies in 
     the Diplomatic and Consular Service'': Provided further, That 
     up to $290,000 of the funds made available in this paragraph 
     may be transferred to, and merged with, funds made available 
     under the heading ``Repatriation Loans Program Account''.

                      office of inspector general

       For an additional amount for ``Office of Inspector 
     General'' for necessary expenses for oversight of operations 
     and programs in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq, $3,600,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2013.

            embassy security, construction, and maintenance

       For an additional amount for ``Embassy Security, 
     Construction, and Maintenance'' for necessary expenses for 
     emergency needs in Haiti following the earthquake of January 
     12, 2010, $79,000,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That funds appropriated in this paragraph may be 
     used to reimburse obligations incurred for the purposes 
     provided herein prior to enactment of this Act.

                      International Organizations

        contributions for international peacekeeping activities

       For an additional amount for ``Contributions for 
     International Peacekeeping Activities'' for necessary 
     expenses for emergency security related to Haiti following 
     the earthquake of January 12, 2010, $96,500,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2011: Provided, That funds 
     appropriated in this paragraph may be used to reimburse 
     obligations incurred for the purposes provided herein prior 
     to enactment of this Act.

                             RELATED AGENCY

                    Broadcasting Board of Governors

                 international broadcasting operations

       For an additional amount for ``International Broadcasting 
     Operations'' for necessary expenses for emergency 
     broadcasting support and other expenses related to Haiti 
     following the earthquake of January 12, 2010, $3,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2011: Provided, That 
     funds appropriated in this paragraph may be used to reimburse 
     obligations incurred for the purposes provided herein prior 
     to enactment of this Act.

           UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

                  Funds Appropriated to the President

                      office of inspector general

       For an additional amount for ``Office of Inspector 
     General'' for necessary expenses for oversight of operations 
     and programs in Afghanistan and Pakistan, $3,400,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2013.
       For an additional amount for ``Office of Inspector 
     General'' for necessary expenses for oversight of emergency 
     relief, rehabilitation, and reconstruction aid, and other 
     expenses related to Haiti following the earthquake of January 
     12, 2010, $4,500,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2012: Provided, That up to $1,500,000 of the funds 
     appropriated in this paragraph may be used to reimburse 
     obligations incurred for the purposes provided herein prior 
     to enactment of this Act.

                     BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE

                  Funds Appropriated to the President

                    global health and child survival

       For an additional amount for ``Global Health and Child 
     Survival'' for necessary expenses for pandemic preparedness 
     and response, $45,000,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2011.

                   international disaster assistance

       For an additional amount for ``International Disaster 
     Assistance'' for necessary expenses for emergency relief and 
     rehabilitation, and other expenses related to Haiti following 
     the earthquake of January 12, 2010, $460,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That funds appropriated 
     in this paragraph may be used to reimburse obligations 
     incurred for the purposes provided herein prior to enactment 
     of this Act.

                         Economic Support Fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For an additional amount for ``Economic Support Fund'', 
     $1,620,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012, 
     of which not less than $1,309,000,000 shall be made available 
     for assistance for Afghanistan and not less than $259,000,000 
     shall be made available for assistance for Pakistan: 
     Provided, That funds appropriated under this heading in this 
     Act and in prior Acts making appropriations for the 
     Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs 
     that are made available for assistance for Afghanistan may be 
     made available, after consultation with the Committees on 
     Appropriations, for disarmament, demobilization and 
     reintegration activities, subject to the requirements of 
     section 904(e) in this chapter, and for a United States 
     contribution to an internationally managed fund to support 
     the reintegration into Afghan society of individuals who have 
     renounced violence against the Government of Afghanistan.
       For an additional amount for ``Economic Support Fund'' for 
     necessary expenses for emergency relief, rehabilitation, and 
     reconstruction aid, and other expenses related to Haiti 
     following the earthquake of January 12, 2010, $770,000,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2012: Provided, That 
     of the funds appropriated in this paragraph, up to 
     $120,000,000 may be transferred to the Department of the 
     Treasury for United States contributions to a multi-donor 
     trust fund for reconstruction and recovery efforts in Haiti: 
     Provided further, That of the funds appropriated in this 
     paragraph, up to $10,000,000 may be transferred to, and 
     merged with, funds made available under the heading ``United 
     States Agency for International Development, Funds 
     Appropriated to the President, Operating Expenses'' for 
     administrative costs relating to the purposes provided herein 
     and to reimburse obligations incurred for the purposes 
     provided herein prior to enactment of this Act: Provided 
     further, That funds appropriated in this paragraph may be 
     transferred to, and merged with, funds available under the 
     heading ``Development Credit Authority'' for the purposes 
     provided herein: Provided further, That such transfer 
     authority is in addition to any other transfer authority 
     provided by this or any other Act: Provided further, That 
     funds made available to the Comptroller General pursuant to 
     title I, chapter 4 of Public Law 106-31, to monitor the 
     provision of assistance to address the effects of hurricanes 
     in Central America and the Caribbean, shall also be available 
     to the Comptroller General to monitor relief, rehabilitation, 
     and reconstruction aid, and other expenses related to Haiti 
     following the earthquake of January 12, 2010, and shall 
     remain available until expended: Provided further, That funds 
     appropriated in this paragraph may be made available to the 
     United States Agency for International Development and the 
     Department of State to reimburse any accounts for obligations 
     incurred for the purpose provided herein prior to enactment 
     of this Act.
       For an additional amount for ``Economic Support Fund'' for 
     necessary expenses for assistance for Jordan, $100,000,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2012.

[[Page 12594]]



                          Department of State

                    migration and refugee assistance

       For an additional amount for ``Migration and Refugee 
     Assistance'' for necessary expenses for assistance for 
     refugees and internally displaced persons, $165,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended.

                       Department of the Treasury

               international affairs technical assistance

       For an additional amount for ``International Affairs 
     Technical Assistance'' for necessary expenses for emergency 
     relief, rehabilitation, and reconstruction aid, and other 
     expenses related to Haiti following the earthquake of January 
     12, 2010, $7,100,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2012: Provided, That of the funds appropriated in this 
     paragraph, up to $60,000 may be used to reimburse obligations 
     incurred for the purposes provided herein prior to enactment 
     of this Act.

                   INTERNATIONAL SECURITY ASSISTANCE

                          Department of State

          international narcotics control and law enforcement

       For an additional amount for ``International Narcotics 
     Control and Law Enforcement'', $1,034,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2012: Provided, That of the 
     funds appropriated under this heading, not less than 
     $650,000,000 shall be made available for assistance for Iraq 
     of which $450,000,000 is for one-time start up costs and 
     limited operational costs of the Iraqi police program, and 
     $200,000,000 is for implementation, management, security, 
     communications, and other expenses related to such program 
     and may be obligated only after the Secretary of State 
     determines and reports to the Committees on Appropriations 
     that the Government of Iraq supports and is cooperating with 
     such program: Provided further, That funds appropriated in 
     this chapter for assistance for Iraq shall not be subject to 
     the limitation on assistance in section 7042(b)(1) of 
     division F of Public Law 111-117: Provided further, That of 
     the funds appropriated in this paragraph, not less than 
     $169,000,000 shall be made available for assistance for 
     Afghanistan and not less than $40,000,000 shall be made 
     available for assistance for Pakistan: Provided further, That 
     of the funds appropriated under this heading, $175,000,000 
     shall be made available for assistance for Mexico for 
     judicial reform, institution building, anti-corruption, and 
     rule of law activities, and shall be available subject to 
     prior consultation with, and the regular notification 
     procedures of, the Committees on Appropriations.
       For an additional amount for ``International Narcotics 
     Control and Law Enforcement'' for necessary expenses for 
     emergency relief, rehabilitation, and reconstruction aid, and 
     other expenses related to Haiti following the earthquake of 
     January 12, 2010, $147,660,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2012: Provided, That funds appropriated in this 
     paragraph may be used to reimburse obligations incurred for 
     the purposes provided herein prior to enactment of this Act.

                  Funds Appropriated to the President

                   foreign military financing program

       For an additional amount for ``Foreign Military Financing 
     Program'', $100,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2012, of which not less than $50,000,000 shall be made 
     available for assistance for Pakistan and not less than 
     $50,000,000 shall be made available for assistance for 
     Jordan.

                    GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER

                        extension of authorities

       Sec. 1001.  Funds appropriated in this chapter may be 
     obligated and expended notwithstanding section 10 of Public 
     Law 91-672 (22 U.S.C. 2412), section 15 of the State 
     Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 6212), 
     and section 504(a)(1) of the National Security Act of 1947 
     (50 U.S.C. 414(a)(1)).

                              allocations

       Sec. 1002. (a) Funds appropriated in this chapter for the 
     following accounts shall be made available for programs and 
     countries in the amounts contained in the respective tables 
     included in the report accompanying this Act:
       (1) ``Diplomatic and Consular Programs''.
       (2) ``Economic Support Fund''.
       (3) ``International Narcotics Control and Law 
     Enforcement''.
       (b) For the purposes of implementing this section, and only 
     with respect to the tables included in the report 
     accompanying this Act, the Secretary of State and the 
     Administrator of the United States Agency for International 
     Development, as appropriate, may propose deviations to the 
     amounts referred in subsection (a), subject to the regular 
     notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations 
     and section 634A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.

               spending plans and notification procedures

       Sec. 1003. (a) Spending Plans.--Not later than 45 days 
     after enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State, in 
     consultation with the Administrator of the United States 
     Agency for International Development, and the Broadcasting 
     Board of Governors, shall submit reports to the Committees on 
     Appropriations detailing planned uses of funds appropriated 
     in this chapter, except for funds appropriated under the 
     headings ``International Disaster Assistance'' and 
     ``Migration and Refugee Assistance''.
       (b) Obligation Reports.--The Secretary of State, in 
     consultation with the Administrator of the United States 
     Agency for International Development, and the Broadcasting 
     Board of Governors, shall submit reports to the Committees on 
     Appropriations not later than 90 days after enactment of this 
     Act, and every 180 days thereafter until September 30, 2012, 
     on obligations, expenditures, and program outputs and 
     outcomes.
       (c) Notification.--Funds made available in this chapter 
     shall be subject to the regular notification procedures of 
     the Committees on Appropriations and section 634A of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, except for funds appropriated 
     under the headings ``International Disaster Assistance'' and 
     ``Migration and Refugee Assistance''.

                              afghanistan

       Sec. 1004. (a) The terms and conditions of sections 
     1102(a), (b)(1), (c), and (d) of Public Law 111-32 shall 
     apply to funds appropriated in this chapter that are 
     available for assistance for Afghanistan.
       (b) Funds appropriated in this chapter and in prior Acts 
     making appropriations for the Department of State, foreign 
     operations, and related programs under the headings 
     ``Economic Support Fund'' and ``International Narcotics 
     Control and Law Enforcement'' that are available for 
     assistance for Afghanistan may be obligated only if the 
     Secretary of State reports to the Committees on 
     Appropriations that prior to the disbursement of funds, 
     representatives of the Afghan national, provincial or local 
     government, local communities and civil society 
     organizations, as appropriate, will be consulted and 
     participate in the design of programs, projects, and 
     activities, and following such disbursement will participate 
     in implementation and oversight, and progress will be 
     measured against specific benchmarks.
       (c)(1) Funds appropriated in this chapter may be made 
     available for assistance for the Government of Afghanistan 
     only if the Secretary of State determines and reports to the 
     Committees on Appropriations that the Government of 
     Afghanistan is--
       (A) cooperating with United States reconstruction and 
     reform efforts;
       (B) demonstrating a commitment to accountability by 
     removing corrupt officials, implementing fiscal transparency 
     and other necessary reforms of government institutions, and 
     facilitating active public engagement in governance and 
     oversight of public resources; and
       (C) respecting the internationally recognized human rights 
     of Afghan women.
       (2) If at any time after making the determination required 
     in paragraph (1) the Secretary receives credible information 
     that the factual basis for such determination no longer 
     exists, the Secretary should suspend assistance and promptly 
     inform the relevant Afghan authorities that such assistance 
     is suspended until sufficient factual basis exists to support 
     the determination.
       (d) Funds appropriated in this chapter and in prior Acts 
     that are available for assistance for Afghanistan may be made 
     available to support reconciliation with, or reintegration 
     of, former combatants only if the Secretary of State 
     determines and reports to the Committees on Appropriations 
     that--
       (1) Afghan women are participating at national, provincial 
     and local levels of government in the design, policy 
     formulation and implementation of the reconciliation or 
     reintegration process, and women's internationally recognized 
     human rights are protected in such process; and
       (2) such funds will not be used to support any pardon, 
     immunity from prosecution or amnesty, or any position in the 
     Government of Afghanistan or security forces, for any leader 
     of an armed group responsible for crimes against humanity, 
     war crimes, or other violations of internationally recognized 
     human rights.
       (e) Funds appropriated in this chapter that are available 
     for assistance for Afghanistan may be made available to 
     support the work of the Independent Electoral Commission and 
     the Electoral Complaints Commission in Afghanistan only if 
     the Secretary of State determines and reports to the 
     Committees on Appropriations that--
       (1) the Independent Electoral Commission has no members or 
     other employees who participated in, or helped to cover up, 
     acts of fraud in the 2009 elections for president in 
     Afghanistan, and the Electoral Complaints Commission is a 
     genuinely independent body with all the authorities that were 
     invested in it under Afghanistan law as of December 31, 2009, 
     and with no members appointed by the President of 
     Afghanistan; and
       (2) the central Government of Afghanistan has taken steps 
     to ensure that women are able to exercise their rights to 
     political participation, whether as candidates or voters.
       (f)(1) Not more than 45 days after enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary of State, in consultation with the 
     Administrator of the United States Agency for International 
     Development, shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations 
     a strategy to address the needs and protect the rights of 
     Afghan women and girls, including planned expenditures of 
     funds appropriated in this chapter, and detailed plans for 
     implementing and monitoring such strategy.
       (2) Such strategy shall be coordinated with and support the 
     goals and objectives of the National Action Plan for Women of 
     Afghanistan and the Afghan National Development Strategy and 
     shall include a defined scope and methodology to measure the 
     impact of such assistance.
       (g)(1) Notwithstanding section 303 of the Federal Property 
     and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C. 253) and 
     requirements for awarding task orders under task and delivery 
     order contracts under section 303J of such Act (41

[[Page 12595]]

     U.S.C. 253j), the Secretary of State may award task orders 
     for police training in Afghanistan under current Department 
     of State contracts for police training.
       (2) Any task order awarded under paragraph (1) shall be for 
     a limited term and shall remain in performance only until a 
     successor contract or contracts awarded by the Department of 
     Defense using full and open competition have entered into 
     full performance after completion of any start-up or 
     transition periods.

                                pakistan

       Sec. 1005. (a) Funds appropriated in this chapter and in 
     prior Acts making appropriations for the Department of State, 
     foreign operations, and related programs under the headings 
     ``Foreign Military Financing Program'' and ``Pakistan 
     Counterinsurgency Capability Fund'' shall be made available--
       (1) in a manner that promotes unimpeded access by 
     humanitarian organizations to detainees, internally displaced 
     persons, and other Pakistani civilians adversely affected by 
     the conflict; and
       (2) in accordance with section 620J of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961, and the Secretary of State shall 
     inform relevant Pakistani authorities of the requirements of 
     section 620J and of its application, and regularly monitor 
     units of Pakistani security forces that receive United States 
     assistance and the performance of such units.
       (b)(1) Of the funds appropriated in this chapter under the 
     heading ``Economic Support Fund'' for assistance for 
     Pakistan, $5,000,000 shall be made available through the 
     Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Department of 
     State, for human rights programs in Pakistan, including 
     training of government officials and security forces, and 
     assistance for human rights organizations.
       (2) Not later than 90 days after enactment of this Act and 
     prior to the obligation of funds under this subsection, the 
     Secretary of State shall submit to the Committees on 
     Appropriations a human rights strategy in Pakistan including 
     the proposed uses of funds.
       (c) Of the funds appropriated in this chapter under the 
     heading ``Economic Support Fund'' for assistance for 
     Pakistan, up to $1,500,000 should be made available to the 
     Department of State and the United States Agency for 
     International Development for the lease of aircraft to 
     implement programs and conduct oversight in northwestern 
     Pakistan, which shall be coordinated under the authority of 
     the United States Chief of Mission in Pakistan.

                                  iraq

       Sec. 1006. (a) The uses of aircraft in Iraq purchased or 
     leased with funds made available under the headings 
     ``International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement'' and 
     ``Diplomatic and Consular Affairs'' in this chapter and in 
     prior Acts making appropriations for the Department of State, 
     foreign operations, and related programs shall be coordinated 
     under the authority of the United States Chief of Mission in 
     Iraq.
       (b) The terms and conditions of section 1106(b) of Public 
     Law 111-32 shall apply to funds made available in this 
     chapter for assistance for Iraq under the heading 
     ``International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement''.
       (c) Of the funds appropriated in this chapter and in prior 
     acts making appropriations for the Department of State, 
     foreign operations, and related programs under the headings 
     ``Diplomatic and Consular Programs'' and ``Embassy Security, 
     Construction, and Maintenance'' for Afghanistan, Pakistan and 
     Iraq, up to $300,000,000 may, after consultation with the 
     Committees on Appropriations, be transferred between, and 
     merged with, such appropriations for activities related to 
     security for civilian led operations in such countries.

                                 haiti

       Sec. 1007. (a) Funds appropriated in this chapter and in 
     prior Acts making appropriations for the Department of State, 
     foreign operations, and related programs under the headings 
     ``Economic Support Fund'' and ``International Narcotics 
     Control and Law Enforcement'' that are available for 
     assistance for Haiti may be obligated only if the Secretary 
     of State reports to the Committees on Appropriations that 
     prior to the disbursement of funds, representatives of the 
     Haitian national, provincial or local government, local 
     communities and civil society organizations, as appropriate, 
     will be consulted and participate in the design of programs, 
     projects, and activities, and following such disbursement 
     will participate in implementation and oversight, and 
     progress will be measured against specific benchmarks.
       (b)(1) Funds appropriated in this chapter under the 
     headings ``Economic Support Fund'' and ``International 
     Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement'' may be made available 
     for assistance for the Government of Haiti only if the 
     Secretary of State determines and reports to the Committees 
     on Appropriations that the Government of Haiti is--
       (A) cooperating with United States reconstruction and 
     reform efforts; and
       (B) demonstrating a commitment to accountability by 
     removing corrupt officials, implementing fiscal transparency 
     and other necessary reforms of government institutions, and 
     facilitating active public engagement in governance and 
     oversight of public resources.
       (2) If at any time after making the determination required 
     in paragraph (1) the Secretary receives credible information 
     that the factual basis for making such determination no 
     longer exists, the Secretary should suspend assistance and 
     promptly inform the relevant Haitian authorities that such 
     assistance is suspended until sufficient factual basis exists 
     to support the determination.
       (c)(1) Funds appropriated in this chapter for bilateral 
     assistance for Haiti may be provided as direct budget support 
     to the central Government of Haiti only if the Secretary of 
     State reports to the Committees on Appropriations that the 
     Government of the United States and the Government of Haiti 
     have agreed, in writing, to clear and achievable goals and 
     objectives for the use of such funds, and have established 
     mechanisms within each implementing agency to ensure that 
     such funds are used for the purposes for which they were 
     intended.
       (2) The Secretary should suspend any such direct budget 
     support to an implementing agency if the Secretary has 
     credible evidence of misuse of such funds by any such agency.
       (3) Any such direct budget support shall be subject to 
     prior consultation with the Committees on Appropriations.
       (d) Funds appropriated in this chapter that are made 
     available for assistance for Haiti shall be made available, 
     to the maximum extent practicable, in a manner that 
     emphasizes the participation and leadership of Haitian women 
     and directly improves the security, economic and social well-
     being, and political status of Haitian women and girls.
       (e) Funds appropriated in this chapter may be made 
     available for assistance for Haiti notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, except for section 620J of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 and provisions of this chapter.

                           haiti debt relief

       Sec. 1008. (a) For an additional amount for ``Contribution 
     to the Inter-American Development Bank'', ``Contribution to 
     the International Development Association'', and 
     ``Contribution to the International Fund for Agricultural 
     Development'', to cancel Haiti's existing debts and 
     repayments on disbursements from loans committed prior to 
     January 12, 2010, and for the United States share of an 
     increase in the resources of the Fund for Special Operations 
     of the Inter-American Development Bank, to the extent 
     separately authorized in this chapter, in furtherance of 
     providing debt relief for Haiti in view of the Cancun 
     Declaration of March 21, 2010, a total of $212,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2012.
       (b) Up to $40,000,000 of the amounts appropriated under the 
     heading ``Department of the Treasury, Debt Restructuring'' in 
     prior Acts making appropriations for the Department of State, 
     foreign operations, and related programs may be used to 
     cancel Haiti's existing debts and repayments on disbursements 
     from loans committed prior to January 12, 2010, to the Inter-
     American Development Bank, the International Development 
     Association, and the International Fund for Agricultural 
     Development, and for the United States share of an increase 
     in the resources of the Fund for Special Operations of the 
     Inter-American Development Bank in furtherance of providing 
     debt relief to Haiti in view of the Cancun Declaration of 
     March 21, 2010.

                      haiti debt relief authority

       Sec. 1009.  The Inter-American Development Bank Act, Public 
     Law 86-147, as amended (22 U.S.C. 283 et seq.), is further 
     amended by adding at the end thereof the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 40. AUTHORITY TO VOTE FOR AND CONTRIBUTE TO AN 
                   INCREASE IN RESOURCES OF THE FUND FOR SPECIAL 
                   OPERATIONS; PROVIDING DEBT RELIEF TO HAITI.

       ``(a) Vote Authorized.--In accordance with section 5 of 
     this Act, the United States Governor of the Bank is 
     authorized to vote in favor of a resolution to increase the 
     resources of the Fund for Special Operations up to 
     $479,000,000, in furtherance of providing debt relief for 
     Haiti in view of the Cancun Declaration of March 21, 2010, 
     which provides that:
       ``(1) Haiti's debts to the Fund for Special Operations are 
     to be cancelled;
       ``(2) Haiti's remaining local currency conversion 
     obligations to the Fund for Special Operations are to be 
     cancelled;
       ``(3) undisbursed balances of existing loans of the Fund 
     for Special Operations to Haiti are to be converted to 
     grants; and
       ``(4) the Fund for Special Operations is to make available 
     significant and immediate grant financing to Haiti as well as 
     appropriate resources to other countries remaining as 
     borrowers within the Fund for Special Operations, consistent 
     with paragraph 6 of the Cancun Declaration of March 21, 2010.
       ``(b) Contribution Authority.--To the extent and in the 
     amount provided in advance in appropriations Acts the United 
     States Governor of the Bank may, on behalf of the United 
     States and in accordance with section 5 of this Act, 
     contribute up to $252,000,000 to the Fund for Special 
     Operations, which will provide for debt relief of:
       ``(1) up to $240,000,000 to the Fund for Special 
     Operations;
       ``(2) up to $8,000,000 to the International Fund For 
     Agricultural Development (IFAD); and
       ``(3) up to $4,000,000 for the International Development 
     Association (IDA).
       ``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--To pay for the 
     contribution authorized under subsection (b), there are 
     authorized to be appropriated, without fiscal year 
     limitation, for payment by the Secretary of the Treasury 
     $212,000,000, for the United States contribution to the Fund 
     for Special Operations.''.

                                 mexico

       Sec. 1010. (a) For purposes of funds appropriated in this 
     chapter and in prior Acts making appropriations for the 
     Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs 
     under the

[[Page 12596]]

     heading ``International Narcotics Control and Law 
     Enforcement'' that are made available for assistance for 
     Mexico, the provisions of paragraphs (1) through (3) of 
     section 7045(e) of the Department of State, Foreign 
     Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2009 
     (division H of Public Law 111-8) shall apply and the report 
     required in paragraph (1) shall be based on a determination 
     by the Secretary of State of compliance with each of the 
     requirements in paragraph (1)(A) through (D).
       (b) Funds appropriated in this chapter under the heading 
     ``International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement'' that 
     are available for assistance for Mexico may be made available 
     only after the Secretary of State submits a report to the 
     Committees on Appropriations detailing a coordinated, multi-
     year, interagency strategy to address the causes of drug-
     related violence and other organized criminal activity in 
     Central and South America, Mexico, and the Caribbean, which 
     shall describe--
       (1) the United States multi-year strategy for the region, 
     including a description of key challenges in the source, 
     transit, and demand zones; the key objectives of the 
     strategy; and a detailed description of outcome indicators 
     for measuring progress toward such objectives;
       (2) the integration of diplomatic, administration of 
     justice, law enforcement, civil society, economic 
     development, demand reduction, and other assistance to 
     achieve such objectives;
       (3) progress in phasing out law enforcement activities of 
     the militaries of each recipient country, as applicable; and
       (4) governmental efforts to investigate and prosecute 
     violations of internationally recognized human rights.
       (c) Of the funds appropriated in this chapter under the 
     heading ``Diplomatic and Consular Programs'', up to 
     $5,000,000 may be made available for armored vehicles and 
     other emergency diplomatic security support for United States 
     Government personnel in Mexico.

                              el salvador

       Sec. 1011.  Of the funds appropriated in this chapter under 
     the heading ``Economic Support Fund'', $25,000,000 shall be 
     made available for necessary expenses for emergency relief 
     and reconstruction assistance for El Salvador related to 
     Hurricane/Tropical Storm Ida.

                    democratic republic of the congo

       Sec. 1012.  Of the funds appropriated in this chapter under 
     the heading ``Economic Support Fund'', $15,000,000 shall be 
     made available for necessary expenses for emergency security 
     and humanitarian assistance for civilians, particularly women 
     and girls, in the eastern region of the Democratic Republic 
     of the Congo.

                  international scientific cooperation

       Sec. 1013.  Funds appropriated in prior Acts making 
     appropriations for the Department of State, foreign 
     operations, and related programs that are made available for 
     science and technology centers in the former Soviet Union may 
     be used to support productive, non-military projects that 
     engage scientists and engineers who have no weapons 
     background, but whose competence could otherwise be applied 
     to weapons development, provided such projects are executed 
     through existing science and technology centers and 
     notwithstanding sections 503 and 504 of the FREEDOM Support 
     Act (Public Law 102-511), and following consultation with the 
     Committees on Appropriations, the Committee on Foreign 
     Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs 
     of the House of Representatives.

                 international renewable energy agency

       Sec. 1014.  For fiscal year 2011 and thereafter, the 
     President is authorized to accept the statute of, and to 
     maintain membership of the United States in, the 
     International Renewable Energy Agency, and the United States' 
     assessed contributions to maintain such membership may be 
     paid from funds appropriated for ``Contributions to 
     International Organizations''.

                 office of inspector general personnel

       Sec. 1015. (a) Funds appropriated in this chapter for the 
     United States Agency for International Development Office of 
     Inspector General (OIG) may be made available to contract 
     with United States citizens for personal services when the 
     Inspector General determines that the personnel resources of 
     the OIG are otherwise insufficient.
       (1) Not more than 5 percent of the OIG personnel 
     (determined on a full-time equivalent basis), as of any given 
     date, are serving under personal services contracts.
       (2) Contracts under this paragraph shall not exceed a term 
     of 2 years unless the Inspector General determines that 
     exceptional circumstances justify an extension of up to 1 
     additional year, and contractors under this paragraph shall 
     not be considered employees of the Federal Government for 
     purposes of title 5, United States Code, or members of the 
     Foreign Service for purposes of title 22, United States Code.
       (b)(1) The Inspector General may waive subsections (a) 
     through (d) of section 8344, and subsections (a) through (e) 
     of section 8468 of title 5, United States Code, and 
     subsections (a) through (d) of section 4064 of title 22, 
     United States Code, on behalf of any re-employed annuitant 
     serving in a position within the OIG to facilitate the 
     assignment of persons to positions in Iraq, Pakistan, 
     Afghanistan, and Haiti or to positions vacated by members of 
     the Foreign Service assigned to those countries.
       (2) The authority provided in paragraph (1) shall be 
     exercised on a case-by-case basis for positions for which 
     there is difficulty recruiting or retaining a qualified 
     employee or to address a temporary emergency hiring need, 
     individuals employed by the OIG under this paragraph shall 
     not be considered employees for purposes of subchapter III of 
     chapter 83 of title 5, United States Code, or chapter 84 of 
     such title, and the authorities of the Inspector General 
     under this paragraph shall terminate on October 1, 2012.

                      authority to reprogram funds

       Sec. 1016.  Of the funds appropriated by this chapter for 
     assistance for Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan, up to 
     $100,000,000 may be made available pursuant to the authority 
     of section 451 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as 
     amended, for assistance in the Middle East and South Asia 
     regions if the President finds, in addition to the 
     requirements of section 451 and certifies and reports to the 
     Committees on Appropriations, that exercising the authority 
     of this section is necessary to protect the national security 
     interests of the United States: Provided, That the Secretary 
     of State shall consult with the Committees on Appropriations 
     prior to the reprogramming of such funds, which shall be 
     subject to the regular notification procedures of the 
     Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That the 
     funding limitation otherwise applicable to section 451 of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 shall not apply to this 
     section: Provided further, That the authority of this section 
     shall expire upon enactment of the Department of State, 
     Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 
     2011.

        special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction

                         (including rescission)

       Sec. 1017. (a) Of the funds appropriated under the heading 
     ``Department of State, Administration of Foreign Affairs, 
     Office of Inspector General'' and authorized to be 
     transferred to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan 
     Reconstruction in title XI of Public Law 111-32, $7,200,000 
     are rescinded.
       (b) For an additional amount for ``Department of State, 
     Administration of Foreign Affairs, Office of Inspector 
     General'' which shall be available for the Special Inspector 
     General for Afghanistan Reconstruction for reconstruction 
     oversight in Afghanistan, $7,200,000, and shall remain 
     available until September 30, 2011.

                               CHAPTER 11

                      DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

             National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

                     highway traffic safety grants

                          (highway trust fund)

                         (including rescission)

       Of the amounts provided for Safety Belt Performance Grants 
     in Public Law 111-117, $15,000,000 shall be available to pay 
     for expenses necessary to discharge the functions of the 
     Secretary, with respect to traffic and highway safety under 
     subtitle C of title X of Public Law 109-59 and chapter 301 
     and part C of subtitle VI of title 49, United States Code, 
     and for the planning or execution of programs authorized 
     under section 403 of title 23, United States Code: Provided, 
     That such funds shall be available until September 30, 2011, 
     and shall be in addition to the amount of any limitation 
     imposed on obligations in fiscal year 2011.
       Of the amounts made available for Safety Belt Performance 
     Grants under section 406 of title 23, United States Code, 
     $25,000,000 in unobligated balances are permanently 
     rescinded: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the 
     amounts under this heading.

            consumer assistance to recycle and save program

                              (rescission)

       Of the amounts made available for the Consumer Assistance 
     to Recycle and Save Program, $44,000,000 in unobligated 
     balances are rescinded.

              DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

                   Community Planning and Development

                       community development fund

       For an additional amount for the ``Community Development 
     Fund'', for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, 
     long-term recovery, and restoration of infrastructure, 
     housing, and economic revitalization in areas affected by 
     severe storms and flooding from March 2010 through May 2010 
     for which the President declared a major disaster covering an 
     entire State or States with more than 20 counties declared 
     major disasters under title IV of the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1974, 
     $100,000,000, to remain available until expended, for 
     activities authorized under title I of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-383): 
     Provided, That funds shall be awarded directly to the State 
     or unit of general local government at the discretion of the 
     Secretary: Provided further, That prior to the obligation of 
     funds a grantee shall submit a plan to the Secretary 
     detailing the proposed use of all funds, including criteria 
     for eligibility and how the use of these funds will address 
     long-term recovery and restoration of infrastructure: 
     Provided further, That funds provided under this heading may 
     be used by a State or locality as a matching requirement, 
     share, or contribution for any other Federal program: 
     Provided further, That such funds may not be used for 
     activities reimbursable by, or for which funds are made 
     available by, the Federal Emergency Management Agency or the 
     Army Corps of Engineers: Provided further, That funds 
     allocated under this heading shall not adversely affect the 
     amount of any

[[Page 12597]]

     formula assistance received by a State or subdivision thereof 
     under the Community Development Fund: Provided further, That 
     a State or subdivision thereof may use up to 5 percent of its 
     allocation for administrative costs: Provided further, That 
     in administering the funds under this heading, the Secretary 
     of Housing and Urban Development may waive, or specify 
     alternative requirements for, any provision of any statute or 
     regulation that the Secretary administers in connection with 
     the obligation by the Secretary or the use by the recipient 
     of these funds or guarantees (except for requirements related 
     to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards, and the 
     environment), upon a request by a State or subdivision 
     thereof explaining why such waiver is required to facilitate 
     the use of such funds or guarantees, if the Secretary finds 
     that such waiver would not be inconsistent with the overall 
     purpose of title I of the Housing and Community Development 
     Act of 1974: Provided further, That the Secretary shall 
     publish in the Federal Register any waiver of any statute or 
     regulation that the Secretary administers pursuant to title I 
     of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 no later 
     than 5 days before the effective date of such waiver: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary shall obligate to a 
     State or subdivision thereof not less than 50 percent of the 
     funding provided under this heading within 90 days after the 
     enactment of this Act.

                                TITLE II

                         DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

                  Economic Development Administration

                economic development assistance programs

       For an additional amount, in addition to amounts provided 
     elsewhere in this Act, for ``Economic Development Assistance 
     Programs'', to carry out planning, technical assistance and 
     other assistance under section 209, and consistent with 
     section 703(b), of the Public Works and Economic Development 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 3149, 3233), in States affected by the 
     incidents related to the discharge of oil that began in 2010 
     in connection with the explosion on, and sinking of, the 
     mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater Horizon, $5,000,000, 
     to remain available until expended.

            National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

                  operations, research, and facilities

       For an additional amount, in addition to amounts provided 
     elsewhere in this Act, for ``Operations, Research, and 
     Facilities'', $13,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended, for responding to economic impacts on fishermen and 
     fishery-dependent businesses: Provided, That the amounts 
     appropriated herein are not available unless the Secretary of 
     Commerce determines that resources provided under other 
     authorities and appropriations including by the responsible 
     parties under the Oil Pollution Act, 33 U.S.C. 2701, et seq., 
     are not sufficient to respond to economic impacts on 
     fishermen and fishery-dependent business following an 
     incident related to a spill of national significance declared 
     under the National Contingency Plan provided for under 
     section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605).
       For an additional amount, in addition to amounts provided 
     elsewhere in this Act, for ``Operations, Research, and 
     Facilities'', for activities undertaken including scientific 
     investigations and sampling as a result of the incidents 
     related to the discharge of oil and the use of oil 
     dispersants that began in 2010 in connection with the 
     explosion on, and sinking of, the mobile offshore drilling 
     unit Deepwater Horizon, $7,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended. These activities may be funded through the 
     provision of grants to universities, colleges and other 
     research partners through extramural research funding.

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

                      Food and Drug Administration

                         salaries and expenses

       For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'', 
     Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human 
     Services, for food safety monitoring and response activities 
     in connection with the incidents related to the discharge of 
     oil that began in 2010 in connection with the explosion on, 
     and sinking of, the mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater 
     Horizon, $2,000,000, to remain available until expended.

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                          Departmental Offices

                        Office of the Secretary

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For an additional amount for the ``Office of the Secretary, 
     Salaries and Expenses'' for increased inspections, 
     enforcement, investigations, environmental and engineering 
     studies, and other activities related to emergency offshore 
     oil spill incidents in the Gulf of Mexico, $29,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended: Provided, That such funds 
     may be transferred by the Secretary to any other account in 
     the Department of the Interior to carry out the purposes 
     provided herein.

                         DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

                            Legal Activities

            salaries and expenses, general legal activities

       For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses, 
     General Legal Activities'', $10,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended, for litigation expenses resulting from 
     incidents related to the discharge of oil that began in 2010 
     in connection with the explosion on, and sinking of, the 
     mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater Horizon.

                    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                         Science and Technology

       For an additional amount for ``Science and Technology'' for 
     a study on the potential human and environmental risks and 
     impacts of the release of crude oil and the application of 
     dispersants, surface washing agents, bioremediation agents, 
     and other mitigation measures listed in the National 
     Contingency Plan Product List (40 C.F.R. Part 300 Subpart J), 
     as appropriate, $2,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That the study shall be performed at the 
     direction of the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency, in coordination with the Secretary of 
     Commerce and the Secretary of the Interior: Provided further, 
     That the study may be funded through the provision of grants 
     to universities and colleges through extramural research 
     funding.

                     GENERAL PROVISION--THIS TITLE

                           deepwater horizon

       Sec. 2001.  Section 6002(b) of the Oil Pollution Act of 
     1990 (33 U.S.C. 2752) is amended in the second sentence:
       (1) by inserting ``: (1)'' before ``may obtain an advance'' 
     and after ``the Coast Guard'';
       (2) by striking ``advance. Amounts'' and inserting the 
     following: ``advance; (2) in the case of discharge of oil 
     that began in 2010 in connection with the explosion on, and 
     sinking of, the mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater 
     Horizon, may, without further appropriation, obtain one or 
     more advances from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund as 
     needed, up to a maximum of $100,000,000 for each advance, the 
     total amount of all advances not to exceed the amounts 
     available under section 9509(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 9509(c)(2)), and within 7 days of 
     each advance, shall notify Congress of the amount advanced 
     and the facts and circumstances necessitating the advance; 
     and (3) amounts''.


                   prohibition on fines and liability

       Sec. 2002. None of the funds made available by this Act 
     shall be used to levy against any person any fine, or to hold 
     any person liable for construction or renovation work 
     performed by the person, in any State under the final rule 
     entitled ``Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program; 
     Lead Hazard Information Pamphlet; Notice of Availability; 
     Final Rule'' (73 Fed. Reg. 21692 (April 22, 2008)), and the 
     final rule entitled ``Lead; Amendment to the Opt-out and 
     Recordkeeping Provisions in the Renovation, Repair, and 
     Painting Program'' signed by the Administrator on April 22, 
     2010.


                              right-of-way

       Sec. 2003.  (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the Secretary of the Interior shall--
       (1) not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, amend Right-of-Way Grants No. NVN-49781/IDI-26446/
     NVN-85211/NVN-85210 of the Bureau of Land Management to shift 
     the 200-foot right-of-way for the 500-kilovolt transmission 
     line project to the alignment depicted on the maps entitled 
     ``Southwest Intertie Project'' and dated December 10, 2009, 
     and May 21, 2010, and approve the construction, operation and 
     maintenance plans of the project; and
       (2) not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, issue a notice to proceed with construction of the 
     project in accordance with the amended grants and approved 
     plans described in paragraph (1).
       (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary of Energy may provide or facilitate federal 
     financing for the project described in subsection (a) under 
     the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public 
     Law 111-5; 123 Stat. 115) or the Energy Policy Act of 2005 
     (42 U.S.C. 15801 et seq.), based on the comprehensive reviews 
     and consultations performed by the Secretary of the Interior.


            funding for environmental and fisheries impacts

       Sec. 2004.  (1) Fisheries Disaster Relief.--For an 
     additional amount, in addition to other amounts provided in 
     this Act for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration, $15,000,000 to be available to provide 
     fisheries disaster relief under section 312 of the Magnuson-
     Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1861a) related to a commercial fishery failure due to a 
     fishery resource disaster in the Gulf of Mexico that resulted 
     from the Deepwater Horizon oil discharge.
       (2) Expanded stock assessment of fisheries.--For an 
     additional amount, in addition to other amounts provided in 
     this Act for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration, $10,000,000 to conduct an expanded stock 
     assessment of the fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico. Such 
     expanded stock assessment shall include an assessment of the 
     commercial and recreational catch and biological sampling, 
     observer programs, data management and processing activities, 
     the conduct of assessments, and follow-up evaluations of such 
     fisheries.
       (3) Ecosystem services impacts study.--For an additional 
     amount, in addition to other amounts provided for the 
     Department of Commerce, $1,000,000 to be available for the 
     National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study of the long-
     term ecosystem service impacts of the Deepwater Horizon oil 
     discharge. Such study shall assess long-term costs to the 
     public of lost water filtration, hunting, and fishing 
     (commercial and recreational), and other ecosystem services 
     associated with the Gulf of Mexico.

[[Page 12598]]

       (4) In general.--Of the amounts appropriated or made 
     available under division B, title I of Public Law 111-117 
     that remain unobligated as of the date of the enactment of 
     this Act under Procurement, Acquisition, and Construction for 
     the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 
     $26,000,000 of the amounts appropriated are hereby rescinded.

                               TITLE III

                      GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT

                         availability of funds

       Sec. 3001  No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current 
     fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.

                         emergency designation

       Sec. 3002.  Unless otherwise specified, each amount in this 
     Act is designated as an emergency requirement and necessary 
     to meet emergency needs pursuant to sections 403(a) and 
     423(b) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), the concurrent 
     resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010.
       Sec. 3003. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     for fiscal year 2010 only, all funds received from sales, 
     bonuses, royalties, and rentals under the Geothermal Steam 
     Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 1001 et seq.) shall be 
     deposited in the Treasury, of which--
       (1) 50 percent shall be used by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury to make payments to States within the boundaries of 
     which the leased land and geothermal resources are located;
       (2) 25 percent shall be used by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury to make payments to the counties within the 
     boundaries of which the leased land or geothermal resources 
     are located; and
       (3) 25 percent shall be deposited in miscellaneous 
     receipts.
       (b) Section 3002 shall not apply to this section.
       Sec. 3004. (a) Public Law 111-88, the Interior, 
     Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010, 
     is amended under the heading ``Office of the Special Trustee 
     for American Indians'' by--
       (1) striking ``$185,984,000'' and inserting 
     ``$176,984,000''; and
       (2) striking ``$56,536,000'' and inserting ``$47,536,000''.
       (b) Section 3002 shall not apply to the amounts in this 
     section.
       Sec. 3005.  Section 502(c) of the Chesapeake Bay Initiative 
     Act of 1998 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; Public Law 105-312) is 
     amended by striking ``2008'' and inserting ``2011''.
       Sec. 3006.  For fiscal years 2010 and 2011--
       (1) the National Park Service Recreation Fee Program 
     account may be available for the cost of adjustments and 
     changes within the original scope of contracts for National 
     Park Service projects funded by Public Law 111-5 and for 
     associated administrative costs when no funds are otherwise 
     available for such purposes;
       (2) notwithstanding section 430 of division E of Public Law 
     111-8 and section 444 of Public Law 111-88, the Secretary of 
     the Interior may utilize unobligated balances for adjustments 
     and changes within the original scope of projects funded 
     through division A, title VII, of Public Law 111-5 and for 
     associated administrative costs when no funds are otherwise 
     available;
       (3) the Secretary of the Interior shall ensure that any 
     unobligated balances utilized pursuant to paragraph (2) shall 
     be derived from the bureau and account for which the project 
     was funded in Public Law 111-5; and
       (4) the Secretary of the Interior shall consult with the 
     Committees on Appropriations prior to making any charges 
     authorized by this section.
       Sec. 3007. (a) Section 205(d) of the Federal Land 
     Transaction Facilitation Act (43 U.S.C. 2304(d)) is amended 
     by striking ``10 years'' and inserting ``11 years''.
       (b) Section 3002 shall not apply to this section.
       Sec. 3008.  Of the amounts appropriated for the Edward 
     Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program under subpart 
     1 of part E of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe 
     Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3750 et seq.) under the 
     heading ``state and local law enforcement assistance'' under 
     the heading ``Office of Justice Programs'' under the heading 
     ``State and Local Law Enforcement Activities'' under title II 
     of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8; 
     123 Stat. 579), at the discretion of the Attorney General, 
     the amounts to be made available to Genesee County, Michigan 
     for assistance for individuals transitioning from prison in 
     Genesee County, Michigan pursuant to the joint statement of 
     managers accompanying that Act may be made available to My 
     Brother's Keeper of Genesee County, Michigan to provide 
     assistance for individuals transitioning from prison in 
     Genesee County, Michigan.
       Sec. 3009.  Section 159(b)(2)(C) of title I of division A 
     of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 (49 U.S.C. 24305 
     note) is amended by striking clauses (i) and (ii) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(i) requiring inspections of any container containing a 
     firearm or ammunition; and
       ``(ii) the temporary suspension of firearm carriage service 
     if credible intelligence information indicates a threat 
     related to the national rail system or specific routes or 
     trains.''.


  public availability of contractor integrity and performance database

       Sec. 3010. Section 872(e)(1) of the Clean Contracting Act 
     of 2008 (subtitle G of title VIII of Public Law 110-417; 41 
     U.S.C. 417b(e)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following: ``In addition, the Administrator shall post all 
     such information, excluding past performance reviews, on a 
     publicly available Internet website.''.


                assessments on guantanamo bay detainees

       Sec. 3011.  (a) Submission of Information Related to 
     Disposition Decisions.--Not later than 45 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Director of National 
     Intelligence, in coordination with the participants of the 
     interagency review of Guantanamo Bay detainees conducted 
     pursuant to Executive Order 13492 (10 U.S.C. 801 note), shall 
     fully inform the congressional intelligence committees 
     concerning the basis for the disposition decisions reached by 
     the Guantanamo Review Task Force, and shall provide to the 
     congressional intelligence committees--
       (1) the written threat analyses prepared on each detainee 
     by the Guantanamo Review Task Force established pursuant to 
     Executive Order 13492; and
       (2) access to the intelligence information that formed the 
     basis of any such specific assessments or threat analyses.
       (b) Future Submissions.--In addition to the analyses, 
     assessments, and information required under subsection (a) 
     and not later than 10 days after the date that a threat 
     assessment described in subsection (a) is disseminated, the 
     Director of National Intelligence shall provide to the 
     congressional intelligence committees--
       (1) any new threat assessment prepared by any element of 
     the intelligence community of a Guantanamo Bay detainee who 
     remains in detention or is pending release or transfer; and
       (2) access to the intelligence information that formed the 
     basis of such threat assessment.
       (c) Congressional Intelligence Committees Defined.--In this 
     section, the term ``congressional intelligence committees'' 
     has the meaning given that term in section 3(7) of the 
     National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(7)).
       Sec. 3012.  Of the amounts appropriated for the Edward 
     Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program under subpart 
     1 of part E of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe 
     Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3750 et seq.) under the 
     heading ``state and local law enforcement assistance'' under 
     the heading ``Office of Justice Programs'' under the heading 
     ``State and Local Law Enforcement Activities'' under title II 
     of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8; 
     123 Stat. 579), at the discretion of the Attorney General, 
     the amounts to be made available to the Marcus Institute, 
     Atlanta, Georgia, to provide remediation for the potential 
     consequences of childhood abuse and neglect, pursuant to the 
     joint statement of managers accompanying that Act, may be 
     made available to the Georgia State University Center for 
     Healthy Development, Atlanta, Georgia.


                       coastal impact assistance

       Sec. 3013. Section 31 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands 
     Act (43 U.S.C. 1356a) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(e) Emergency Funding.--
       ``(1) In general.--In response to a spill of national 
     significance under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 
     2701 et seq.), at the request of a producing State or coastal 
     political subdivision and notwithstanding the requirements of 
     part 12 of title 43, Code of Federal Regulations (or a 
     successor regulation), the Secretary may immediately disburse 
     funds allocated under this section for 1 or more individual 
     projects that are--
       ``(A) consistent with subsection (d); and
       ``(B) specifically designed to respond to the spill of 
     national significance.
       ``(2) Approval by secretary.--The Secretary may, in the 
     sole discretion of the Secretary, approve, on a project by 
     project basis, the immediate disbursal of the funds under 
     paragraph (1).
       ``(3) State requirements.--
       ``(A) Additional information.--If the Secretary approves a 
     project for funding under this subsection that is included in 
     a plan previously approved under subsection (c), not later 
     than 90 days after the date of the funding approval, the 
     producing State or coastal political subdivision shall submit 
     to the Secretary any additional information that the 
     Secretary determines to be necessary to ensure that the 
     project is in compliance with subsection (d).
       ``(B) Amendment to plan.--If the Secretary approves a 
     project for funding under this subsection that is not 
     included in a plan previously approved under subsection (c), 
     not later than 90 days after the date of the funding 
     approval, the producing State or coastal political 
     subdivision shall submit to the Secretary for approval an 
     amendment to the plan that includes any projects funded under 
     paragraph (1), as well as any information about such projects 
     that the Secretary determines to be necessary to ensure that 
     the project is in compliance with subsection (d).
       ``(C) Limitation.--If a producing State or coastal 
     political subdivision does not submit the additional 
     information or amendments to the plan required by this 
     paragraph, or if, based on the information submitted by the 
     Secretary determines that the project is not in compliance 
     with subsection (d), by the deadlines specified in this 
     paragraph, the Secretary shall not disburse any additional 
     funds to the producing State or the coastal political 
     subdivisions until the date on which the additional 
     information or amendment to the plan has been approved by the 
     Secretary.''.
       This Act may be cited as the ``Supplemental Appropriations 
     Act, 2010''.
       Amend the title so as to read: ``Making supplemental 
     appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, 
     and for other purposes.''.

[[Page 12599]]




                            Motion to Concur

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the motion.
  The text of the motion is as follows:

       Mr. Obey moves that the House concur in the Senate 
     amendment to the text of H.R. 4899 with each of the five 
     amendments printed in House Report 111-522.

  The text of the amendments is as follows:


                            Amendment No. 1

       In the matter proposed to be inserted by the Senate 
     amendment to the text of the bill, insert before the short 
     title at the end the following:

                       TITLE V--OTHER PROVISIONS

          Subtitle A--Settlements and Other Program Provisions

     SEC. 5001. APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR FINAL SETTLEMENT OF 
                   CLAIMS FROM IN RE BLACK FARMERS DISCRIMINATION 
                   LITIGATION.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Settlement agreement.--The term ``Settlement 
     Agreement'' means the settlement agreement dated February 18, 
     2010 (including any modifications agreed to by the parties 
     and approved by the court under that agreement) between 
     certain plaintiffs, by and through their counsel, and the 
     Secretary of Agriculture to resolve, fully and forever, the 
     claims raised or that could have been raised in the cases 
     consolidated in In re Black Farmers Discrimination 
     Litigation, No. 08-511 (D.D.C.), including Pigford claims 
     asserted under section 14012 of the Food, Conservation, and 
     Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246; 122 Stat. 2209).
       (2) Pigford claim.--The term ``Pigford claim'' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 14012(a)(3) of the Food, 
     Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246; 122 
     Stat. 2210).
       (b) Appropriation of Funds.--There is hereby appropriated 
     to the Secretary of Agriculture $1,150,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended, to carry out the terms of the 
     Settlement Agreement if the Settlement Agreement is approved 
     by a court order that is or becomes final and nonappealable. 
     The funds appropriated by this subsection are in addition to 
     the $100,000,000 of funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation 
     made available by section 14012(i) of the Food, Conservation, 
     and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246; 122 Stat. 2212) 
     and shall be available for obligation only after those 
     Commodity Credit Corporation funds are fully obligated. If 
     the Settlement Agreement is not approved as provided in this 
     subsection, the $100,000,000 of funds of the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation made available by section 14012(i) of the Food, 
     Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 shall be the sole 
     funding available for Pigford claims.
       (c) Use of Funds.--The use of the funds appropriated by 
     subsection (b) shall be subject to the express terms of the 
     Settlement Agreement.
       (d) Treatment of Remaining Funds.--If any of the funds 
     appropriated by subsection (b) are not obligated and expended 
     to carry out the Settlement Agreement, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall return the unused funds to the Treasury and 
     may not make the unused funds available for any purpose 
     related to section 14012 of the Food, Conservation, and 
     Energy Act of 2008, for any other settlement agreement 
     executed in In re Black Farmers Discrimination Litigation, 
     No. 08-511 (D.D.C.), or for any other purpose.
       (e) Rules of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall 
     be construed as requiring the United States, any of its 
     officers or agencies, or any other party to enter into the 
     Settlement Agreement or any other settlement agreement. 
     Nothing in this section shall be construed as creating the 
     basis for a Pigford claim.
       (f) Conforming Amendments.--Section 14012 of the Food, 
     Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246; 122 
     Stat. 2209) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(1)--
       (A) by striking ``subsection (h)'' and inserting 
     ``subsection (g)''; and
       (B) by striking ``subsection (i)'' and inserting 
     ``subsection (h)'';
       (2) by striking subsection (e);
       (3) in subsection (g), by striking ``subsection (f)'' and 
     inserting ``subsection (e)'';
       (4) in subsection (i)--
       (A) by striking ``(1) In general.--Of the funds'' and 
     inserting ``Of the funds''; and
       (B) by striking paragraph (2);
       (5) by striking subsection (j); and
       (6) by redesignating subsections (f), (g), (h), (i), and 
     (k) as subsections (e), (f), (g), (h), and (i), respectively.

     SEC. 5002. EMPLOYMENT FOR YOUTH.

       There is appropriated, out of any funds in the Treasury not 
     otherwise appropriated, for an additional amount for 
     ``Department of Labor--Employment and Training 
     Administration--Training and Employment Services'' for 
     activities under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 
     (``WIA''), $1,000,000,000 shall be available for obligation 
     on the date of enactment of this Act for grants to States for 
     youth activities, including employment for youth: Provided, 
     That no portion of such funds shall be reserved to carry out 
     section 127(b)(1)(A) of the WIA: Provided further, That for 
     purposes of section 127(b)(1)(C)(iv) of the WIA, funds 
     available for youth activities shall be allotted as if the 
     total amount available for youth activities in the fiscal 
     year does not exceed $1,000,000,000: Provided further, That 
     with respect to the youth activities provided with such 
     funds, section 101(13)(A) of the WIA shall be applied by 
     substituting ``age 24'' for ``age 21'': Provided further, 
     That the work readiness performance indicator described in 
     section 136(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I) of the WIA shall be the only 
     measure of performance used to assess the effectiveness of 
     employment for youth provided with such funds: Provided 
     further, That an amount that is not more than 1 percent of 
     such amount may be used for the administration, management, 
     and oversight of the programs, activities, and grants carried 
     out with such funds, including the evaluation of the use of 
     such funds: Provided further, That funds available under the 
     preceding proviso, together with funds described in section 
     801(a) of division A of the American Recovery and 
     reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5), and funds 
     provided in such Act under the heading ``Department of Labor-
     Departmental Management-Salaries and Expenses'', shall remain 
     available for obligation through September 30, 2011.

     SEC. 5003. THE INDIVIDUAL INDIAN MONEY ACCOUNT LITIGATION 
                   SETTLEMENT ACT OF 2010.

       (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the 
     ``Individual Indian Money Account Litigation Settlement Act 
     of 2010''.
       (b) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Amended complaint.--The term ``Amended Complaint'' 
     means the Amended Complaint attached to the Settlement.
       (2) Land consolidation program.--The term ``Land 
     Consolidation Program'' means a program conducted in 
     accordance with the Settlement and the Indian Land 
     Consolidation Act (25 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.) under which the 
     Secretary may purchase fractional interests in trust or 
     restricted land.
       (3) Litigation.--The term ``Litigation'' means the case 
     entitled Elouise Cobell et al. v. Ken Salazar et al., United 
     States District Court, District of Columbia, Civil Action No. 
     96-1285 (JR).
       (4) Plaintiff.--The term ``Plaintiff'' means a member of 
     any class certified in the Litigation.
       (5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (6) Settlement.--The term ``Settlement'' means the Class 
     Action Settlement Agreement dated December 7, 2009, in the 
     Litigation, as modified by the parties to the Litigation.
       (7) Trust administration class.--The term ``Trust 
     Administration Class'' means the Trust Administration Class 
     as defined in the Settlement.
       (c) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to authorize 
     the Settlement.
       (d) Authorization.--The Settlement is authorized, ratified, 
     and confirmed.
       (e) Jurisdictional Provisions.--
       (1) In general.--Notwithstanding the limitation of 
     jurisdiction of district courts contained in section 
     1346(a)(2) of title 28, United States Code, the United States 
     District Court for the District of Columbia shall have 
     jurisdiction over the claims asserted in the Amended 
     Complaint for purposes of the Settlement.
       (2) Certification of trust administration class.--
       (A) In general.--Notwithstanding the requirements of the 
     Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court overseeing the 
     Litigation may certify the Trust Administration Class.
       (B) Treatment.--On certification under subparagraph (A), 
     the Trust Administration Class shall be treated as a class 
     under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) for purposes 
     of the Settlement.
       (f) Trust Land Consolidation.--
       (1) Trust land consolidation fund.--
       (A) Establishment.--On final approval (as defined in the 
     Settlement) of the Settlement, there shall be established in 
     the Treasury of the United States a fund, to be known as the 
     ``Trust Land Consolidation Fund''.
       (B) Availability of amounts.--Amounts in the Trust Land 
     Consolidation Fund shall be made available to the Secretary 
     during the 10-year period beginning on the date of final 
     approval of the Settlement--
       (i) to conduct the Land Consolidation Program; and
       (ii) for other costs specified in the Settlement.
       (C) Deposits.--
       (i) In general.--On final approval (as defined in the 
     Settlement) of the Settlement, the Secretary of the Treasury 
     shall deposit in the Trust Land Consolidation Fund 
     $2,000,000,000 of the amounts appropriated by section 1304 of 
     title 31, United States Code.
       (ii) Conditions met.--The conditions described in section 
     1304 of title 31, United States Code, shall be considered to 
     be met for purposes of clause (i).
       (D) Transfers.--In a manner designed to encourage 
     participation in the Land Consolidation Program, the 
     Secretary may transfer, at the discretion of the Secretary, 
     not more than $60,000,000 of amounts in the Trust Land 
     Consolidation Fund to the Indian Education Scholarship 
     Holding Fund established under paragraph 2.
       (2) Indian education scholarship holding fund.--

[[Page 12600]]

       (A) Establishment.--On the final approval (as defined in 
     the Settlement) of the Settlement, there shall be established 
     in the Treasury of the United States a fund, to be known as 
     the ``Indian Education Scholarship Holding Fund''.
       (B) Availability.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law governing competition, public notification, or Federal 
     procurement or assistance, amounts in the Indian Education 
     Scholarship Holding Fund shall be made available, without 
     further appropriation, to the Secretary to contribute to an 
     Indian Education Scholarship Fund, as described in the 
     Settlement, to provide scholarships for Native Americans.
       (3) Acquisition of trust or restricted land.--The Secretary 
     may acquire, at the discretion of the Secretary and in 
     accordance with the Land Consolidation Program, any 
     fractional interest in trust or restricted land.
       (4) Treatment of unlocatable plaintiffs.--A Plaintiff the 
     whereabouts of whom are unknown and who, after reasonable 
     efforts by the Secretary, cannot be located during the 5 year 
     period beginning on the date of final approval (as defined in 
     the Settlement) of the Settlement shall be considered to have 
     accepted an offer made pursuant to the Land Consolidation 
     Program.
       (g) Taxation and Other Benefits.--
       (1) Internal revenue code.--For purposes of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986, amounts received by an individual 
     Indian as a lump sum or a periodic payment pursuant to the 
     Settlement--
       (A) shall not be included in gross income; and
       (B) shall not be taken into consideration for purposes of 
     applying any provision of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
     that takes into account excludable income in computing 
     adjusted gross income or modified adjusted gross income, 
     including section 86 of that Code (relating to Social 
     Security and tier 1 railroad retirement benefits).
       (2) Other benefits.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, for purposes of determining initial eligibility, ongoing 
     eligibility, or level of benefits under any Federal or 
     federally assisted program, amounts received by an individual 
     Indian as a lump sum or a periodic payment pursuant to the 
     Settlement shall not be treated for any household member, 
     during the 1-year period beginning on the date of receipt--
       (A) as income for the month during which the amounts were 
     received; or
       (B) as a resource.
       SEC. 5004. EXTENSION AND FLEXIBILITY FOR CERTAIN ALLOCATED 
     SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS.
       (a) Modification of Allocation Rules.--Section 411(d) of 
     the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2010 (Public Law 
     111-147; 124 Stat. 80) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)--
       (i) by striking ``1301, 1302,''; and
       (ii) by striking ``1198, 1204,''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) in the matter preceding clause (i) by striking 
     ``apportioned under sections 104(b) and 144 of title 23, 
     United States Code,'' and inserting ``specified in section 
     105(a)(2) of title 23, United States Code (except the high 
     priority projects program),''; and
       (ii) in clause (ii) by striking ``apportioned under such 
     sections of such Code'' and inserting ``specified in such 
     section 105(a)(2) (except the high priority projects 
     program)'';
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)--
       (i) by striking ``1301, 1302,''; and
       (ii) by striking ``1198, 1204,''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) in the matter preceding clause (i) by striking 
     ``apportioned under sections 104(b) and 144 of title 23, 
     United States Code,'' and inserting ``specified in section 
     105(a)(2) of title 23, United States Code (except the high 
     priority projects program),''; and
       (ii) in clause (ii) by striking ``apportioned under such 
     sections of such Code'' and inserting ``specified in such 
     section 105(a)(2) (except the high priority projects 
     program)''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) Projects of national and regional significance and 
     national corridor infrastructure improvement programs.--
       ``(A) Redistribution among states.--Notwithstanding 
     sections 1301(m) and 1302(e) of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1202 
     and 1205), the Secretary shall apportion funds authorized to 
     be appropriated under subsection (b) for the projects of 
     national and regional significance program and the national 
     corridor infrastructure improvement program among all States 
     such that each State's share of the funds so apportioned is 
     equal to the State's share for fiscal year 2009 of funds 
     apportioned or allocated for the programs specified in 
     section 105(a)(2) of title 23, United States Code.
       ``(B) Distribution among programs.--Funds apportioned to a 
     State pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be--
       ``(i) made available to the State for the programs 
     specified in section 105(a)(2) of title 23, United States 
     Code (except the high priority projects program), and in the 
     same proportion for each such program that--

       ``(I) the amount apportioned to the State for that program 
     for fiscal year 2009; bears to
       ``(II) the amount apportioned to the State for fiscal year 
     2009 for all such programs; and

       ``(ii) administered in the same manner and with the same 
     period of availability as funding is administered under 
     programs identified in clause (i).''.
       (b) Expenditure Authority From Highway Trust Fund.--
     Paragraph (1) of section 9503(c) of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 is amended by striking ``Surface Transportation 
     Extension Act of 2010'' and inserting ``Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act, 2010''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect upon the date of enactment of the Surface 
     Transportation Extension Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-147; 124 
     Stat. 78 et seq.) and shall be treated as being included in 
     that Act at the time of the enactment of that Act.
       (d) Savings Clause.--
       (1) In general.--For fiscal year 2010 and for the period 
     beginning on October 1, 2010, and ending on December 31, 
     2010, the amount of funds apportioned to each State under 
     section 411(d) of the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 
     2010 (Public Law 111-147) that is determined by the amount 
     that the State received or was authorized to receive for 
     fiscal year 2009 to carry out the projects of national and 
     regional significance program and national corridor 
     infrastructure improvement program shall be the greater of--
       (A) the amount that the State was authorized to receive 
     under section 411(d) of the Surface Transportation Extension 
     Act of 2010 with respect to each such program according to 
     the provisions of that Act, as in effect on the day before 
     the date of enactment of this Act; or
       (B) the amount that the State is authorized to receive 
     under section 411(d) of the Surface Transportation Extension 
     Act of 2010 with respect to each such program pursuant to the 
     provisions of that Act, as amended by the amendments made by 
     this section.
       (2) Obligation authority.--For fiscal year 2010, the amount 
     of obligation authority distributed to each State shall be 
     the greater of--
       (A) the amount that the State was authorized to receive 
     pursuant to section 120(a)(4)(A) (as it pertains to the 
     Appalachian Development Highway System program) of title I of 
     division A of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 
     (Public Law 111-117) and sections 120(a)(4)(B) and 120(a)(6) 
     of such title, as of the day before the date of enactment of 
     this Act; or
       (B) the amount that the State is authorized to receive 
     pursuant to section 120(a)(4)(A) (as it pertains to the 
     Appalachian Development Highway System program) of title I of 
     division A of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 
     (Public Law 111-117) and sections 120(a)(4)(B) and 120(a)(6) 
     of such title, as of the date of enactment of this Act.
       (3) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than 
     the Mass Transit Account) such sums as may be necessary to 
     carry out this subsection.
       (4) Increase in obligation limitation.--The limitation 
     under the heading ``Federal-aid Highways (Limitation on 
     Obligations) (Highway Trust Fund)'' in Public Law 111-117 is 
     increased by such sums as may be necessary to carry out this 
     subsection.
       (5) Contract authority.--Funds made available to carry out 
     this subsection shall be available for obligation and 
     administered in the same manner as if such funds were 
     apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code.
       (6) Amounts.--The dollar amount specified in section 
     105(d)(1) of title 23, United States Code, the dollar amount 
     specified in section 120(a)(4)(B) of title I of division A of 
     the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-
     117), and the dollar amount specified in section 120(b)(10) 
     of such title shall each be increased as necessary to carry 
     out this subsection.

                     Subtitle B--Revenue Provisions

     SEC. 5101. REQUIRED MINIMUM 10-YEAR TERM, ETC., FOR GRANTOR 
                   RETAINED ANNUITY TRUSTS.

       (a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 2702 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1), (2) and (3) as 
     subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), respectively, and by moving 
     such subparagraphs (as so redesignated) 2 ems to the right,
       (2) by striking ``For purposes of'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of'', and
       (3) by striking ``paragraph (1) or (2)'' in paragraph 
     (1)(C) (as so redesignated) and inserting ``subparagraph (A) 
     or (B)'', and
       (4) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Additional requirements with respect to grantor 
     retained annuities.--For purposes of subsection (a), in the 
     case of an interest described in paragraph (1)(A) (determined 
     without regard to this paragraph) which is retained by the 
     transferor, such interest shall be treated as described in 
     such paragraph only if--
       ``(A) the right to receive the fixed amounts referred to in 
     such paragraph is for a term of not less than 10 years,
       ``(B) such fixed amounts, when determined on an annual 
     basis, do not decrease relative

[[Page 12601]]

     to any prior year during the first 10 years of the term 
     referred to in subparagraph (A), and
       ``(C) the remainder interest has a value greater than zero 
     determined as of the time of the transfer.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to transfers made after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.

     SEC. 5102. CRUDE TALL OIL INELIGIBLE FOR CELLULOSIC BIOFUEL 
                   PRODUCER CREDIT.

       (a) In General.--Clause (iii) of section 40(b)(6)(E) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of subclause (I),
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subclause (II) and 
     inserting ``, or'',
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subclause:

       ``(III) such fuel has an acid number greater than 25.'', 
     and

       (4) by striking ``unprocessed'' in the heading and 
     inserting ``certain''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to fuels sold or used on or after January 1, 
     2010.

     SEC. 5103. TIME FOR PAYMENT OF CORPORATE ESTIMATED TAXES.

       The percentage under paragraph (2) of section 561 of the 
     Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act in effect on the 
     date of the enactment of this Act is increased by 5.25 
     percentage points.

                    Subtitle C--Budgetary Provisions

     SEC. 5201. BUDGETARY PROVISIONS.

       (a) Statutory Paygo.--The budgetary effects of this Act, 
     for the purpose of complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-
     Go-Act of 2010, shall be determined by reference to the 
     latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO 
     Legislation'' for this Act, jointly submitted for printing in 
     the Congressional Record by the Chairmen of the House and 
     Senate Budget Committees, provided that such statement has 
     been submitted prior to the vote on passage in the House 
     acting first on this conference report or amendment between 
     the Houses.
       (b) Exclusion From Paygo.--
       (1) Savings in this Act that would be subject to inclusion 
     in the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go scorecards are providing an 
     offset to increased discretionary spending. As such, they 
     should not be available on the scorecards maintained by the 
     Office of Management and Budget to provide offsets for future 
     legislation.
       (2) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget 
     shall not include any net savings resulting from the changes 
     in direct spending or revenues contained in this Act on the 
     scorecards required to be maintained by OMB under the 
     Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.


                            Amendment No. 2

       Page 90, after line 18, insert the following:

                                TITLE IV

                               CHAPTER 1

                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

                            ENERGY PROGRAMS

         Title 17 Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program

       Subject to section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, commitments to guarantee loans under title XVII of the 
     Energy Policy Act of 2005, shall not exceed a total principal 
     amount of $18,000,000,000 for eligible projects, to remain 
     available until committed, of which $9,000,000,000 shall be 
     for nuclear power facilities and $9,000,000,000 shall be for 
     renewable energy system and efficient end-use energy 
     technology projects: Provided, That these amounts are in 
     addition to authorities provided in any other Act: Provided 
     further, That for amounts collected pursuant to section 
     1702(b)(2) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the source of 
     such payment received from borrowers is not a loan or other 
     debt obligation that is guaranteed by the Federal Government: 
     Provided further, That none of the loan guarantee authority 
     made available in this paragraph shall be available for 
     commitments to guarantee loans for any projects where funds, 
     personnel, or property (tangible or intangible) of any 
     Federal agency, instrumentality, personnel, or affiliated 
     entity are expected to be used (directly or indirectly) 
     through acquisitions, contracts, demonstrations, exchanges, 
     grants, incentives, leases, procurements, sales, other 
     transaction authority, or other arrangements, to support the 
     project or to obtain goods or services from the project: 
     Provided further, That the previous proviso shall not be 
     interpreted as precluding the use of the loan guarantee 
     authority in this paragraph for commitments to guarantee 
     loans for projects as a result of such projects benefitting 
     from (1) otherwise allowable Federal income tax benefits; (2) 
     being located on Federal land pursuant to a lease or right-
     of-way agreement for which all consideration for all uses is 
     (A) paid exclusively in cash, (B) deposited in the Treasury 
     as offsetting receipts, and (C) equal to the fair market 
     value as determined by the head of the relevant Federal 
     agency; (3) Federal insurance programs, including under 
     section 170 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2210; 
     commonly known as the ``Price-Anderson Act''); or (4) for 
     electric generation projects, use of transmission facilities 
     owned or operated by a Federal Power Marketing Administration 
     or the Tennessee Valley Authority that have been authorized, 
     approved, and financed independent of the project receiving 
     the guarantee: Provided further, That none of the loan 
     guarantee authority made available in this paragraph shall be 
     available for any project unless the Director of the Office 
     of Management and Budget has certified in advance in writing 
     that the loan guarantee and the project comply with the 
     provisions under this paragraph: Provided further, That none 
     of the loan guarantee authority made available in this 
     paragraph may be used to make a final or conditional loan 
     guarantee award unless the Secretary of Energy provides 
     notification of the award, including the proposed subsidy 
     cost, to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and 
     the House of Representatives at least 3 full business days in 
     advance of such award: Provided further, That section 3002 
     shall not apply to the amounts under this heading.

                      Departmental Administration

       For necessary expenses of the National Commission on the BP 
     Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling established 
     by, and in order to carry out activities under, Executive 
     Order 13543, $12,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2011: Provided, That funds appropriated in this paragraph 
     may be used to reimburse obligations incurred for the 
     purposes provided herein prior to enactment of this Act.

                    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

                   U.S. Customs and Border Protection

                         salaries and expenses

       For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'', 
     $356,900,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012, 
     of which $78,000,000 shall be for costs to maintain U.S. 
     Customs and Border Protection Officer staffing on the 
     Southwest Border of the United States, $58,000,000 shall be 
     for hiring additional U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
     Officers for deployment at ports of entry on the Southwest 
     Border of the United States, $208,400,000 shall be for hiring 
     additional Border Patrol agents for deployment to the 
     Southwest Border of the United States, $2,500,000 shall be 
     for forward operating bases on the Southwest Border of the 
     United States, and $10,000,000 shall be to support integrity 
     and background investigation programs.

        border security fencing, infrastructure, and technology

       For an additional amount for ``Border Security Fencing, 
     Infrastructure, and Technology,'' $14,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2011, for costs of designing, 
     building, and deploying tactical communications for support 
     of enforcement activities on the Southwest Border of the 
     United States.

 air and marine interdiction, operations, maintenance, and procurement

       For an additional amount for ``Air and Marine Interdiction, 
     Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement'', $32,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2012, for costs of 
     acquisition and deployment of unmanned aircraft systems.

                 construction and facilities management

       For an additional amount for ``Construction and Facilities 
     Management'', $9,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2011, for costs to construct up to three forward 
     operating bases for use by the Border Patrol to carry out 
     enforcement activities on the Southwest Border of the United 
     States.

                U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

                         salaries and expenses

        For an additional amount for `Salaries and Expenses', 
     $30,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011, 
     for law enforcement activities targeted at reducing the 
     threat of violence along the Southwest Border of the United 
     States.

                  Federal Emergency Management Agency

                        state and local programs

       For an additional amount for ``State and Local Programs'', 
     $50,000,000 to remain available until September 30, 2011, for 
     Operation Stonegarden.

                Federal Law Enforcement Training Center

                         salaries and expenses

       For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'', 
     $8,100,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011, for 
     costs to provide basic training for new U.S. Customs and 
     Border Protection Officers and Border Patrol agents.

                        DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

                          Education Jobs Fund

       For necessary expenses for an Education Jobs Fund, 
     $10,000,000,000: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply 
     to $1,300,000,000 of the amount under this heading: Provided 
     further, That the amount under this heading shall be 
     administered under the terms and conditions of sections 14001 
     through 14013 and title XV of division A of the American 
     Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) 
     except as follows:
       (1) Allocation of funds.--
       (A) Funds appropriated under this heading shall be 
     available only for allocation by the Secretary of Education 
     (in this heading referred to as the ``Secretary'') in 
     accordance

[[Page 12602]]

     with subsections (a), (b), (d), (e), and (f) of section 14001 
     of division A of Public Law 111-5 and subparagraph (B) of 
     this paragraph, except that the amount reserved under such 
     subsection (b) shall not exceed $1,000,000 and such 
     subsection (f) shall be applied by substituting ``one year'' 
     for ``two years''.
       (B) Prior to allocating funds to States under section 
     14001(d) of division A of Public Law 111-5, the Secretary 
     shall allocate 0.5 percent to the Secretary of the Interior 
     for schools operated or funded by the Bureau of Indian 
     Affairs on the basis of the schools' respective needs for 
     activities consistent with this heading under such terms and 
     conditions as the Secretary of the Interior may determine.
       (2) Reservation.--A State that receives an allocation of 
     funds appropriated under this heading may reserve not more 
     than 2 percent for the administrative costs of carrying out 
     its responsibilities with respect to those funds.
       (3) Awards to local educational agencies.--
       (A) Except as specified in paragraph (2), an allocation of 
     funds to a State shall be used only for awards to local 
     educational agencies for the support of elementary and 
     secondary education in accordance with paragraph (5) for the 
     2010-2011 school year (or, in the case of reallocations made 
     under section 14001(f) of division A of Public Law 111-5, for 
     the 2010-2011 or the 2011-2012 school year).
       (B) Funds used to support elementary and secondary 
     education shall be distributed through a State's primary 
     elementary and secondary funding formulae or based on local 
     educational agencies' relative shares of funds under part A 
     of title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for the most recent fiscal year 
     for which data are available.
       (C) Subsections (a) and (b) of section 14002 of division A 
     of Public Law 111-5 shall not apply to funds appropriated 
     under this heading.
       (4) Compliance with education reform assurances.--For 
     purposes of awarding funds appropriated under this heading, 
     any State that has an approved application for Phase II of 
     the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund that was submitted in 
     accordance with the application notice published in the 
     Federal Register on November 17, 2009 (74 Fed. Reg. 59142) 
     shall be deemed to be in compliance with subsection (b) and 
     paragraphs (2) through (5) of subsection (d) of section 14005 
     of division A of Public Law 111-5.
       (5) Requirement to use funds to retain or create education 
     jobs.--Notwithstanding section 14003(a) of division A of 
     Public Law 111-5, funds awarded to local educational agencies 
     under paragraph (3)--
       (A) may be used only for compensation and benefits and 
     other expenses, such as support services, necessary to retain 
     existing employees, to recall or rehire former employees, and 
     to hire new employees, in order to provide early childhood, 
     elementary, or secondary educational and related services; 
     and
       (B) may not be used for ``general administrative expenses'' 
     or for ``other support services expenditures'' as those terms 
     were defined by the National Center for Education Statistics 
     in its Common Core of Data as of the date of enactment of 
     this Act.
       (6) Prohibition on use of funds for rainy-day funds or debt 
     retirement.--A State that receives an allocation may not use 
     such funds, directly or indirectly, to--
       (A) establish, restore, or supplement a rainy-day fund;
       (B) supplant State funds in a manner that has the effect of 
     establishing, restoring, or supplementing a rainy-day fund;
       (C) reduce or retire debt obligations incurred by the 
     State; or
       (D) supplant State funds in a manner that has the effect of 
     reducing or retiring debt obligations incurred by the State.
       (7) Deadline for award.--The Secretary shall award funds 
     appropriated under this heading not later than 45 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act to States that have 
     submitted applications meeting the requirements applicable to 
     funds under this heading. The Secretary shall not require 
     information in applications beyond what is necessary to 
     determine compliance with applicable provisions of law.
       (8) Alternate distribution of funds.--If, within 30 days 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, a Governor has 
     not submitted an approvable application, the Secretary shall 
     provide for funds allocated to that State to be distributed 
     to another entity or other entities in the State 
     (notwithstanding section 14001(e) of division A of Public Law 
     111-5) for support of elementary and secondary education, 
     under such terms and conditions as the Secretary may 
     establish, provided that all terms and conditions that apply 
     to funds appropriated under this heading shall apply to such 
     funds distributed to such entity or entities. No distribution 
     shall be made to a State under this paragraph, however, 
     unless the Secretary has determined (on the basis of such 
     information as may be available) that the requirements of 
     clauses (i), (ii), or (iii) of paragraph 10(A) are likely to 
     be met, notwithstanding the lack of an application from the 
     Governor of that State.
       (9) Local educational agency application.--Section 442 of 
     the General Education Provisions Act shall not apply to a 
     local educational agency that has previously submitted an 
     application to the State under title XIV of division A of 
     Public Law 111-5. The assurances provided under that 
     application shall continue to apply to funds awarded under 
     this heading.
       (10) Maintenance of effort.--
       (A) Except as provided in paragraph (8), the Secretary 
     shall not allocate funds to a State under paragraph (1) 
     unless the Governor of the State provides an assurance to the 
     Secretary that--
       (i) for State fiscal year 2011, the State will maintain 
     State support for elementary and secondary education (in the 
     aggregate or on the basis of expenditures per pupil) and for 
     public institutions of higher education (not including 
     support for capital projects or for research and development 
     or tuition and fees paid by students) at not less than the 
     level of such support for each of the two categories, 
     respectively, for State fiscal year 2009;
       (ii) for State fiscal year 2011, the State will maintain 
     State support for elementary and secondary education and for 
     public institutions of higher education (not including 
     support for capital projects or for research and development 
     or tuition and fees paid by students) at a percentage of the 
     total revenues available to the State that is equal to or 
     greater than the percentage provided for each of the two 
     categories, respectively, for State fiscal year 2010; or
       (iii) in the case of a State in which State tax collections 
     for calendar year 2009 were less than State tax collections 
     for calendar year 2006, for State fiscal year 2011 the State 
     will maintain State support for elementary and secondary 
     education (in the aggregate) and for public institutions of 
     higher education (not including support for capital projects 
     or for research and development or tuition and fees paid by 
     students)--

       (I) at not less than the level of such support for each of 
     the two categories, respectively, for State fiscal year 2006; 
     or
       (II) at a percentage of the total revenues available to the 
     State that is equal to or greater than the percentage 
     provided for each of the two categories, respectively, for 
     State fiscal year 2006.

       (B) Section 14005(d)(1) and subsections (a) through (c) of 
     section 14012 of division A of Public Law 111-5 shall not 
     apply to funds appropriated under this heading.
       (11) Additional requirements for the state of texas.--The 
     following requirements shall apply to the State of Texas:
       (A) Notwithstanding paragraph (3)(B), funds used to support 
     elementary and secondary education shall be distributed based 
     on local educational agencies' relative shares of funds under 
     part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
     Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for the most recent 
     fiscal year which data are available. Funds distributed 
     pursuant to this paragraph shall be used to supplement and 
     not supplant State formula funding that is distributed on a 
     similar basis to part A of title I of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.).
       (B) The Secretary shall not allocate funds to the State of 
     Texas under paragraph (1) unless the Governor of the State 
     provides an assurance to the Secretary that the State will 
     for fiscal years 2011, 2012, and 2013 maintain State support 
     for elementary and secondary education at a percentage of the 
     total revenues available to the State that is equal to or 
     greater than the percentage provided for such purpose for 
     fiscal year 2011 prior to the enactment of this Act.
       (C) Notwithstanding paragraph (8), no distribution shall be 
     made to the State of Texas or local education agencies 
     therein unless the Governor of Texas makes an assurance to 
     the Secretary that the requirements in paragraphs (11)(A) and 
     (11)(B) will be met, notwithstanding the lack of an 
     application from the Governor of Texas.

                      Student Financial Assistance

       For an additional amount for ``Student Financial 
     Assistance'', $4,950,000,000, to remain available through 
     September 30, 2011, to carry out subpart 1 of part A of title 
     IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965: Provided, That 
     section 3002 shall not apply to the amount under this 
     heading.

                         DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

                      Military Construction, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Military Construction, 
     Army'', $16,500,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2011, for a soldier readiness processing center: Provided, 
     That notwithstanding any other provision of law, such funds 
     may be obligated and expended to carry out planning and 
     design and military construction projects not otherwise 
     authorized by law: Provided further, That section 3002 shall 
     not apply to the amount under this heading.

                    GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER

       Sec. 4101.  For an additional amount for the emergency food 
     assistance program as authorized by section 27(a) of the Food 
     and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2036(a)) and section 
     204(a)(1) of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (7 
     U.S.C. 7508(a)(1)), $50,000,000: Provided, That section 3002 
     shall not apply to the amount in this section.

[[Page 12603]]




                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4102. There is rescinded from accounts under the 
     heading ``Department of Agriculture--Natural Resources 
     Conservation Service'', $69,900,000, to be derived from the 
     unobligated balances of funds that were provided for such 
     accounts in prior appropriation Acts (other than Public Law 
     111-5) and that were designated by the Congress in such Acts 
     as an emergency requirement pursuant to a concurrent 
     resolution on the budget or the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
     Deficit Control Act of 1985.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4103. There is rescinded from accounts under the 
     heading ``Department of Agriculture--Rural Development'', 
     $122,000,000, to be derived from the unobligated balances of 
     funds that were provided for such accounts in prior 
     appropriation Acts (other than Public Law 111-5) and that 
     were designated by the Congress in such Acts as an emergency 
     requirement pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the budget 
     or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
     1985.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4104. Of the funds made available for ``Department of 
     Agriculture--Rural Utilities Service--Distance Learning, 
     Telemedicine, and Broadband Program'' in title I of division 
     A of Public Law 111-5 (123 Stat. 118), $300,000,000 is 
     rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4105.  There is rescinded from accounts under the 
     heading ``Department of Agriculture--Food and Nutrition 
     Service--Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, 
     Infants, and Children (WIC)'', $361,825,000, to be derived 
     from unobligated balances available from amounts placed in 
     reserve in title I of division A of Public Law 111-5 (123 
     Stat. 115).


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4106. Of the unobligated balances available for 
     ``Department of Agriculture--Food and Nutrition Service--
     Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, 
     and Children (WIC)'' as authorized by section 17 of the Child 
     Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786), $125,000,000 is 
     rescinded: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the 
     amount in this section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4107. Of the funds appropriated under the heading 
     ``Department of Commerce--National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology--Construction of Research Facilities'' in title II 
     of division A of Public Law 111-5 (123 Stat. 129) $15,000,000 
     is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4108. Of the funds made available for ``Department of 
     Commerce--National Telecommunications and Information 
     Administration--Broadband Technology Opportunities Program'' 
     in title II of division A of Public Law 111-5, $302,000,000 
     is rescinded.
       Sec. 4109.  For an additional amount for the Department of 
     Justice for necessary expenses for increased law enforcement 
     activities related to Southwest border enforcement, 
     $201,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011: 
     Provided, That funds shall be distributed to the following 
     accounts and in the following specified amounts:
       (1) ``Administrative Review and Appeals'', $2,118,000;
       (2) ``Detention Trustee'', $7,000,000;
       (3) ``Legal Activities, Salaries and Expenses, General 
     Legal Activities'', $3,862,000;
       (4) ``Legal Activities, Salaries and Expenses, United 
     States Attorneys'', $9,198,000;
       (5) ``United States Marshals Service, Salaries and 
     Expenses'', $29,651,000;
       (6) ``United States Marshals Service, Construction'', 
     $8,000,000;
       (7) ``Interagency Law Enforcement, Interagency Crime and 
     Drug Enforcement'', $21,000,000;
       (8) ``Federal Bureau of Investigation, Salaries and 
     Expenses'', $25,262,000;
       (9) ``Drug Enforcement Administration, Salaries and 
     Expenses'', $35,805,000;
       (10) ``Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, 
     Salaries and Expenses'', $39,104,000; and
       (11) ``Federal Prison System, Salaries and Expenses'', 
     $20,000,000.
       Sec. 4110.  Section 8005 of the Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Act, 2010 (division A of Public Law 111-118) 
     is amended by striking the dollar amount specified in such 
     section and inserting ``$6,000,000,000'': Provided, That 
     section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in this section: 
     Provided further, That the amendment made by this section 
     shall apply in lieu of any amendment made by another 
     provision of this Act to such dollar amount.
       Sec. 4111.  With respect to the multiyear procurement of F/
     A-18E, F/A-18F, and EA-18G aircraft--  
       (1) section 8011 of division A of Public Law 111-118 is 
     amended by striking ``within 30 days of enactment of this 
     Act'' and inserting ``30 days prior to contract award'';
       (2) the term ``March 1 of the year in which the Secretary 
     requests legislative authority to enter into such contract,'' 
     in section 2306b(i)(1) of title 10, United States Code, and 
     section 128(a)(2) of Public Law 111-84, shall be deemed to be 
     a reference to September 1, 2010;
       (3) the Secretary of Defense may submit the report 
     identified in section 2306b(l)(4) of title 10, United States 
     Code, to the congressional defense committees on or before 
     September 1, 2010; and
       (4) the authority provided in section 8011 of Public Law 
     111-118 and section 128(a) of Public Law 111-84, as amended 
     by this section, shall satisfy, with respect to the 
     procurement of F/A-18E, F/A-18F, and EA-18G aircraft, the 
     requirements of sections 2306b(i)(3) and 2306b(l)(3) of title 
     10, United States Code, that a multiyear contract be 
     authorized by law in an appropriations Act and an Act other 
     than an appropriations Act.
       Sec. 4112.  For all major defense acquisition programs for 
     which the Department of Defense plans to proceed to source 
     selection during the current fiscal year and fiscal year 
     2011, the Secretary of Defense shall perform an assessment of 
     such programs and the proposals of all bidders to determine 
     whether or not the costs are realistic and reasonable with 
     respect to expected industry development and production 
     costs: Provided, That the assessments shall address whether 
     the programs and proposals of all bidders are at fair market 
     value: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall 
     provide an assessment of the programs and proposals of all 
     bidders to determine the number of jobs, including an 
     estimate of development and direct manufacturing jobs, 
     supported or lost in the United States of America: Provided 
     further, That jobs supported or lost shall be measured as 
     full time equivalent personnel: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary of Defense shall provide a report, in consultation 
     with the Secretary of Labor, containing the results of these 
     assessments to the congressional defense committees not later 
     than 60 days after enactment of this Act and on a quarterly 
     basis thereafter.

                         (including rescission)

       Sec. 4113. (a) In addition to the amounts provided 
     elsewhere in this Act, there is appropriated $300,000,000 for 
     an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Defense-Wide'', to remain available until expended. Such 
     funds may be available for the Office of Economic Adjustment, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, for 
     transportation infrastructure improvements associated with 
     medical facilities related to recommendations of the Defense 
     Base Closure and Realignment Commission.
       (b) Of the funds appropriated for ``Defense Health 
     Program'' in title VI of division A of Public Law 111-118, 
     $300,000,000 is rescinded, to be derived from amounts for 
     operation and maintenance.
       (c) Section 3002 shall not apply to the amounts in this 
     section.

                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4114. (a) Of the funds appropriated in Department of 
     Defense Appropriations Acts, the following funds are 
     rescinded from the following accounts in the specified 
     amounts:
       ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, 2006/2010'', 
     $107,000,000;
       ``Aircraft Procurement, Army, 2008/2010'', $21,000,000;
       ``Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army, 
     2008/2010'', $21,000,000;
       ``Procurement of Ammunition, Army, 2008/2010'', 
     $17,000,000;
       ``Other Procurement, Army, 2008/2010'', $75,000,000;
       ``Aircraft Procurement, Navy, 2008/2010'', $166,000,000;
       ``Weapons Procurement, Navy, 2008/2010'', $26,000,000;
       ``Other Procurement, Navy, 2008/2010'', $42,000,000;
       ``Procurement, Marine Corps, 2008/2010'', $13,000,000;
       ``Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2008/2010'', 
     $102,000,000;
       ``Missile Procurement, Air Force, 2008/2010'', $28,000,000;
       ``Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force, 2008/2010'', 
     $7,000,000;
       ``Other Procurement, Air Force, 2008/2010'', $130,000,000;
       ``Procurement, Defense-Wide, 2008/2010'', $33,000,000;
       ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, 2009/
     2010'', $76,000,000;
       ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, 2009/
     2010'', $131,000,000;
       ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force, 
     2009/2010'', $164,000,000;
       ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide, 
     2009/2010'', $137,000,000;
       ``Operation, Test and Evaluation, Defense, 2009/2010'', 
     $1,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Army, 2010'', $154,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy, 2010'', $155,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps, 2010'', 
     $25,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, 2010'', 
     $155,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, 2010'', 
     $126,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve, 2010'', 
     $12,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve, 2010'', 
     $6,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve, 2010'', 
     $1,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve, 2010'', 
     $14,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard, 2010'', 
     $28,000,000; and

[[Page 12604]]

       ``Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard, 2010'', 
     $27,000,000.
       (b) Section 3002 shall not apply to amounts in this 
     section.

                             (rescissions)

       Sec. 4115. (a) Of the funds appropriated in the American 
     Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5), the 
     following funds are rescinded from the following accounts in 
     the specified amounts:
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Army, 2009/2010'', 
     $113,500,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy, 2009/2010'', 
     $34,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps, 2009/2010'', 
     $7,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, 2009/2010'', 
     $61,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve, 2009/2010'', 
     $3,500,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve, 2009/2010'', 
     $8,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve, 2009/
     2010'', $1,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve, 2009/
     2010'', $2,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard, 2009/
     2010'', $1,000,000;
       ``Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard, 2009/
     2010'', $2,500,000; and
       ``Defense Health Program, 2009/2010'', $27,000,000.
       (b) Of the funds appropriated in the Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-252), the following 
     funds are rescinded from the following account in the 
     specified amount:
       ``Procurement, Marine Corps, 2008/2010'', $177,180,000.

             (including transfer of funds and rescissions)

       Sec. 4116. (a) In addition to amounts provided elsewhere in 
     this Act, there is appropriated $163,000,000 for an 
     additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-
     Wide'', to remain available until expended: Provided, That 
     such funds shall only be available to the Secretary of 
     Defense, acting through the Office of Economic Adjustment of 
     the Department of Defense, or for transfer to the Secretary 
     of Education, notwithstanding any other provision of law, to 
     make grants, conclude cooperative agreements, or supplement 
     other Federal funds to construct, renovate, repair, or expand 
     elementary and secondary public schools on military 
     installations in order to address capacity or facility 
     condition deficiencies at such schools: Provided further, 
     That in making such funds available, the Office of Economic 
     Adjustment or the Secretary of Education shall give priority 
     consideration to those military installations with schools 
     having the most serious capacity or facility condition 
     deficiencies as determined by the Secretary of Defense.
       (b)(1) Of the funds appropriated for ``Procurement of 
     Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army'' in title III of 
     division A of public Law 111-118, $116,000,000 is rescinded.
       (2) Of the funds appropriated under the heading ``Operation 
     and Maintenance, Army'' in title II of division A of Public 
     Law 111-118, $100,000,000 is rescinded.
       (3) Of the funds appropriated for ``Other Procurement, 
     Army'' in title III of division C of Public Law 110-329, 
     $87,000,000 is rescinded.
       (c) Section 3002 shall not apply to amounts in this 
     section.
       Sec. 4117. (a) Specific Appropriation or Contribution.--
     Section 1702 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 
     16512) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
       ``(b) Specific Appropriation or Contribution.--
       ``(1) In general.--No guarantee shall be made unless--
       ``(A) an appropriation for the cost of the guarantee has 
     been made;
       ``(B) the Secretary has received from the borrower a 
     payment in full for the cost of the guarantee and deposited 
     the payment into the Treasury; or
       ``(C) a combination of one or more appropriations under 
     subparagraph (A) and one or more payments from the borrower 
     under subparagraph (B) has been made that is sufficient to 
     cover the cost of the guarantee.
       ``(2) Limitation.--The source of payments received from a 
     borrower under paragraph (1)(B) or (C) shall not be a loan or 
     other debt obligation that is made or guaranteed by the 
     Federal Government.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(l) Credit Report.--If, in the opinion of the Secretary, 
     a third-party credit rating of the applicant or project is 
     not necessary for the Secretary to begin review of an 
     application, the project costs are not projected to exceed 
     $100,000,000, and the applicant agrees to accept the credit 
     rating assigned to the applicant by the Secretary, the 
     Secretary may waive an otherwise applicable requirement 
     (including any requirement described in part 609 of title 10, 
     Code of Federal Regulations) to provide a third-party credit 
     report with an application, provided that the Secretary 
     requires a third party credit report prior to issuance of a 
     conditional commitment for a guarantee.
       ``(m) Multiple Sites.--Notwithstanding any contrary 
     requirement (including any provision under part 609 of title 
     10, Code of Federal Regulations) an eligible project may be 
     located on two or more non-contiguous sites in the United 
     States.''.
       (b) Applications for Multiple Eligible Projects.--Section 
     1705 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16516) is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
       ``(e) Multiple Applications.--Notwithstanding any contrary 
     requirement (including any provision under part 609.3(a) of 
     title 10, Code of Federal Regulations), a project applicant 
     or sponsor of an eligible project may submit an application 
     for more than one eligible project under this section.''.
       (c) Energy Efficiency Loan Guarantees.--Section 1705(a) of 
     the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16516(a)) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Efficient end-use energy technologies.
       ``(5) Combined heat and power or industrial waste energy 
     recovery projects.''.
       (d) Administrative Costs.--Section 136 of the Energy 
     Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. 17013) is 
     amended by striking subsection (f) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(f) Fees.--The Secretary is authorized to charge and 
     collect fees from applicants for or recipients of an award or 
     loan to cover administrative costs. For any given loan or 
     award, such fees shall not exceed $100,000 or 10 basis points 
     of the loan or award. In addition to the foregoing fees, the 
     Secretary may require applicants for and recipients of an 
     award or loan under this section to pay directly, or through 
     the payment of fees to be used by the Secretary to pay, all 
     fees and expenses of agents, consultants, and professional 
     advisors retained by the Secretary in connection with 
     activities authorized under this section.''.


                             (rescissions)

       Sec. 4118. There are rescinded the following amounts from 
     the specified accounts:
       (1) $35,000,000, to be derived from unobligated balances 
     made available under ``Mississippi River and Tributaries'' in 
     Public Law 110-329.
       (2) $4,874,037, to be derived from unobligated balances 
     made available under ``Flood Control and Coastal 
     Emergencies'' in Public Law 109-234.
       (3) $5,005,400, to be derived from unobligated balances 
     made available under ``Flood Control and Coastal 
     Emergencies'' in title V of Public Law 110-28.
       (4) $2,199,629, to be derived from unobligated balances 
     made available under ``Construction'' in Public Law 109-148.


                             (rescissions)

       Sec. 4119.  (a) There are rescinded the following amounts 
     from the specified accounts:
       (1) $150,000,000, to be derived from unobligated balances 
     of funds made available under the heading ``Corps of 
     Engineers, Civil--Construction'' in prior appropriations Acts 
     (other than Public Law 111-5) for projects and activities 
     authorized under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 
     1948, section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1986, and section 206 of the Water Resources Act of 1996.
       (2) $40,000,000, to be derived from unobligated balances of 
     funds made available under the heading ``Corps of Engineers, 
     Civil--Construction'' in prior appropriations Acts, other 
     than funds designated by the Congress as an emergency 
     requirement pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the budget 
     or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
     1985.
       (b) Section 3002 shall not apply to amounts in this 
     section.


                             (rescissions)

       Sec. 4120.  (a) There are rescinded the following amounts 
     from the specified accounts:
       (1) $78,000,000, to be derived from unobligated balances of 
     funds made available under the heading ``Department of 
     Energy--Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy'' in division 
     C of Public Law 111-8 and Public Law 111-85 for biomass and 
     biorefinery research, development, and demonstration.
       (2) $71,000,000, to be derived from unobligated balances of 
     funds made available in prior appropriations Acts under the 
     heading ``Department of Energy--Strategic Petroleum 
     Reserve'', including $14,493,000 provided in Public Law 110-
     161 for new site land acquisition activities; $31,507,000 
     provided in Public Law 111-8 for new site expansion 
     activities, beyond land acquisition; and $25,000,000 provided 
     in Public Law 111-85.
       (3) $20,000,000, to be derived from unobligated balances of 
     funds made available in prior appropriations Acts under the 
     heading ``Department of Energy--Nuclear Energy''.
       (b) Section 3002 shall not apply to amounts in this 
     section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4121. Of the unobligated balances of funds provided 
     under the heading ``Nuclear Regulatory Commission'' in prior 
     appropriations Acts, $18,000,000 is permanently rescinded: 
     Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in 
     this section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4122. From unobligated balances of prior year 
     appropriations made available to ``Domestic Nuclear Detection 
     Office--Systems Acquisition'', $50,000,000 is rescinded: 
     Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in 
     this section.

[[Page 12605]]

       Sec. 4123. (a) The Administrator of General Services, not 
     later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     shall prepare and submit to the Congress a building project 
     survey report related to a consolidated headquarters for the 
     Federal Bureau of Investigation in the Washington 
     metropolitan region (as defined in section 8301 of title 40, 
     United States Code).
       (b) The building project survey report shall be prepared by 
     the Administrator of General Services in consultation with 
     the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and each 
     strategy described in the report shall contain, at a minimum, 
     an estimated cost, a financing and development plan, a 
     budgetary and financial impact analysis, a procurement and 
     implementation plan, an analysis of security and information 
     technology issues specific to the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation, and a schedule.
       (c) The building project survey report shall identify a 
     preferred strategy.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4124. There are permanently rescinded from ``General 
     Services Administration--Real Property Activities--Federal 
     Building Fund'', $75,000,000 from Rental of Space and 
     $25,000,000 from Building Operations, to be derived from 
     unobligated balances that were provided in previous 
     appropriations Acts: Provided, That section 3002 shall not 
     apply to the amount in this section.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 4125. (a) The Secretary of Homeland Security may 
     transfer to the Secretary of the Interior amounts available 
     for environmental mitigation requirements for ``U.S. Customs 
     and Border Protection--Border Security Fencing, 
     Infrastructure, and Technology'' for fiscal year 2009 or 
     thereafter, for use by the Secretary of the Interior under 
     laws administered by such Secretary to mitigate adverse 
     environmental impacts, including impact on species listed 
     under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
     seq.) resulting from construction, operation, and maintenance 
     activities related to border security.
       (b) Uses of funds authorized by this section include 
     acquisition of land or interests in land that will, in the 
     judgment of the Secretary of the Interior, mitigate or off-
     set such adverse impacts.
       (c) Any funds transferred under this section shall be used 
     in accordance with an agreement between the Secretaries.
       (d) Not later than September 30, 2010, and on an annual 
     basis thereafter, the Secretary of the Interior shall submit 
     to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the 
     House of Representatives a report that describes in detail 
     the actions taken in the preceding year with amounts 
     transferred under this section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4126. From unobligated balances of prior year 
     appropriations made available for ``Transportation Security 
     Administration--Aviation Security'' in chapter 5 of title III 
     of Public Law 110-28, $6,600,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4127. From unobligated balances of prior year 
     appropriations made available for ``United States Coast 
     Guard--Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements'' in 
     chapter 4 of title I of division B of Public Law 109-148, 
     $3,000,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4128. From unobligated balances of prior year 
     appropriations made available for ``United States Coast 
     Guard--Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements'' in 
     chapter 4 of title II of Public Law 109-234, $4,000,000 is 
     rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4129. From unobligated balances of prior year 
     appropriations made available for ``Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency--Administrative and Regional Operations'' 
     in chapter 4 of title II of Public Law 109-234, $36,000,000 
     is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4130. From unobligated balances of prior year 
     appropriations made available for ``Domestic Nuclear 
     Detection Office--Research, Development, and Operations'' in 
     chapter 5 of title III of Public Law 110-28, $3,800,000 is 
     rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4131. From unobligated balances of prior year 
     appropriations made available to ``U.S. Customs and Border 
     Protection--Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and 
     Technology'', $200,000,000 is rescinded: Provided, That 
     section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in this section.
       Sec. 4132.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     including any agreement, the Federal share of assistance, 
     including direct Federal assistance provided under sections 
     403, 406, and 407 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 
     and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170b, 5172, and 
     5173), for damages resulting from FEMA-1909-DR, FEMA-1894-DR, 
     and FEMA-3311-EM-RI shall not be less than 90 percent of the 
     eligible costs under such sections.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4133. Of the funds made available for ``Bureau of Land 
     Management--Management of Lands and Resources'' in title VII 
     of division A of Public Law 111-5, $6,400,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4134. Of the funds made available for ``Bureau of Land 
     Management--Construction'' in title VII of division A of 
     Public Law 111-5, $3,600,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4135. Of the funds made available for ``National Park 
     Service--Construction'' in title VII of division A of Public 
     Law 111-5, $3,200,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4136. Of the funds made available for ``United States 
     Geological Survey--Surveys, Investigations, and Research'' in 
     title VII of division A of Public Law 111-5, $5,000,000 is 
     rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4137. Of the funds made available for ``Bureau of 
     Indian Affairs--Construction'' in title VII of division A of 
     Public Law 111-5, $2,934,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4138. Of the funds made available for ``Bureau of 
     Indian Affairs--Indian Guaranteed Loan Program Account'' in 
     title VII of division A of Public Law 111-5, $6,820,000 is 
     rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4139. Of the funds made available for ``Environmental 
     Protection Agency--Hazardous Substance Superfund'' in title 
     VII of division A of Public Law 111-5, $6,000,000 is 
     rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4140. Of the funds made available for ``Environmental 
     Protection Agency--Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust 
     Fund Program'' in title VII of division A of Public Law 111-
     5, $9,200,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4141. Of the funds made available for transfer in 
     title VII of division A of Public Law 111-5, ``Environmental 
     Protection Agency--Environmental Programs and Management'', 
     $13,000,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4142. Of the funds made available for ``Department of 
     Agriculture--Forest Service--Capital Improvement and 
     Maintenance'' in title VII of division A of Public Law 111-5, 
     $20,000,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4143. Of the funds transferred in section 703 of title 
     VII of division A of Public Law 111-5, ``Department of the 
     Interior--Working Capital Fund'', $4,400,000 is permanently 
     rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4144. Of the funds made available for ``National Park 
     Service--Construction'' in chapter 5 of title II of Public 
     Law 105-18, $7,600,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4145. Of the funds made available for ``National Park 
     Service--Construction'' in chapter 7 of division B of Public 
     Law 108-324, $5,104,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4146. Of the funds made available for ``National Park 
     Service--Construction'' in chapter 5 of title II of Public 
     Law 109-234, $6,700,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4147. Of the funds made available for ``Fish and 
     Wildlife Service--Construction'' in chapter 6 of title I of 
     division B of Public Law 110-329, $13,300,000 is rescinded.
       Sec. 4148.  Section 11(c)(1) of the Outer Continental Shelf 
     Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1340(c)(1)) is amended in the fourth 
     sentence by striking ``within thirty days of its 
     submission,'' and inserting the following: ``within 90 days 
     of its submission or within such additional time as the 
     Secretary determines is necessary to complete any 
     environmental, safety, or other reviews (in the case of 
     leases issued pursuant to a sale held after March 17, 2010), 
     or within 90 days of its submission or, with the consent of 
     the holder of the lease, within such additional time as the 
     Secretary determines is necessary to complete any 
     environmental, safety, or other reviews (in the case of 
     leases issued pursuant to a sale held on or before March 17, 
     2010),''.
       Sec. 4149.  From funds appropriated in this Act under the 
     heading ``Department of Health and Human Services--Office of 
     the Secretary--Public Health and Social Services Emergency 
     Fund'', the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall make 
     grants to States, in the amount needed to defray actual 
     costs, for the purpose of assisting school districts serving 
     significant numbers of children who entered the United States 
     from Haiti during the period January 12, 2010, through May 
     30, 2010, and who are United States citizens or Haitian 
     nationals, to meet the educational and related needs of such 
     children.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4150. The unobligated balance of funds appropriated in 
     the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and 
     Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1995 
     (Public Law 103-333; 108 Stat. 2574) under the heading 
     ``Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund'' is 
     rescinded.

[[Page 12606]]

       Sec. 4151.  Amounts in section 1012 of division B of Public 
     Law 111-118 shall be deemed to have been designated by such 
     section on the date of its enactment as an emergency 
     requirement and necessary to meet emergency needs pursuant to 
     sections 403 and 423(b) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), 
     the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010.
       Sec. 4152. (a) Oil Spill Unemployment Assistance.--Upon a 
     determination by the President that additional resources are 
     necessary to respond to an incident related to a spill of 
     national significance declared under the National Contingency 
     Plan provided for under section 105 of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605) (``covered incident''), the Secretary 
     of Labor is authorized to provide to any individual 
     unemployed as a result of such covered incident such benefit 
     assistance as the Secretary deems appropriate while such 
     individual is unemployed for the weeks of such unemployment 
     with respect to which the individual is not entitled to any 
     other unemployment compensation (as that term is defined in 
     section 85(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) or 
     waiting period credit. Such assistance as the Secretary shall 
     provide shall be available to an individual as long as the 
     individual's unemployment caused by such covered incident 
     continues or until the individual is reemployed in a suitable 
     position, but no longer than 26 weeks after the individual's 
     unemployment that resulted from the covered incident. Oil 
     spill unemployment assistance payments for a week of 
     unemployment shall not exceed the maximum weekly amount 
     authorized under the unemployment compensation law of the 
     individual's State. The Secretary is directed to provide such 
     assistance through agreements with States that, in the 
     Secretary's judgment, have an adequate system for 
     administering such assistance through existing State 
     agencies.
       (b) Federal-State Agreements.--Any State affected by a 
     covered incident may enter into and participate in an 
     agreement under this section with the Secretary. Any State 
     which is a party to an agreement under this section may, upon 
     providing 30 days' written notice to the Secretary, terminate 
     such agreement.
       (c) Provisions of Agreement.--Any agreement under 
     subsection (b) shall provide that the State agency of the 
     State will--
       (1) make payments of oil spill unemployment assistance to 
     individuals who--
       (A) are unemployed as a result of a covered incident;
       (B) have no rights to regular compensation or extended 
     compensation with respect to a week under State law or any 
     other State unemployment compensation law or to compensation 
     under any other Federal law; and
       (C) are not receiving compensation with respect to such 
     week under the unemployment compensation law of Canada; and
       (2) refer individuals receiving oil spill unemployment 
     assistance under this section to one-stop delivery systems 
     established under section 134(c) of the Workforce Investment 
     Act of 1998 for reemployment services or training provided 
     under such Act, the Wagner-Peyser Act, or other Federal law.
       (d) Weekly Benefit Amount, Due Process Rights.--For 
     purposes of any agreement under this section, the terms and 
     conditions of Federal law and regulations which apply to 
     claims for disaster unemployment assistance and to the 
     payment thereof shall apply to claims for oil spill 
     unemployment assistance and the payment thereof, except where 
     otherwise inconsistent with the provisions of this section or 
     with the regulations or operating instructions of the 
     Secretary promulgated to carry out this section.
       (e) Unauthorized Aliens Ineligible.--A State shall require 
     as a condition of oil spill unemployment assistance under 
     this section that each alien who receives such assistance 
     must be legally authorized to work in the United States, as 
     defined for purposes of the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (26 
     U.S.C. 3101 et seq.). In determining whether an alien meets 
     the requirements of this subsection, a State must follow the 
     procedures provided in section 1137(d) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1320b-7(d)).
       (f) Fraud and Overpayments.--
       (1) In general.--If an individual knowingly has made, or 
     caused to be made by another, a false statement or 
     representation of a material fact, or knowingly has failed, 
     or caused another to fail, to disclose a material fact, and 
     as a result of such false statement or representation or of 
     such nondisclosure such individual has received an amount of 
     oil spill unemployment assistance under this section to which 
     such individual was not entitled, such individual--
       (A) shall be ineligible for further oil spill unemployment 
     assistance under this section in accordance with the 
     provisions of the applicable State unemployment compensation 
     law relating to fraud in connection with a claim for 
     unemployment compensation; and
       (B) shall be subject to prosecution under section 1001 of 
     title 18, United States Code.
       (2) Repayment.--In the case of an individual who has 
     received oil spill unemployment assistance under this section 
     to which such individual was not entitled, the State shall 
     require such individual to repay the amount of such oil spill 
     unemployment assistance to the State agency, except that the 
     State agency may waive such repayment if it determines that--
       (A) the payment of such oil spill unemployment assistance 
     was without fault on the part of any such individual; and
       (B) such repayment would be contrary to equity and good 
     conscience.
       (3) Prevention and detection by state agency.--The State 
     agency shall submit a weekly payment file of all benefit 
     payments to the National Directory of New Hires, and shall 
     make arrangements for the cross match of the benefit payment 
     recipients' social security numbers with the National 
     Directory of New Hires Reported Hire and Benefit payment 
     databases a minimum of once each week and investigate all 
     matches.
       (4) Recovery by state agency.--
       (A) In general.--The State agency may recover the amount to 
     be repaid, or any part thereof, by deductions from any oil 
     spill unemployment assistance payable to such individual 
     under this section or from any unemployment compensation 
     payable to such individual under any State or Federal 
     unemployment compensation law administered by the State 
     agency or under any other State or Federal law administered 
     by the State agency which provides for the payment of any 
     assistance or allowance with respect to any week of 
     unemployment, during the 3-year period after the date such 
     individual received the payment of the oil spill unemployment 
     assistance to which such individual was not entitled, except 
     that no single deduction may exceed 50 percent of the weekly 
     benefit amount from which such deduction is made.
       (B) Opportunity for hearing.--No repayment shall be 
     required, and no deduction shall be made, until a 
     determination has been made, notice thereof and an 
     opportunity for a fair hearing has been given to the 
     individual, and the determination has become final.
       (5) Review.--Any determination by a State agency under this 
     subsection shall be subject to review in the same manner and 
     to the same extent as determinations under the State 
     unemployment compensation law, and only in that manner and to 
     that extent.
       (g) Payments to States.--
       (1) Benefits.--There shall be paid to each State that has 
     entered into an agreement under this section an amount equal 
     to 100 percent of the oil spill unemployment assistance paid 
     to individuals by the State under such agreement.
       (2) Administration.--There shall be paid to each State that 
     has entered into an agreement under this section such amounts 
     as the Secretary determines necessary for the proper and 
     efficient administration of such agreement.
       (h) Financing.--
       (1) In general.--There are appropriated out of the general 
     fund of the United States Treasury such funds as may be 
     necessary in meeting the costs of benefits, Federal 
     administration, and State administration of agreements under 
     this section.
       (2) Certification.--The Secretary shall from time to time 
     certify to the Secretary of the Treasury for payment to each 
     State the sums payable to such State under this section. Upon 
     receipt of the certification from the Secretary, the 
     Secretary of the Treasury shall make payments to the State in 
     accordance with such certification, by transfers from the 
     general fund of the United States Treasury.
       (i) Relationship With Income Replacement Payments for Lost 
     Wages or Self Employment Income by the Responsible Party.--
       (1) The total combined amount an individual receives of oil 
     spill unemployment assistance and payments by the responsible 
     party for either lost wages or self-employment income shall 
     not exceed the greater of--
       (A) the total amount of unemployment assistance that an 
     individual is entitled to receive under subsection (a), as 
     determined by the State agency; or
       (B) the liability of the responsible party to such 
     individual for lost wages or self-employment income.
       (2) If a responsible party or the Oil Spill Liability Trust 
     Fund under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et 
     seq.) makes a payment to the individual for lost wages 
     related to unemployment resulting from a covered incident, 
     and an individual has previously received unemployment 
     assistance under this section for such period of 
     unemployment, the responsible party or the Oil Spill 
     Liability Trust Fund shall subtract from such payment the 
     amount of such unemployment assistance and shall reimburse 
     such subtracted amount to the United States for deposit in 
     the general fund of the Treasury. If a responsible party 
     fails to reimburse such subtracted amount pursuant to this 
     paragraph, the Secretary of the Treasury shall request the 
     Attorney General to bring a civil action against the 
     responsible party or a guarantor in an appropriate district 
     court to recover the amount of the demand, plus all costs 
     incurred in obtaining payment including prejudgment interest, 
     attorneys fees, and any other administrative and adjudicative 
     costs involved.
       (3) If a responsible party or the Oil Spill Liability Trust 
     Fund has made a payment to an individual for lost wages 
     related to unemployment resulting from a covered incident,

[[Page 12607]]

     the amount of such payment shall be subtracted from the 
     unemployment assistance under this section that the 
     individual subsequently receives for such period of 
     unemployment.
       (4) Any individual's receipt of unemployment assistance 
     under this section related to unemployment resulting from a 
     covered incident shall be conditional on the individual 
     taking appropriate actions, as determined by the Secretary, 
     to seek payment for lost wages for such period of 
     unemployment under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 
     2701 et seq.) from the responsible party or the Oil Spill 
     Liability Trust Fund.
       (5) Any individual, as a condition of receiving oil spill 
     unemployment assistance, shall provide informed consent to 
     the sharing of benefit information between the State agency 
     and the responsible party (or its claim processor) or the Oil 
     Spill Liability Trust Fund, as appropriate, for the purpose 
     of determining eligibility and to avoid duplicate payments as 
     deemed necessary.
       (6) If the Secretary determines the actions described in 
     paragraphs (2) through (5) have not succeeded in avoiding 
     duplicate payments, the Secretary may take such other actions 
     as the Secretary determines necessary in order to avoid 
     duplicate payments, consistent with the responsible party or 
     the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund making payments to 
     individuals for lost wages related to unemployment resulting 
     from a covered incident.
       (7) The Secretary may take such actions as the Secretary 
     determines are necessary for implementing this section, 
     including entering into agreements with States that have 
     agreements with the Secretary to administer this program, and 
     the responsible party with respect to each State's 
     administration of this program and payments made by the 
     responsible party to claimants for lost wages and self-
     employment income to establish processes for--
       (A) the coordination of payment of oil spill unemployment 
     assistance under this section and payments for lost wages and 
     self employment income by the responsible party or the Oil 
     Spill Liability Trust Fund so as to minimize duplicate 
     payments to claimants, including methods to--
       (i) prevent duplicate payments, such as developing methods 
     for claims processing that identify eligibility for both 
     types of payments so as to ensure the individual receives no 
     more than the amount specified in paragraph (1) of this 
     subsection;
       (ii) document that individuals who received either oil 
     spill unemployment assistance or payments by the responsible 
     party or the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund prior to 
     execution of the agreement were unemployed as a result of the 
     oil spill; and
       (iii) ensure prompt and accurate payment of oil spill 
     unemployment assistance under this section or payment of 
     claims by the responsible party or the Oil Spill Liability 
     Trust Fund;
       (B) sharing and protecting information regarding an 
     individual's claim for oil spill unemployment assistance or 
     claims for replacement of wages that is necessary to 
     coordinate benefit payments and claims by the responsible 
     party or the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund under 
     subparagraph (A);
       (C) reimbursement by the responsible party to the Federal 
     Government and States for payment of oil spill unemployment 
     assistance to individuals whose unemployment was the result 
     of a covered incident and for the administration of this 
     program, which may include the responsible party developing a 
     special fund for use by the States to pay benefits under this 
     program, in accordance with the process developed under 
     subparagraph (A) with a periodic reconciliation process to 
     make future claims unnecessary;
       (D) ensuring that the responsible party shall make benefit 
     information available to government organizations upon 
     request, subject to the safeguards applicable to confidential 
     unemployment compensation information in Federal law and 
     regulations, which shall apply to the Secretary, the State 
     agencies administering the oil spill unemployment assistance 
     program, the responsible party, and the Oil Spill Liability 
     Trust Fund; and
       (E) developing similar agreements with the responsible 
     party to coordinate payments of unemployment compensation 
     under State law related to a covered incident and payments 
     made by the responsible party or the Oil Spill Liability 
     Trust Fund.
       (8) The procedures developed under this section may be 
     employed by States to coordinate payments of unemployment 
     compensation under State law related to a covered incident 
     and payments made by the responsible party or the Oil Spill 
     Liability Trust Fund.
       (j) Liability of Responsible Parties.--Each responsible 
     party under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et 
     seq.) is liable for any costs, net of any payments by the 
     responsible party to the United States under subsection (i), 
     incurred by the United States under this section and shall, 
     upon the demand of the Secretary of the Treasury, reimburse 
     the general fund of the Treasury for these costs as well as 
     the costs of the United States in administering its 
     responsibilities under this section. If a responsible party 
     fails to pay a demand of the Secretary of the Treasury 
     pursuant to this subsection, the Secretary shall request the 
     Attorney General to bring a civil action against the 
     responsible party or a guarantor in an appropriate district 
     court to recover the amount of the demand, plus all costs 
     incurred in obtaining payment including prejudgment interest, 
     attorneys fees, and any other administrative and adjudicative 
     costs involved. Such reimbursement shall be without regard to 
     limits of liability under section 1004 of the Oil Pollution 
     Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2704).
       (k) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 
     immediately upon enactment of this Act and shall apply to all 
     responsible parties under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 
     U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), including any party determined to be 
     liable under such Act for any incident that occurred prior to 
     the enactment of this section.
       (l) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
       (1) Duplicate payments.--The term ``duplicate payments'' 
     includes any payment that would cause the individual to 
     receive payments in excess of the amount determined under 
     paragraph (1) of subsection (i).
       (2) Responsible party.--The term ``responsible party'' 
     means one or more responsible parties.
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Labor.
       (4) State.--The term ``State'' means any State, as such 
     term is defined in section 3306(j)(1) of the Federal 
     Unemployment Tax Act (26 U.S.C. 3306(j)(1)).
       (5) State agency.--The term ``State agency'' means the 
     State agency which administers the unemployment compensation 
     law of the State approved by the Secretary of Labor under 
     section 3304 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
       Sec. 4153. (a) In General.--Section 173(a) of the Workforce 
     Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2918(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) to provide assistance to the Governor of any State 
     within the boundaries of an area that is the subject of a 
     Presidential determination that additional resources are 
     necessary to respond to an incident related to a spill of 
     national significance declared under the National Contingency 
     Plan provided for under section 105 of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605) (`covered incident') to provide oil 
     spill relief employment in the area.''.
       (b) Oil Spill Relief Employment Assistance Requirements.--
     Section 173 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 
     U.S.C. 2918) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(h) Oil Spill Relief Employment Assistance 
     Requirements.--
       ``(1) In general.--Funds made available under subsection 
     (a)(5)--
       ``(A) shall be used to provide oil spill relief employment 
     on projects involving the cleaning, restoration, renovation, 
     repair and reconstruction of lands, marshes, waters, 
     structures, and facilities located within the area of the 
     covered incident, as well as offshore areas related to such 
     incident, and projects that provide food, clothing, shelter, 
     and other humanitarian assistance to individuals harmed by 
     the covered incident;
       ``(B) may be expended through public and private agencies 
     and organizations engaged in such projects;
       ``(C) may be expended to provide employment and training 
     activities;
       ``(D) may be expended to provide personal protective 
     equipment to workers engaged in oil spill relief employment 
     described in subparagraph (A);
       ``(E) may be used to increase the capacity of States to 
     make available the full range of services authorized under 
     this title and provide information (in languages appropriate 
     to the individuals served) about, and access to, the variety 
     of public and private services available to individuals 
     adversely affected by the covered incident in One-Stop Career 
     Centers and other access points (including other public 
     facilities, mobile service delivery units, and social 
     services offices); and
       ``(F) may be used to provide temporary employment by public 
     sector entities for a period not to exceed 6 months, in 
     addition to the oil spill relief employment described in 
     subparagraph (A).
       ``(2) Eligibility.--An individual shall be eligible for 
     services under subsection (a)(5) if such individual is 
     temporarily or permanently laid off as a consequence of the 
     covered incident described in such subsection, is a 
     dislocated worker, is a long-term unemployed individual, or 
     meets such other criteria as the Secretary may establish.
       ``(3) Limitations on oil spill relief employment 
     assistance.--No individual shall be employed under subsection 
     (a)(5) for more than 6 months for oil spill relief employment 
     related to recovery from a single covered incident. The 
     Secretary may, upon reviewing a State's request, extend such 
     employment related to recovery from a single covered incident 
     for up to an additional 6 months.
       ``(4) Reimbursement.--Each responsible party under the Oil 
     Pollution Act of 1990 (33

[[Page 12608]]

     U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) is liable for any costs incurred by the 
     United States under this subsection or subsection (a)(5) and 
     shall, upon the demand of the Secretary of the Treasury, 
     reimburse the general fund of the Treasury for the costs 
     incurred under this subsection or subsection (a)(5) as well 
     as the costs of the United States in administering its 
     responsibilities under this subsection or subsection (a)(5). 
     If a responsible party fails to pay a demand of the Secretary 
     of the Treasury pursuant to this subsection or subsection 
     (a)(5), the Secretary shall request the Attorney General to 
     bring a civil action against the responsible party or a 
     guarantor in an appropriate district court to recover the 
     amount of the demand, plus all costs incurred in obtaining 
     payment including prejudgment interest, attorney's fees, and 
     any other administrative and adjudicative costs involved. 
     Such reimbursement shall be without regard to limits of 
     liability under section 1004 of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 
     (33 U.S.C. 2704).
       ``(5) Use of available funds.--Funds appropriated for 
     fiscal years 2009 and 2010 and remaining available for 
     obligation by the Secretary to provide any assistance 
     authorized under this section shall be available to assist 
     workers affected by a covered incident, including workers who 
     have relocated from areas in which a covered incident has 
     been declared. Under such conditions as the Secretary may 
     approve, any State may use funds that remain available for 
     expenditure under any grants awarded to the State under this 
     section to provide any assistance authorized under this 
     subsection. Funds used pursuant to the authority provided 
     under this paragraph shall be subject to the reimbursement 
     requirements described in paragraph (4).
       ``(6) Requirements for grant applications.--An application 
     submitted to the Secretary under this subsection shall 
     include a detailed description of--
       ``(A) how the State will ensure the capacity of One-Stop 
     Career Centers and other access points to--
       ``(i) provide affected individuals with information, in 
     languages appropriate to the individuals served, about the 
     range of available services; and
       ``(ii) provide affected individuals with access to the 
     range of needed services;
       ``(B) how the State will prioritize individuals who are 
     temporarily or permanently laid off as a consequence of the 
     covered incident in the assignment of temporary employment 
     positions; and
       ``(C) any other supporting information the Secretary may 
     require.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--This section, and the amendments made 
     by this section, shall take effect immediately upon enactment 
     of this Act and shall apply to all responsible parties under 
     the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), 
     including any party determined to be liable under such Act 
     for any incident that occurred prior to the enactment of this 
     Act.
       (d) Appropriation.--There is appropriated $50,000,000 for 
     an additional amount for ``Department of Labor--Employment 
     and Training Administration--Training and Employment 
     Services'', to carry out section 173(a)(5) and (h) of the 
     Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 29l8(a)(5) and 
     (h)) (``WIA'') as amended by this Act, to remain available 
     through June 30, 2011: Provided, That funding shall be 
     available upon enactment of this Act, notwithstanding section 
     189(g)(l) of WIA.
       Sec. 4154. (a) The Secretary of Labor may reserve not more 
     than 1 percent of the funds available to carry out section 
     4152 of this Act and section 173(h) of the Workforce 
     Investment Act of 1998 (as added by section 4153 of this Act) 
     for transfer to appropriate Department of Labor accounts for 
     program administration and support activities in the 
     Department of Labor associated with such sections, and for 
     the increased worker protection and workplace benefit 
     activities and oversight and coordination activities in 
     connection with the application of laws and regulations 
     associated with the Department's response to spills of 
     national significance declared under the National Contingency 
     Plan provided for under section 105 of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605).
       (b) A responsible party under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 
     (33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) shall, upon the demand of the 
     Secretary of the Treasury, reimburse the general fund of the 
     Treasury for all or a portion of the additional amount 
     appropriated herein, as determined by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury.
       (c) If a responsible party fails to pay a demand of the 
     Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to this section, the 
     Secretary shall request the Attorney General to bring a civil 
     action against the responsible party or a guarantor in an 
     appropriate district court to recover the amount of the 
     demand, plus all costs incurred in obtaining payment 
     including prejudgment interest, attorneys fees, and any other 
     administrative and adjudicative costs involved. Such 
     reimbursement shall be without regard to limits of liability 
     under section 1004 of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 
     U.S.C. 2704).
       (d) This section shall take effect immediately upon 
     enactment of this Act and shall apply to all responsible 
     parties under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, including any 
     party determined to be liable under such Act for any incident 
     that occurred prior to the enactment of this Act.
       (e) The Secretary of Labor shall provide to the Committees 
     on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate a report describing the use of the funds not later 
     than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4155. Of the unobligated balance of funds appropriated 
     without fiscal year limitation under the heading ``Department 
     of Health and Human Services--Office of the Secretary--Public 
     Health and Social Services Emergency Fund'' in fiscal years 
     2006 through 2010 to prepare for and respond to an influenza 
     pandemic (including any amount not yet designated by the 
     President as emergency funds) and the unobligated balance of 
     funds transferred to ``Public Health and Social Services 
     Emergency Fund'' pursuant to the fourth paragraph under such 
     heading in Public Law 111-117, $2,000,000,000 is rescinded: 
     Provided, That the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in 
     consultation with the Director of the Office of Management 
     and Budget, shall determine the amount to be rescinded from 
     each appropriation and shall transmit a written notice of 
     such determination to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate not later than 30 
     days after enactment of this Act: Provided further, That 
     section 3002 shall not apply to $500,000,000 of the amount in 
     this section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4156. Of the funds appropriated for ``Department of 
     Education--Innovation and Improvement'' in division D of 
     Public Law 111-117 (123 Stat. 3263), $100,000,000 is 
     rescinded, to be derived only from the amount available for 
     grants authorized under subpart I of part B of title V of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965: Provided, 
     That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in this 
     section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4157. Of the funds appropriated for ``Department of 
     Education--Innovation and Improvement'' in division A of 
     Public Law 111-5 (123 Stat. 182) and division D of Public Law 
     111-117 (123 Stat. 3263), $200,000,000 is rescinded, to be 
     derived only from amounts available for the Teacher Incentive 
     Fund: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to 
     $100,000,000 of the amount in this section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4158. Of the funds appropriated for ``Department of 
     Education--State Fiscal Stabilization Fund'' in title XIV of 
     division A of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 
     2009 (Public Law 111-5; 123 Stat. 279), $500,000,000 is 
     rescinded, to be derived only from the amount made available 
     for grants under section 14006 of such title and through a 
     corresponding reduction in the total amount reserved under 
     section 14001(c) of such title for grants under such section 
     14006.
       Sec. 4159.  Amounts appropriated to the Architect of the 
     Capitol in the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2006 
     (Public Law 109-55) under the heading ``Architect of the 
     Capitol--Capitol Police Building and Grounds'' and that 
     remain available until September 30, 2010, and amounts 
     appropriated to the Architect of the Capitol in the 
     Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-
     68) under the heading ``Architect of the Capitol--Capitol 
     Police Buildings, Grounds and Security'' and that remain 
     available until September 30, 2014, shall be available to the 
     Architect of the Capitol for the purchase of real property 
     (including any buildings or facilities) for the use of the 
     Capitol Police.
       Sec. 4160. (a) Termination of OEPPO.--Section 905 of the 
     Emergency Supplemental Act, 2002 (2 U.S.C. 130i) is repealed.
       (b) Transfer to Sergeant at Arms.--The functions and 
     responsibilities of the Office of Emergency Planning, 
     Preparedness, and Operations under section 905 of the 
     Emergency Supplemental Act, 2002 (2 U.S.C. 130i) (as in 
     effect on the day before the date referred to in subsection 
     (c)) shall be transferred and assigned to the Sergeant at 
     Arms of the House of Representatives.
       (c) Effective Date.--This section and the amendment made by 
     this section shall take effect February 1, 2010.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4161. Of the unobligated balances available to the 
     Architect of the Capitol from prior year appropriations for 
     the Capitol Visitor Center project, $5,000,000 is rescinded: 
     Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount in 
     this section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4162. Of the unobligated balances available under 
     ``Department of Defense, Military Construction, Army'' from 
     prior appropriations Acts, $340,000,000 is rescinded: 
     Provided, That no funds may be rescinded from amounts that 
     were designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement 
     or as appropriations for overseas deployments and other 
     activities pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the budget 
     or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
     1985: Provided further, That section 3002

[[Page 12609]]

     shall not apply to the amount in this section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4163. Of the unobligated balances available under 
     ``Department of Defense, Military Construction, Navy and 
     Marine Corps'' from prior appropriations Acts, $110,000,000 
     is rescinded: Provided, That no funds may be rescinded from 
     amounts that were designated by the Congress as an emergency 
     requirement or as appropriations for overseas deployments and 
     other activities pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the 
     budget or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
     Act of 1985: Provided further, That section 3002 shall not 
     apply to the amount in this section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4164. Of the unobligated balances available under 
     ``Department of Defense, Military Construction, Air Force'' 
     from prior appropriations Acts, $50,000,000 is rescinded: 
     Provided, That no funds may be rescinded from amounts that 
     were designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement 
     or as appropriations for overseas deployments and other 
     activities pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the budget 
     or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
     1985: Provided further, That section 3002 shall not apply to 
     the amount in this section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4165. Of the funds made available for the General 
     Operating Expenses account of the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs in section 2201(e)(4)(A)(ii) of division B of Public 
     Law 111-5 (123 Stat. 454; 26 U.S.C. 6428 note), $6,100,000 is 
     rescinded.
       Sec. 4166.  None of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available by this Act may be obligated by any covered 
     executive agency in contravention of the certification 
     requirement of section 6(b) of the Iran Sanctions Act of 
     1996, as included in the revisions to the Federal Acquisition 
     Regulation pursuant to such section.

                             (rescissions)

       Sec. 4167. (a) Millennium Challenge Corporation.--Of the 
     unobligated balances available under the heading ``Millennium 
     Challenge Corporation'' in title III of division H of Public 
     Law 111-8 and under such heading in prior Acts making 
     appropriations for the Department of State, foreign 
     operations, and related programs, $150,000,000 is rescinded.
       (b) Civilian Stabilization Initiative.--
       (1) Department of state.--Of the unobligated balances 
     available under the heading ``Department of State--
     Administration of Foreign Affairs--Civilian Stabilization 
     Initiative'' in prior Acts making appropriations for the 
     Department of State, foreign operations, and related 
     programs, $40,000,000 is rescinded.
       (2) United states agency for international development.--Of 
     the unobligated balances available under the heading ``United 
     States Agency for International Development--Funds 
     Appropriated to the President--Civilian Stabilization 
     Initiative'' in prior Acts making appropriations for the 
     Department of State, foreign operations, and related 
     programs, $30,000,000 is rescinded.
       (c) Section 3002 shall not apply to the amounts in this 
     section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4168. Of the unobligated balances available under the 
     heading ``Capital Investment Fund'' in title XI of division A 
     of Public Law 111-5, $40,000,000 is rescinded.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4169. Of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available under section 108(b) of Public Law 101-100, as 
     added by Public Law 101-130, to the Emergency Fund authorized 
     by section 125 of title 23, United States Code, $10,893,687 
     is rescinded: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply to 
     the amount in this section.


                             (rescissions)

       Sec. 4170. There are rescinded the following amounts from 
     the specified accounts:
       (1) ``Department of Transportation--Federal Aviation 
     Administration--Facilities and Equipment'', $2,182,544, to be 
     derived from unobligated balances made available under this 
     heading in Public Law 108-324.
       (2) ``Department of Transportation--Federal Aviation 
     Administration--Facilities and Equipment'', $5,705,750, to be 
     derived from unobligated balances made available under this 
     heading in Public Law 109-148.
       (3) ``Department of Housing and Urban Development--
     Community Planning and Development--Community Development 
     Fund'', $111,602,923, to be derived from unobligated balances 
     made available under this heading in chapter 10 of title I of 
     division B of Public Law 110-329.
       Sec. 4171.  The item relating to ``Federal Housing 
     Administration--General and Special Risk Program Account'' in 
     title II of division A of the Consolidated Appropriations 
     Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-117; 123 Stat. 3091) is amended by 
     striking ``$15,000,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$20,000,000,000'': Provided, That section 3002 shall not 
     apply to the amount in this section.
       Sec. 4172.  Section 1117(d) of the Transportation Equity 
     Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 161) is repealed and the 
     designation made by that section shall no longer be 
     effective.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4173. Of the unobligated balances of contract 
     authority apportioned to each State for the programs listed 
     in section 105(a)(2) of title 23, United States Code (except 
     the equity bonus program under section 105 of such title and 
     the high priority projects program under section 117 of such 
     title), $2,200,000,000 is permanently rescinded: Provided, 
     That such rescission shall be distributed within each State 
     among all programs for which funds were apportioned for 
     fiscal year 2009 and to which the rescission applies, to the 
     extent sufficient funds remain available for obligation, in 
     the ratio that the amount of funds apportioned for each such 
     program for such fiscal year, bears to the amount of funds 
     apportioned for all such programs for such fiscal year: 
     Provided further, That funds set aside under sections 
     133(d)(2) and 133(d)(3) of title 23, United States Code, 
     shall be treated as being apportioned for the purposes of 
     this section: Provided further, That section 1132 of Public 
     Law 110-140 shall not apply to the rescission under this 
     section: Provided further, That section 3002 shall not apply 
     to the amount in this section.


                              (rescission)

       Sec. 4174. Of the unobligated balances of funds under the 
     heading ``Department of Housing and Urban Development--
     Community Planning and Development--Community Development 
     Fund'' made available by section 159 of Public Law 110-92, as 
     added by division B of Public Law 110-116, $400,000,000 is 
     rescinded.

                               CHAPTER 2

               PRESERVE ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE GENERICS ACT


                              short title

       Sec. 4201. This chapter may be cited as the ``Preserve 
     Access to Affordable Generics Act''.


                    unlawful compensation for delay

       Sec. 4202.  (a) In General.--The Federal Trade Commission 
     Act (15 U.S.C. 44 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating section 28 as section 29; and
       (2) by inserting before section 29, as redesignated, the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 28. PRESERVING ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE GENERICS.

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Enforcement proceeding.--The Federal Trade Commission 
     may initiate a proceeding to enforce the provisions of this 
     section against the parties to any agreement resolving or 
     settling, on a final or interim basis, a patent infringement 
     claim, in connection with the sale of a drug product.
       ``(2) Presumption.--
       ``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), in such a 
     proceeding, an agreement shall be presumed to have 
     anticompetitive effects and be unlawful if--
       ``(i) an ANDA filer receives anything of value; and
       ``(ii) the ANDA filer agrees to limit or forego research, 
     development, manufacturing, marketing, or sales of the ANDA 
     product for any period of time.
       ``(B) Exception.--The presumption in subparagraph (A) shall 
     not apply if the parties to such agreement demonstrate by 
     clear and convincing evidence that the procompetitive 
     benefits of the agreement outweigh the anticompetitive 
     effects of the agreement.
       ``(b) Competitive Factors.--In determining whether the 
     settling parties have met their burden under subsection 
     (a)(2)(B), the fact finder shall consider--
       ``(1) the length of time remaining until the end of the 
     life of the relevant patent, compared with the agreed upon 
     entry date for the ANDA product;
       ``(2) the value to consumers of the competition from the 
     ANDA product allowed under the agreement;
       ``(3) the form and amount of consideration received by the 
     ANDA filer in the agreement resolving or settling the patent 
     infringement claim;
       ``(4) the revenue the ANDA filer would have received by 
     winning the patent litigation;
       ``(5) the reduction in the NDA holder's revenues if it had 
     lost the patent litigation;
       ``(6) the time period between the date of the agreement 
     conveying value to the ANDA filer and the date of the 
     settlement of the patent infringement claim; and
       ``(7) any other factor that the fact finder, in its 
     discretion, deems relevant to its determination of 
     competitive effects under this subsection.
       ``(c) Limitations.--In determining whether the settling 
     parties have met their burden under subsection (a)(2)(B), the 
     fact finder shall not presume--
       ``(1) that entry would not have occurred until the 
     expiration of the relevant patent or statutory exclusivity; 
     or
       ``(2) that the agreement's provision for entry of the ANDA 
     product prior to the expiration of the relevant patent or 
     statutory exclusivity means that the agreement is pro-
     competitive, although such evidence may be relevant to the 
     fact finder's determination under this section.

[[Page 12610]]

       ``(d) Exclusions.--Nothing in this section shall prohibit a 
     resolution or settlement of a patent infringement claim in 
     which the consideration granted by the NDA holder to the ANDA 
     filer as part of the resolution or settlement includes only 
     one or more of the following:
       ``(1) The right to market the ANDA product in the United 
     States prior to the expiration of--
       ``(A) any patent that is the basis for the patent 
     infringement claim; or
       ``(B) any patent right or other statutory exclusivity that 
     would prevent the marketing of such drug.
       ``(2) A payment for reasonable litigation expenses not to 
     exceed $7,500,000.
       ``(3) A covenant not to sue on any claim that the ANDA 
     product infringes a United States patent.
       ``(e) Regulations and Enforcement.--
       ``(1) Regulations.--The Federal Trade Commission may issue, 
     in accordance with section 553 of title 5, United States 
     Code, regulations implementing and interpreting this section. 
     These regulations may exempt certain types of agreements 
     described in subsection (a) if the Commission determines such 
     agreements will further market competition and benefit 
     consumers. Judicial review of any such regulation shall be in 
     the United States District Court for the District of Columbia 
     pursuant to section 706 of title 5, United States Code.
       ``(2) Enforcement.--A violation of this section shall be 
     treated as a violation of section 5.
       ``(3) Judicial review.--Any person, partnership or 
     corporation that is subject to a final order of the 
     Commission, issued in an administrative adjudicative 
     proceeding under the authority of subsection (a)(1), may, 
     within 30 days of the issuance of such order, petition for 
     review of such order in the United States Court of Appeals 
     for the District of Columbia Circuit or the United States 
     Court of Appeals for the circuit in which the ultimate parent 
     entity, as defined at 16 C.F.R. 801.1(a)(3), of the NDA 
     holder is incorporated as of the date that the NDA is filed 
     with the Secretary of the Food and Drug Administration, or 
     the United States Court of Appeals for the circuit in which 
     the ultimate parent entity of the ANDA filer is incorporated 
     as of the date that the ANDA is filed with the Secretary of 
     the Food and Drug Administration. In such a review 
     proceeding, the findings of the Commission as to the facts, 
     if supported by evidence, shall be conclusive.
       ``(f) Antitrust Laws.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to modify, impair, or supersede the applicability 
     of the antitrust laws as defined in subsection (a) of the 
     first section of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12(a)) and of 
     section 5 of this Act to the extent that section 5 applies to 
     unfair methods of competition. Nothing in this section shall 
     modify, impair, limit or supersede the right of an ANDA filer 
     to assert claims or counterclaims against any person, under 
     the antitrust laws or other laws relating to unfair 
     competition.
       ``(g) Penalties.--
       ``(1) Forfeiture.--Each person, partnership or corporation 
     that violates or assists in the violation of this section 
     shall forfeit and pay to the United States a civil penalty 
     sufficient to deter violations of this section, but in no 
     event greater than 3 times the value received by the party 
     that is reasonably attributable to a violation of this 
     section. If no such value has been received by the NDA 
     holder, the penalty to the NDA holder shall be shall be 
     sufficient to deter violations, but in no event greater than 
     3 times the value given to the ANDA filer reasonably 
     attributable to the violation of this section. Such penalty 
     shall accrue to the United States and may be recovered in a 
     civil action brought by the Federal Trade Commission, in its 
     own name by any of its attorneys designated by it for such 
     purpose, in a district court of the United States against any 
     person, partnership or corporation that violates this 
     section. In such actions, the United States district courts 
     are empowered to grant mandatory injunctions and such other 
     and further equitable relief as they deem appropriate.
       ``(2) Cease and desist.--
       ``(A) In general.--If the Commission has issued a cease and 
     desist order with respect to a person, partnership or 
     corporation in an administrative adjudicative proceeding 
     under the authority of subsection (a)(1), an action brought 
     pursuant to paragraph (1) may be commenced against such 
     person, partnership or corporation at any time before the 
     expiration of 1 year after such order becomes final pursuant 
     to section 5(g).
       ``(B) Exception.--In an action under subparagraph (A), the 
     findings of the Commission as to the material facts in the 
     administrative adjudicative proceeding with respect to such 
     person's, partnership's or corporation's violation of this 
     section shall be conclusive unless--
       ``(i) the terms of such cease and desist order expressly 
     provide that the Commission's findings shall not be 
     conclusive; or
       ``(ii) the order became final by reason of section 5(g)(1), 
     in which case such finding shall be conclusive if supported 
     by evidence.
       ``(3) Civil penalty.--In determining the amount of the 
     civil penalty described in this section, the court shall take 
     into account--
       ``(A) the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the 
     violation;
       ``(B) with respect to the violator, the degree of 
     culpability, any history of violations, the ability to pay, 
     any effect on the ability to continue doing business, profits 
     earned by the NDA holder, compensation received by the ANDA 
     filer, and the amount of commerce affected; and
       ``(C) other matters that justice requires.
       ``(4) Remedies in addition.--Remedies provided in this 
     subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other 
     remedy provided by Federal law. Nothing in this paragraph 
     shall be construed to affect any authority of the Commission 
     under any other provision of law.
       ``(h) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Agreement.--The term `agreement' means anything that 
     would constitute an agreement under section 1 of the Sherman 
     Act (15 U.S.C. 1) or section 5 of this Act.
       ``(2) Agreement resolving or settling a patent infringement 
     claim.--The term `agreement resolving or settling a patent 
     infringement claim' includes any agreement that is entered 
     into within 30 days of the resolution or the settlement of 
     the claim, or any other agreement that is contingent upon, 
     provides a contingent condition for, or is otherwise related 
     to the resolution or settlement of the claim.
       ``(3) ANDA.--The term `ANDA' means an abbreviated new drug 
     application, as defined under section 505(j) of the Federal 
     Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j)).
       ``(4) ANDA filer.--The term `ANDA filer' means a party who 
     has filed an ANDA with the Food and Drug Administration.
       ``(5) ANDA product.--The term `ANDA product' means the 
     product to be manufactured under the ANDA that is the subject 
     of the patent infringement claim.
       ``(6) Drug product.--The term `drug product' means a 
     finished dosage form (e.g., tablet, capsule, or solution) 
     that contains a drug substance, generally, but not 
     necessarily, in association with 1 or more other ingredients, 
     as defined in section 314.3(b) of title 21, Code of Federal 
     Regulations.
       ``(7) NDA.--The term `NDA' means a new drug application, as 
     defined under section 505(b) of the Federal Food, Drug, and 
     Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(b)).
       ``(8) NDA holder.--The term `NDA holder' means--
       ``(A) the party that received FDA approval to market a drug 
     product pursuant to an NDA;
       ``(B) a party owning or controlling enforcement of the 
     patent listed in the Approved Drug Products With Therapeutic 
     Equivalence Evaluations (commonly known as the `FDA Orange 
     Book') in connection with the NDA; or
       ``(C) the predecessors, subsidiaries, divisions, groups, 
     and affiliates controlled by, controlling, or under common 
     control with any of the entities described in subparagraphs 
     (A) and (B) (such control to be presumed by direct or 
     indirect share ownership of 50 percent or greater), as well 
     as the licensees, licensors, successors, and assigns of each 
     of the entities.
       ``(9) Patent infringement.--The term `patent infringement' 
     means infringement of any patent or of any filed patent 
     application, extension, reissue, renewal, division, 
     continuation, continuation in part, reexamination, patent 
     term restoration, patents of addition and extensions thereof.
       ``(10) Patent infringement claim.--The term `patent 
     infringement claim' means any allegation made to an ANDA 
     filer, whether or not included in a complaint filed with a 
     court of law, that its ANDA or ANDA product may infringe any 
     patent held by, or exclusively licensed to, the NDA holder of 
     the drug product.
       ``(11) Statutory exclusivity.--The term `statutory 
     exclusivity' means those prohibitions on the approval of drug 
     applications under clauses (ii) through (iv) of section 
     505(c)(3)(E) (5- and 3-year data exclusivity), section 527 
     (orphan drug exclusivity), or section 505A (pediatric 
     exclusivity) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act .''.
       (b) Effective Date.--Section 28 of the Federal Trade 
     Commission Act, as added by this section, shall apply to all 
     agreements described in section 28(a)(1) of that Act entered 
     into after November 15, 2009. Section 28(g) of the Federal 
     Trade Commission Act, as added by this section, shall not 
     apply to agreements entered into before the date of enactment 
     of this chapter.


                 notice and certification of agreements

       Sec. 4203.  (a) Notice of All Agreements.--Section 
     1112(c)(2) of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, 
     and Modernization Act of 2003 (21 U.S.C. 355 note) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``the Commission the'' and inserting the 
     following: ``the Commission--
       ``(1) the'';
       (2) by striking the period and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by inserting at the end the following:
       ``(2) any other agreement the parties enter into within 30 
     days of entering into an agreement covered by subsection (a) 
     or (b).''.
       (b) Certification of Agreements.--Section 1112 of such Act 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Certification.--The Chief Executive Officer or the 
     company official responsible for negotiating any agreement 
     required to be

[[Page 12611]]

     filed under subsection (a), (b), or (c) shall execute and 
     file with the Assistant Attorney General and the Commission a 
     certification as follows: `I declare that the following is 
     true, correct, and complete to the best of my knowledge: The 
     materials filed with the Federal Trade Commission and the 
     Department of Justice under section 1112 of subtitle B of 
     title XI of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and 
     Modernization Act of 2003, with respect to the agreement 
     referenced in this certification: (1) represent the complete, 
     final, and exclusive agreement between the parties; (2) 
     include any ancillary agreements that are contingent upon, 
     provide a contingent condition for, or are otherwise related 
     to, the referenced agreement; and (3) include written 
     descriptions of any oral agreements, representations, 
     commitments, or promises between the parties that are 
     responsive to subsection (a) or (b) of such section 1112 and 
     have not been reduced to writing.'.''.


                forfeiture of 180-day exclusivity period

       Sec. 4204. Section 505(j)(5)(D)(i)(V) of the Federal Food, 
     Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j)(5)(D)(i)(V)) is 
     amended by inserting ``section 28 of the Federal Trade 
     Commission Act or'' after ``that the agreement has 
     violated''.


                    commission litigation authority

       Sec. 4205. Section 16(a)(2) of the Federal Trade Commission 
     Act (15 U.S.C. 56(a)(2)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``or'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in subparagraph (E), by inserting ``or'' after the 
     semicolon; and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following:
       ``(F) under section 28;''.


                         statute of limitations

       Sec. 4206. The Commission shall commence any enforcement 
     proceeding described in section 28 of the Federal Trade 
     Commission Act, as added by section 3202, except for an 
     action described in section 28(g)(2) of the Federal Trade 
     Commission Act, not later than 3 years after the date on 
     which the parties to the agreement file the Notice of 
     Agreement as provided by section 1112(c) of the Medicare 
     Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 
     (21 U.S.C. 355 note).


                              severability

       Sec. 4207. If any provision of this chapter, an amendment 
     made by this chapter, or the application of such provision or 
     amendment to any person or circumstance is held to be 
     unconstitutional, the remainder of this chapter, the 
     amendments made by this chapter, and the application of the 
     provisions of such chapter or amendments to any person or 
     circumstance shall not be affected thereby.

                               CHAPTER 3

           COMPUTATION OF MEDICAID AVERAGE MANUFACTURER PRICE


computation of medicaid average manufacturer price (amp) for drugs not 
             dispensed through retail community pharmacies

       Sec. 4301.  (a) In General.--Section 1927(k)(1)(B)(i)(IV) 
     of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396r-
     8(k)(1)(B)(i)(IV)), as amended by section 2503(a)(2)(B) of 
     the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 
     111-148) and by section 1102(c)(2) of the Health Care and 
     Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-152), is 
     amended by inserting after ``retail community pharmacy'' the 
     following: ``, except that in the case of an inhalation, 
     infusion, or injectable drug that is not dispensed through a 
     retail community pharmacy, the exclusion under this subclause 
     shall not apply to payments received from, and rebates and 
     discounts provided to, distributors or hospitals, clinics, 
     doctors, and other entities directly dispensing the drug; 
     and''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect as if included in section 2503 of Public 
     Law 111-148.

                               CHAPTER 4

            PUBLIC SAFETY EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE COOPERATION ACT


                              short title

       Sec. 4401. This chapter may be cited as the ``Public Safety 
     Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2010''.


                   declaration of purpose and policy

       Sec. 4402. The Congress declares that the following is the 
     policy of the United States:
       (1) Labor-management relationships and partnerships are 
     based on trust, mutual respect, open communication, bilateral 
     consensual problem solving, and shared accountability. Labor-
     management cooperation fully utilizes the strengths of both 
     parties to best serve the interests of the public, operating 
     as a team, to carry out the public safety mission in a 
     quality work environment. In many public safety agencies, it 
     is the union that provides the institutional stability as 
     elected leaders and appointees come and go.
       (2) State and local public safety officers play an 
     essential role in the efforts of the United States to detect, 
     prevent, and respond to terrorist attacks, and to respond to 
     natural disasters, hazardous materials, and other mass 
     casualty incidents. State and local public safety officers, 
     as first responders, are a component of our Nation's National 
     Incident Management System, developed by the Department of 
     Homeland Security to coordinate response to and recovery from 
     terrorism, major natural disasters, and other major 
     emergencies. Public safety employer-employee cooperation is 
     essential in meeting these needs and is, therefore, in the 
     National interest.
       (3) The Federal Government needs to encourage conciliation, 
     mediation, and voluntary arbitration to aid and encourage 
     employers and the representatives of their employees to reach 
     and maintain agreements concerning rates of pay, hours, and 
     working conditions, and to make all reasonable efforts 
     through negotiations to settle their differences by mutual 
     agreement reached through collective bargaining or by such 
     methods as may be provided for in any applicable agreement 
     for the settlement of disputes.
       (4) The absence of adequate cooperation between public 
     safety employers and employees has implications for the 
     security of employees and can affect interstate and 
     intrastate commerce. The lack of such labor-management 
     cooperation can detrimentally impact the upgrading of police 
     and fire services of local communities, the health and well-
     being of public safety officers, and the morale of the fire 
     and police departments. Additionally, these factors could 
     have significant commercial repercussions. Moreover, 
     providing minimal standards for collective bargaining 
     negotiations in the public safety sector can prevent 
     industrial strife between labor and management that 
     interferes with the normal flow of commerce.
       (5) Many States and localities already provide public 
     safety officers with collective bargaining rights comparable 
     to or greater than the rights and responsibilities set forth 
     in this chapter, and such State and local laws should be 
     respected.


                              definitions

       Sec. 4403. In this chapter:
       (1) Authority.--The term ``Authority'' means the Federal 
     Labor Relations Authority.
       (2) Confidential employee.--The term ``confidential 
     employee'' has the meaning given such term under applicable 
     State law on the date of enactment of this Act. If no such 
     State law is in effect, the term means an individual, 
     employed by a public safety employer, who--
       (A) is designated as confidential; and
       (B) is an individual who routinely assists, in a 
     confidential capacity, supervisory employees and management 
     employees.
       (3) Emergency medical services personnel.--The term 
     ``emergency medical services personnel'' means an individual 
     who provides out-of-hospital emergency medical care, 
     including an emergency medical technician, paramedic, or 
     first responder.
       (4) Employer; public safety agency.--The terms ``employer'' 
     and ``public safety agency'' mean any State, or political 
     subdivision of a State, that employs public safety officers.
       (5) Firefighter.--The term ``firefighter'' has the meaning 
     given the term ``employee engaged in fire protection 
     activities'' in section 3(y) of the Fair Labor Standards Act 
     of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203(y)).
       (6) Labor organization.--The term ``labor organization'' 
     means an organization composed in whole or in part of 
     employees, in which employees participate, and which 
     represents such employees before public safety agencies 
     concerning grievances, conditions of employment, and related 
     matters.
       (7) Law enforcement officer.--The term ``law enforcement 
     officer'' has the meaning given such term in section 1204 of 
     the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 3796b).
       (8) Management employee.--The term ``management employee'' 
     has the meaning given such term under applicable State law in 
     effect on the date of enactment of this Act. If no such State 
     law is in effect, the term means an individual employed by a 
     public safety employer in a position that requires or 
     authorizes the individual to formulate, determine, or 
     influence the policies of the employer.
       (9) Person.--The term ``person'' means an individual or a 
     labor organization.
       (10) Public safety officer.--The term ``public safety 
     officer''--
       (A) means an employee of a public safety agency who is a 
     law enforcement officer, a firefighter, or an emergency 
     medical services personnel;
       (B) includes an individual who is temporarily transferred 
     to a supervisory or management position; and
       (C) does not include a permanent supervisory, management, 
     or confidential employee.
       (11) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several 
     States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and 
     any territory or possession of the United States.
       (12) Substantially provides.--The term ``substantially 
     provides'', when used with respect to the rights and 
     responsibilities described in section 3404(b), means 
     compliance with each right and responsibility described in 
     such section.
       (13) Supervisory employee.--The term ``supervisory 
     employee'' has the meaning given such term under applicable 
     State law in effect on the date of enactment of this Act. If 
     no such State law is in effect, the

[[Page 12612]]

     term means an individual, employed by a public safety 
     employer, who--
       (A) has the authority in the interest of the employer to 
     hire, direct, assign, promote, reward, transfer, furlough, 
     lay off, recall, suspend, discipline, or remove public safety 
     officers, to adjust their grievances, or to effectively 
     recommend such action, if the exercise of the authority is 
     not merely routine or clerical in nature but requires the 
     consistent exercise of independent judgment; and
       (B) devotes a majority of time at work to exercising such 
     authority.


              determination of rights and responsibilities

       Sec. 4404.  (a) Determination.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Authority shall make a 
     determination as to whether a State substantially provides 
     for the rights and responsibilities described in subsection 
     (b).
       (2) Consideration of additional opinions.--In making the 
     determination described in paragraph (1), the Authority shall 
     consider the opinions of affected employers and labor 
     organizations. In the case where the Authority is notified by 
     an affected employer and labor organization that both parties 
     agree that the law applicable to such employer and labor 
     organization substantially provides for the rights and 
     responsibilities described in subsection (b), the Authority 
     shall give such agreement weight to the maximum extent 
     practicable in making the Authority's determination under 
     this subsection.
       (3) Limited criteria.--In making the determination 
     described in paragraph (1), the Authority shall be limited to 
     the application of the criteria described in subsection (b) 
     and shall not require any additional criteria.
       (4) Subsequent determinations.--
       (A) In general.--A determination made pursuant to paragraph 
     (1) shall remain in effect unless and until the Authority 
     issues a subsequent determination, in accordance with the 
     procedures set forth in subparagraph (B).
       (B) Procedures for subsequent determinations.--Upon 
     establishing that a material change in State law or its 
     interpretation has occurred, an employer or a labor 
     organization may submit a written request for a subsequent 
     determination. If satisfied that a material change in State 
     law or its interpretation has occurred, the Authority shall 
     issue a subsequent determination not later than 30 days after 
     receipt of such request.
       (5) Judicial review.--Any person or employer aggrieved by a 
     determination of the Authority under this section may, during 
     the 60-day period beginning on the date on which the 
     determination was made, petition any United States Court of 
     Appeals in the circuit in which the person or employer 
     resides or transacts business or in the District of Columbia 
     circuit, for judicial review. In any judicial review of a 
     determination by the Authority, the procedures contained in 
     subsections (c) and (d) of section 7123 of title 5, United 
     States Code, shall be followed.
       (b) Rights and Responsibilities.--In making a determination 
     described in subsection (a), the Authority shall consider a 
     State's law to substantially provide the required rights and 
     responsibilities unless such law fails to provide rights and 
     responsibilities comparable to or greater than the following:
       (1) Granting public safety officers the right to form and 
     join a labor organization, which may exclude management 
     employees, supervisory employees, and confidential employees, 
     that is, or seeks to be, recognized as the exclusive 
     bargaining representative of such employees.
       (2) Requiring public safety employers to recognize the 
     employees' labor organization (freely chosen by a majority of 
     the employees), to agree to bargain with the labor 
     organization, and to commit any agreements to writing in a 
     contract or memorandum of understanding.
       (3) Providing for the right to bargain over hours, wages, 
     and terms and conditions of employment.
       (4) Making available an interest impasse resolution 
     mechanism, such as fact-finding, mediation, arbitration, or 
     comparable procedures.
       (5) Requiring enforcement of all rights, responsibilities, 
     and protections provided by State law and enumerated in this 
     section, and of any written contract or memorandum of 
     understanding between a labor organization and a public 
     safety employer, through--
       (A) a State administrative agency, if the State so chooses; 
     and
       (B) at the election of an aggrieved party, the State 
     courts.
       (c) Compliance With Requirements.--If the Authority 
     determines, acting pursuant to its authority under subsection 
     (a), that a State substantially provides rights and 
     responsibilities described in subsection (b), then this 
     chapter shall not preempt State law.
       (d) Failure to Meet Requirements.--
       (1) In general.--If the Authority determines, acting 
     pursuant to its authority under subsection (a), that a State 
     does not substantially provide for the rights and 
     responsibilities described in subsection (b), then such State 
     shall be subject to the regulations and procedures described 
     in section 3405 beginning on the later of--
       (A) the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of 
     this Act;
       (B) the date that is the last day of the first regular 
     session of the legislature of the State that begins after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act; or
       (C) in the case of a State receiving a subsequent 
     determination under subsection (a)(4), the date that is the 
     last day of the first regular session of the legislature of 
     the State that begins after the date the Authority made the 
     determination.
       (2) Partial failure.--If the Authority makes a 
     determination that a State does not substantially provide for 
     the rights and responsibilities described in subsection (b) 
     solely because the State law substantially provides for such 
     rights and responsibilities for certain categories of public 
     safety officers covered by this chapter but not others, the 
     Authority shall identify those categories of public safety 
     officers that shall be subject to the regulations and 
     procedures described in section 4405, pursuant to section 
     4408(b)(3) and beginning on the appropriate date described in 
     paragraph (1), and those categories of public safety officers 
     that shall remain subject to State law.


               role of federal labor relations authority

       Sec. 4405.  (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after 
     the date of enactment of this Act, the Authority shall issue 
     regulations in accordance with the rights and 
     responsibilities described in section 4404(b) establishing 
     collective bargaining procedures for employers and public 
     safety officers in States which the Authority has determined, 
     acting pursuant to section 4404(a), do not substantially 
     provide for such rights and responsibilities.
       (b) Role of the Federal Labor Relations Authority.--The 
     Authority, to the extent provided in this chapter and in 
     accordance with regulations prescribed by the Authority, 
     shall--
       (1) determine the appropriateness of units for labor 
     organization representation;
       (2) supervise or conduct elections to determine whether a 
     labor organization has been selected as an exclusive 
     representative by a voting majority of the employees in an 
     appropriate unit;
       (3) resolve issues relating to the duty to bargain in good 
     faith;
       (4) conduct hearings and resolve complaints of unfair labor 
     practices;
       (5) resolve exceptions to the awards of arbitrators;
       (6) protect the right of each employee to form, join, or 
     assist any labor organization, or to refrain from any such 
     activity, freely and without fear of penalty or reprisal, and 
     protect each employee in the exercise of such right; and
       (7) take such other actions as are necessary and 
     appropriate to effectively administer this chapter, including 
     issuing subpoenas requiring the attendance and testimony of 
     witnesses and the production of documentary or other evidence 
     from any place in the United States, and administering oaths, 
     taking or ordering the taking of depositions, ordering 
     responses to written interrogatories, and receiving and 
     examining witnesses.
       (c) Enforcement.--
       (1) Authority to petition court.--The Authority may 
     petition any United States Court of Appeals with jurisdiction 
     over the parties, or the United States Court of Appeals for 
     the District of Columbia Circuit, to enforce any final orders 
     under this section, and for appropriate temporary relief or a 
     restraining order. Any petition under this section shall be 
     conducted in accordance with subsections (c) and (d) of 
     section 7123 of title 5, United States Code.
       (2) Private right of action.--Unless the Authority has 
     filed a petition for enforcement as provided in paragraph 
     (1), any party has the right to file suit in any appropriate 
     district court of the United States to enforce compliance 
     with the regulations issued by the Authority pursuant to 
     subsection (b), and to enforce compliance with any order 
     issued by the Authority pursuant to this section. The right 
     provided by this subsection to bring a suit to enforce 
     compliance with any order issued by the Authority pursuant to 
     this section shall terminate upon the filing of a petition 
     seeking the same relief by the Authority.


                    strikes and lockouts prohibited

       Sec. 4406.  (a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), an 
     employer, public safety officer, or labor organization may 
     not engage in a lockout, sickout, work slowdown, strike, or 
     any other organized job action that will measurably disrupt 
     the delivery of emergency services and is designed to compel 
     an employer, public safety officer, or labor organization to 
     agree to the terms of a proposed contract.
       (b) No Preemption.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to preempt any law of any State or political 
     subdivision of any State with respect to strikes by public 
     safety officers.


          existing collective bargaining units and agreements

       Sec. 4407. A certification, recognition, election-held, 
     collective bargaining agreement or memorandum of 
     understanding which has been issued, approved, or ratified by 
     any public employee relations board or commission

[[Page 12613]]

     or by any State or political subdivision or its agents 
     (management officials) and is in effect on the day before the 
     date of enactment of this Act shall not be invalidated by the 
     enactment of this Act.


                      construction and compliance

       Sec. 4408.  (a) Construction.--Nothing in this chapter 
     shall be construed--
       (1) to preempt or limit the remedies, rights, and 
     procedures of any law of any State or political subdivision 
     of any State that provides greater or comparable rights and 
     responsibilities than the rights and responsibilities 
     described in section 4404(b);
       (2) to prevent a State from enforcing a right-to-work law 
     that prohibits employers and labor organizations from 
     negotiating provisions in a labor agreement that require 
     union membership or payment of union fees as a condition of 
     employment;
       (3) to preempt or limit any State law in effect on the date 
     of enactment of this Act that provides for the rights and 
     responsibilities described in section 4404(b) solely because 
     such State law permits an employee to appear on the 
     employee's own behalf with respect to the employee's 
     employment relations with the public safety agency involved;
       (4) to preempt or limit any State law in effect on the date 
     of enactment of this Act that provides for the rights and 
     responsibilities described in section 4404(b) solely because 
     such State law excludes from its coverage employees of a 
     State militia or national guard;
       (5) to permit parties in States subject to the regulations 
     and procedures described in section 4405 to negotiate 
     provisions that would prohibit an employee from engaging in 
     part-time employment or volunteer activities during off-duty 
     hours;
       (6) to prohibit a State from exempting from coverage under 
     this chapter a political subdivision of the State that has a 
     population of less than 5,000 or that employs less than 25 
     full-time employees; or
       (7) to preempt or limit the laws or ordinances of any State 
     or political subdivision of a State that provide for the 
     rights and responsibilities described in section 4404(b) 
     solely because such law or ordinance does not require 
     bargaining with respect to pension, retirement, or health 
     benefits.
     For purposes of paragraph (6), the term ``employee'' includes 
     each and every individual employed by the political 
     subdivision except any individual elected by popular vote or 
     appointed to serve on a board or commission.
       (b) Compliance.--
       (1) Actions of states.--Nothing in this chapter or the 
     regulations promulgated under this chapter shall be construed 
     to require a State to rescind or preempt the laws or 
     ordinances of any of the State's political subdivisions if 
     such laws provide rights and responsibilities for public 
     safety officers that are comparable to or greater than the 
     rights and responsibilities described in section 4404(b).
       (2) Actions of the authority.--Nothing in this chapter or 
     the regulations promulgated under this chapter shall be 
     construed to preempt--
       (A) the laws or ordinances of any State or political 
     subdivision of a State, if such laws provide collective 
     bargaining rights for public safety officers that are 
     comparable to or greater than the rights enumerated in 
     section 4404(b);
       (B) the laws or ordinances of any State or political 
     subdivision of a State that provide for the rights and 
     responsibilities described in section 4404(b) with respect to 
     certain categories of public safety officers covered by this 
     Act solely because such rights and responsibilities have not 
     been extended to other categories of public safety officers 
     covered by this chapter; or
       (C) the laws or ordinances of any State or political 
     subdivision of a State that provide for the rights and 
     responsibilities described in section 4404(b), solely because 
     such laws or ordinances provide that a contract or memorandum 
     of understanding between a public safety employer and a labor 
     organization must be presented to a legislative body as part 
     of the process for approving such contract or memorandum of 
     understanding.
       (3) Limited enforcement power.--In the case of a law 
     described in paragraph (2)(B), the Authority shall only 
     exercise the powers provided in section 4405 with respect to 
     those categories of public safety officers who have not been 
     afforded the rights and responsibilities described in section 
     4404(b).
       (4) Exclusive enforcement provision.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of the chapter, and in the absence of a 
     waiver of a State's sovereign immunity, the Authority shall 
     have the exclusive power to enforce the provisions of this 
     chapter with respect to employees of a State.


                    authorization of appropriations

       Sec. 4409. There are authorized to be appropriated such 
     sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this 
     chapter.

                               CHAPTER 5

                     PROGRAM INTEGRITY INITIATIVES

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

                        Internal Revenue Service

                              enforcement

       For an additional amount for ``Enforcement'', $245,000,000, 
     to remain available through September 30, 2011, for 
     additional and enhanced tax enforcement activities: Provided, 
     That section 3002 shall not apply to the amount under this 
     heading.

                          DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

                 Employment and Training Administration

     state unemployment insurance and employment service operations

       For an additional amount for ``State Unemployment Insurance 
     and Employment Service Operations'', $5,000,000, to be 
     expended from the Employment Security Administration Account 
     of the Unemployment Trust Fund and remain available through 
     September 30, 2011, to conduct in-person reemployment and 
     eligibility assessments and unemployment insurance improper 
     payment reviews: Provided, That section 3002 shall not apply 
     to the amount under this heading.

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

              Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Account

       For an additional amount for ``Health Care Fraud and Abuse 
     Control Account'', $250,000,000, to remain available through 
     September 30, 2012, to be transferred from the Federal 
     Hospital Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Supplementary 
     Medical Insurance Trust Fund, as authorized by section 201(g) 
     of the Social Security Act, of which $124,747,000 shall be 
     for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Program 
     Integrity Activities, including administrative costs, to 
     conduct oversight activities for Medicare Advantage and the 
     Medicare Prescription Drug Program authorized in title XVIII 
     of the Social Security Act, for activities listed in section 
     1893 of such Act, and for Medicaid and Children's Health 
     Insurance Program program integrity activities; of which 
     $65,040,000 shall be for the Department of Health and Human 
     Services Office of Inspector General to carry out fraud and 
     abuse activities authorized by section 1817(k)(3) of such 
     Act; and of which $60,213,000 shall be for the Department of 
     Justice to carry out fraud and abuse activities authorized by 
     section 1817(k)(3) of such Act: Provided, That section 3002 
     shall not apply to the amounts under this heading.

                            RELATED AGENCIES

                     Social Security Administration

                 limitation on administrative expenses

       For an additional amount for ``Limitation on Administrative 
     Expenses'', $38,000,000, to remain available through 
     September 30, 2011, for the cost associated with conducting 
     continuing disability reviews under titles II and XVI of the 
     Social Security Act and for the cost associated with 
     conducting redeterminations of eligibility under title XVI of 
     the Social Security Act: Provided, That section 3002 shall 
     not apply to the amount under this heading.

                               CHAPTER 6

                     GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS TITLE

       Sec. 4601. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act 
     may be used to maintain or establish a computer network 
     unless such network blocks the viewing, downloading, and 
     exchanging of pornography.
       (b) Nothing in subsection (a) shall limit the use of funds 
     necessary for any Federal, State, tribal, or local law 
     enforcement agency, or other entity, to carry out criminal 
     investigation, prosecution, or adjudication activities.
       Sec. 4602. (a) Statutory Paygo.--The budgetary effects of 
     this Act, for the purpose of complying with the Statutory 
     Pay-As-You-Go-Act of 2010, shall be determined by reference 
     to the latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO 
     Legislation'' for this Act, jointly submitted for printing in 
     the Congressional Record by the Chairmen of the House and 
     Senate Budget Committees, provided that such statement has 
     been submitted prior to the vote on passage in the House 
     acting first on this conference report or amendment between 
     the Houses.
       (b) Exclusion From Paygo.--
       (1) Savings in this Act that would be subject to inclusion 
     in the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go scorecards are providing an 
     offset to increased discretionary spending. As such, they 
     should not be available on the scorecards maintained by the 
     Office of Management and Budget to provide offsets for future 
     legislation.
       (2) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget 
     shall not include any net savings resulting from the changes 
     in direct spending or revenues contained in this Act on the 
     scorecards required to be maintained by OMB under the 
     Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.


                            Amendment No. 3

       Page 8, strike line 3 and all that follows through page 9, 
     line 6.
       Page 9, line 10, strike ``$11,719,927,000, of which 
     $218,300,000'' and insert ``$218,300,000, which''.
       Page 9, line 18, strike ``$2,735,194,000, of which 
     $187,600,000'' and insert ``$187,600,000, which''.
       Page 10, line 3, strike ``$829,326,000, of which 
     $30,700,000'' and insert ``$30,700,000, which''.
       Page 10, line 11, strike ``$3,835,095,000, of which 
     $218,400,000'' and insert ``$218,400,000, which''.
       Page 10, beginning on line 20, strike ``$1,236,727,000: 
     Provided, That up to

[[Page 12614]]

     $50,000,000, to remain available until expended,'' and insert 
     ``$50,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That such amount''.
       Page 11, strike line 22 and all that follows through page 
     18, line 18.
       Page 18, strike line 20, and all that follows through page 
     19, line 18.
       Page 19, line 19, strike ``304.'' and insert ``301.''.
       Page 20, line 3, strike ``305.'' and insert ``302.''.
       Page 20, line 8, strike ``306.'' and insert ``303.''.
       Page 20, line 18, strike ``307.'' and insert ``304.''.
       Page 21, line 3, strike ``308.'' and insert ``305.''.
       Page 38, strike lines 4 through 22.
       Page 41, strike lines 6 through 16.
       Page 42, strike lines 8 through 12.
       Page 43, strike lines 22 through 25.
       Page 45, strike lines 3 through 19.
       Page 48, line 8, strike the dollar amount and all that 
     follows through ``available'' on page 49, line 3 and insert 
     ``$175,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2012,''.
       Page 49, line 20, after the first comma, strike the dollar 
     amount and all that follows through ``available'' on line 23 
     and insert ``$50,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2012,''.
       Page 52, strike line 3 and all that follows through page 
     58, line 20.
       Page 58, line 22, strike ``1007.'' and insert ``1004.''.
       Page 61, line 13, strike ``1008.'' and insert ``1005.''.
       Page 62, line 15, strike ``1009.'' and insert ``1006.''.
       Page 64, line 14, strike ``1010.'' and insert ``1007.''.
       Page 66, line 10, strike ``1011.'' and insert ``1008.''.
       Page 66, line 16, strike ``1012.'' and insert ``1009.''.
       Page 66, line 23, strike ``1013.'' and insert ``1010.''.
       Page 67, line 13, strike ``1014.'' and insert ``1011.''.
       Page 67, line 21, strike ``1015.'' and insert ``1012.''.
       Page 68, line 21, strike ``Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, 
     and''.
       Page 68, line 23, strike ``those countries'' and insert 
     ``that country''.
       Page 69, strike line 8 and all that follows through page 
     70, line 18.


                            Amendment No. 4

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. (a) Limitation.--Funds appropriated in this Act 
     for the continued military operations of the Armed Forces in 
     Afghanistan may be obligated and expended within Afghanistan 
     only for the purposes of--
       (1) providing for the continued protection of members of 
     the Armed Forces and civilian and contractor personnel of the 
     Federal Government who are in Afghanistan; and
       (2) beginning the safe and orderly withdrawal from 
     Afghanistan of all members of the Armed Forces and Department 
     of Defense contractor personnel who are in Afghanistan.
       (b) Clarification.--Nothing in subsection (a) shall be 
     construed to prohibit or otherwise restrict the use of funds 
     available to any department or agency of the United States to 
     carry out diplomatic efforts or humanitarian activities in 
     Afghanistan, including security related to such efforts and 
     activities.


                            Amendment No. 5

       Page 22, after line 16, insert the following:
       Sec. 309. (a) Findings Regarding Security and Stability 
     Conditions in Afghanistan.--Since the last national 
     intelligence estimate on conditions in Afghanistan, there 
     have been fundamental changes in the conditions in that 
     country, and fundamental changes in the United States 
     military and diplomatic strategy toward that country, 
     including--
       (1) the August 2009 elections in Afghanistan;
       (2) the strategy announced by the President in December 
     2009 to guide United States military operations, including a 
     commitment to begin redeployment of troops out of Afghanistan 
     by July 2011;
       (3) the tactics employed by the United States, which 
     emphasize counterinsurgency military operations and 
     increasing civilian participation;
       (4) the level of United States forces deployed to 
     Afghanistan; and
       (5) the continuing development of Afghanistan's security 
     forces, including the Afghan National Army and the Afghan 
     National Police.
       (b) Report.--Not later than January 31, 2011, the Director 
     of National Intelligence shall submit to the President and 
     the Congress a new national intelligence estimate on security 
     and stability in Afghanistan and Pakistan, which shall 
     include--
       (1) an assessment of the ability, performance, intent, and 
     commitment of the Government of Afghanistan to work with the 
     United States to implement the strategy announced in December 
     2009;
       (2) an assessment of the ability, performance, intent, and 
     commitment of the Government of Pakistan to work with the 
     United States to implement the strategy announced in December 
     2009;
       (3) an assessment of the security forces of Afghanistan and 
     Pakistan, including their ability to maintain security in 
     areas where they are deployed, and an assessment of the 
     timing of full deployment as envisioned by the December 2009 
     strategy;
       (4) an assessment of whether continuing United States 
     military presence in Afghanistan contributes to Afghan and 
     Pakistani support for, or sympathy toward, the Taliban, al 
     Qaeda, or other insurgents;
       (5) an assessment of the effect of continuing United States 
     military presence on the strength of al Qaeda and other 
     terrorist organizations in Afghanistan and neighboring 
     countries, including those in the United States Central 
     Command and United States Africa Command areas of 
     responsibility; and
       (6) an assessment of the effect of the continuing United 
     States military presence on the ability of al Qaeda and 
     related terrorist organizations to obtain resources, recruit 
     personnel, and continue operations targeted at the United 
     States and its allies.
       (c) Plan With Timetable Required.--Not later than April 4, 
     2011, the President shall submit to Congress a plan for the 
     safe, orderly, and expeditious redeployment of the Armed 
     Forces from Afghanistan, including military and security-
     related contractors, together with a timetable for the 
     completion of that redeployment and information regarding 
     variables that could alter that timetable.
       (d) Status Updates.--Not later than 90 days after the date 
     of the submittal of the plan required by subsection (c), and 
     every 90 days thereafter, the President shall submit to 
     Congress a report setting forth the current status of the 
     plan for redeploying the Armed Forces from Afghanistan.
       (e) Oversight of Contractors Engaged in Activities Relating 
     to Afghanistan.--
       (1) Recommendations required.--Not later than 90 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the Special Inspector 
     General for Afghanistan Reconstruction shall, in consultation 
     with the Inspector General of the Department of Defense, the 
     Inspector General of the United States Agency for 
     International Development, and the Inspector General of the 
     Department of State--
       (A) issue recommendations on measures to increase oversight 
     of contractors engaged in activities relating to Afghanistan 
     that have a record of engaging in waste, fraud, or abuse;
       (B) report on the status of efforts of the Department of 
     Defense, the United States Agency for International 
     Development, and the Department of State to implement 
     existing recommendations regarding oversight of such 
     contractors; and
       (C) report on the extent to which military and security 
     contractors or subcontractors engaged in activities relating 
     to Afghanistan have been responsible for the deaths of Afghan 
     civilians.
       (2) Elements of recommendations.--The recommendations 
     issued under paragraph (1) shall include--
       (A) recommendations for reducing the reliance of the United 
     States on--
       (i) military and security contractors or subcontractors 
     engaged in activities relating to Afghanistan that have been 
     responsible for the deaths of Afghan civilians; and
       (ii) Afghan militias or other armed groups that are not 
     part of the Afghan National Security Forces; and
       (B) recommendations for prohibiting the Department of 
     Defense, the Department of State, or the United States Agency 
     for International Development from entering into contracts 
     with contractors engaged in activities relating to 
     Afghanistan that have a record of engaging in waste, fraud, 
     or abuse.
       Sec. 310. (a) Limitation on Funds.--None of the funds 
     available to the Department of Defense in the Department of 
     Defense Appropriations Act, 2011 may be obligated or expended 
     in a manner that is inconsistent with the President's policy 
     announced on December 1, 2009, to begin the orderly 
     withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan after 
     July 1, 2011, unless the Congress approves a joint resolution 
     as specified in subsection (b).
       (b) Joint Resolution.--For purposes of this section, the 
     term ``joint resolution'' means a joint resolution introduced 
     in either House of the Congress after receipt by the Congress 
     of the national intelligence estimate required under section 
     309 of this Act, the matter after the resolving clause of 
     which is as follows: ``That the Congress approves the 
     obligation and expenditure of funds appropriated in the 
     Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2011 for United 
     States combat operations in Afghanistan after July 1, 2011, 
     even if the plan submitted on April 4, 2011, is inconsistent 
     with the intention to begin the process of orderly withdrawal 
     of United States troops from such combat operations in 
     Afghanistan.''.
       (c) Expedited Procedures in the House.--
       (1) A joint resolution in the House of Representatives 
     shall be referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
       (2) If the committee has not reported the joint resolution 
     at the end of 20 legislative days after its introduction, the 
     committee shall be discharged from further consideration of 
     the joint resolution, and the joint resolution shall be 
     placed on the appropriate calendar of the House.

[[Page 12615]]

       (3) When the committee has reported a joint resolution or 
     been discharged from further consideration, it is at any time 
     thereafter in order (even though a previous motion to the 
     same effect has been disagreed to) to move to proceed to the 
     consideration of the joint resolution. The motion is highly 
     privileged in the House. The motion is not subject to 
     amendment, or to a motion to postpone, or to a motion to 
     proceed to the consideration of other business. A motion to 
     reconsider the vote by which the motion is agreed to or not 
     agreed to shall not be in order.
       (4) Debate on the joint resolution shall be limited to not 
     more than 9 hours, which shall be divided equally between 
     those favoring and those opposing the joint resolution. An 
     amendment to, or motion to recommit, the joint resolution is 
     not in order. A motion to reconsider the vote by which the 
     joint resolution is agreed to or not agreed to is not in 
     order.
       (5) Motions to postpone and motions to proceed to the 
     consideration of other business shall be decided without 
     debate.
       (6) Appeals from the decisions of the Chair relating to the 
     application of the rules of the House to the procedure 
     relating to the joint resolution shall be decided without 
     debate.
       (d) Expedited Procedures in the Senate.--[To be supplied.]
       (e) Congressional Rulemaking.--Subsections (c) and (d) are 
     enacted by the Congress--
       (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate, respectively, and as such 
     they are deemed a part of the rules of each House, 
     respectively, but applicable only with respect to the 
     procedures to be followed in that House in the case of joint 
     resolutions described in subsection (b), and they supersede 
     other rules only to the extent that they are inconsistent 
     with such other rules; and
       (2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of 
     either House to change the rules (so far as relating to the 
     procedures of that House) at any time, in the same manner and 
     to the same extent as in the case of any other rule of that 
     House.
       Sec. 311.  Nothing in section 309 or 310 shall be construed 
     so as to limit or prohibit any authority of the President 
     to--
       (1) attack al Qaeda forces wherever they are located;
       (2) gather, provide, and share intelligence with allies 
     operating in Afghanistan and Pakistan; or
       (3) modify the military strategy and operations of the 
     Armed Forces as such Armed Forces redeploy pursuant to a 
     timetable and strategy developed under section 309(c).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1500, the 
motion shall be debatable for 1 hour and 30 minutes, with 30 minutes 
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on Appropriations; then 30 minutes equally divided and 
controlled by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), or her 
designee, and an opponent; and then 30 minutes equally divided and 
controlled by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), or his 
designee, and an opponent.
  The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lewis) each will control 15 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.


                             General Leave

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include 
extraneous material on the pending legislation.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, the underlying bill presented to us by the Senate is, 
essentially, a bill to provide funding to continue the war activities 
in Afghanistan. Why, people might ask, are we trying to add this 
amendment to that proposal?
  I would suggest the numbers tell the story. With this bill from the 
Senate, we will be spending, in this fiscal year, $167 billion on the 
war in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is obvious to any but the most obtuse 
that that expenditure is killing our ability to finance a recovery of 
our own economy.
  We tried to deal with that problem in December with a $90 billion 
economic package. The Senate declined to act on it. We've proposed 
smaller packages on two occasions since then. About a month ago we 
offered a $23 billion package aimed primarily at trying to save 
teachers' jobs, teachers who otherwise are going to be laid off because 
of the severe economic conditions in virtually every State in the 
Union, except a few lucky exceptions like North Dakota and South 
Dakota.
  We now bring before the House a bill which reflects what we've been 
asked to do by a great many Members. It attempts to provide a much 
smaller aid package to keep those teachers on the job, about $10 
billion; and it contains a few other small items, including almost $5 
billion in additional Pell Grants funds for some 87,000 students who 
are going to need them badly.
  We were also asked to provide offsets, and so we have done that. We 
have offsets for virtually every dollar above the President's request, 
and those offsets are not pleasant, and they are not popular. 
Certainly, I don't like some of them myself. But the fact is that they 
are necessary if we're to provide a fiscally disciplined bill that has 
a chance of getting the votes to pass this House, and that's what we've 
done.
  I think people need to ask themselves one question: Are they 
interested in simply standing by and allowing teachers to be fired day 
after day for the next 3 months all around the country, or are they 
willing to do something about it? I hope the answer is the latter.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2020

  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, let me begin by making a personal observation. This 
evening we are embarking upon the most irresponsible, convoluted 
legislative exercise I have seen in my many years in this body. My dear 
friend and former chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, the 
late Senator Robert Byrd, would be embarrassed by this process, or the 
lack of process, because it greatly diminishes the integrity of this 
Congress he loved so dearly. I can hear Senator Byrd's voice clear as 
day. ``Shame, shame,'' he would say.
  It was 35 days ago that the full Appropriations Committee was 
scheduled to mark up the fiscal year 2010 emergency supplemental before 
us. Republicans and Democrats alike had a number of amendments they 
planned to offer to make the package a better piece of legislation. 
But, for reasons that remain a mystery to everyone, that markup was 
abruptly canceled 3 hours before it was to occur. Tonight, the House is 
considering legislation written by Chairman Obey and the majority 
leadership with absolutely no input from rank-and-file Members on 
either side of the aisle.
  The only legislation we should be considering today is a clean 
emergency supplemental funding bill to provide critical funding for our 
troops; foreign assistance and economic support for Afghanistan, as 
well as Pakistan and Iraq, should be included; FEMA disaster 
assistance; oil spill cleanup assistance; and relief for Haiti. Many 
other funding and policy items could easily be addressed through our 
regular order spending bills.
  Just hours ago we were sent a package of six different amendments and 
two resolutions, totaling 153 pages. Included in that package were 
efforts to cut off troop funding, a timetable for troop withdrawal from 
Afghanistan, billions in additional spending on domestic programs, a 
variety of complex legal settlements piggybacked into a billion-dollar 
summer youth program, and a deem-and-scheme resolution that proposes 
spending $31 billion more in discretionary spending in FY 2011 than was 
spent in FY 2010. It's worth noting that only in Washington could 
Chairman Obey and Chairman Spratt characterize this $31 billion 
increase as a cut.
  I am deeply concerned about the impact these amendments could have on 
our ability to approve a bill for the President's signature prior to 
the Fourth of July recess. The failure of this body to approve critical 
funds for our troops before the Fourth of July would send absolutely 
the wrong message to our men and women in uniform, and delay needed 
money for other emergency needs.
  Further, this inaction would force our commanders to begin making 
budget decisions that could compromise our military readiness. It would 
also signal

[[Page 12616]]

to our enemies a lack of resolve that could undermine our mission in 
several very dangerous areas of the world.
  The fact that we are sitting here in July without this spending bill 
passed and signed into law is, frankly, astonishing to me. The 
President submitted his request in February of this year. The Senate 
passed its war funding measure on May 27, and indicated that it was 
ready to conference the bill with the House. The House never marked up 
this supplemental or had an opportunity to amend it in any way. And 
yet, here we are 35 days and tens of billions of dollars of spending 
later, and we still have not approved funding for our troops.
  Yesterday, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released a 
long-term budget outlook. CBO noted that our national debt equaled 40 
percent of our country's economic input in 2008. By the end of this 
year, the Federal debt will represent 62 percent of our national 
economy. That's a 22 percent increase in the level of debt in just 2 
years. The additional unrequested nontroop-related spending the House 
is considering today would drive that debt even higher.
  I recognize there are tremendous political pressures that come to 
bear on majority Members when it comes to opposing measures sponsored 
by their own party. Today my request to the Members of the majority is 
quite simple: Please think long and hard about the consequences of 
supporting anything beyond the clean Senate supplemental spending bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield myself 30 additional seconds.
  I urge my colleagues on both sides, particularly my friends in the 
majority who are truly concerned about the ever-escalating rates of 
growth of spending, to reject these amendments and reject this Fourth 
of July spending spree. Let's support our troops, pass a clean version 
of the supplemental on a broad, bipartisan basis, and get this package 
to the Commander in Chief. Our men and women in harm's way deserve no 
less.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield myself 1 minute.
  Somehow we are being told that we are committing a mortal sin because 
we are trying to attach some material to the bill sent to us by the 
Senate. I would simply point out that just a few weeks ago, as the 
gentleman from Massachusetts pointed out earlier in the debate, when 
the defense authorization bill was on the floor only nine Republicans 
in this House voted for it. They felt then that another matter was 
evidently more important than providing passage for that bill. And yet 
today they criticize us because we are suggesting several additions to 
the appropriations bill. I find that inconsistent.
  I would also point out that there are a number of high-priority 
national items that we are trying to add besides education funding. We 
are trying to provide additional funds for Pell Grants, some $5 
billion. We are trying to provide $700 million more for border 
security, $180 million more for energy loans, $163 million more for 
schools on military installations, $142 million for gulf coast oil 
spill funding, and $16 million to build a new soldier processing center 
at Fort Hood.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield myself 30 additional seconds.
  I would like to know what's wrong with any of those items.
  I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Reyes) to explain why it's necessary to do additional funding for 
border security.
  Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment, the Obey 
amendment, because during these tough economic times there are many 
areas that merit attention. This amendment takes a comprehensive 
approach to addressing the vital needs of our communities. Of 
particular importance to me is the support in this amendment for border 
security and also for education.
  Border security is a major portion of the concern of Americans, as we 
have seen in recent days. This amendment provides $701 million to 
strengthen our security efforts along the U.S.-Mexico border. The funds 
would be used to hire 1,200 Border Patrol agents and 500 Customs and 
Border Protection officers that would be working the ports of entry, 
critically needed today, as well as to improve tactical communications 
and make other much-needed investments in the security along the U.S.-
Mexico border.
  Residents along the border in districts such as the one that I 
represent remain deeply concerned about the level of violence affecting 
our southern neighbor Mexico. As a former Border Patrol sector chief 
and veteran of 26\1/2\ years in the United States Border Patrol, I know 
very well what these resources that are provided in this amendment mean 
to a critical area such as the Southwest border.
  I am particularly encouraged by Mr. Obey's efforts in this amendment 
to address the long-standing needs of our ports of entry by providing 
funds for Customs and Border Protection officers. For too long, 
inadequate staffing and outdated infrastructure at our ports of entry 
have made the U.S. and Mexico border less safe. This is a major step 
forward in making our Nation even more secure by providing funding for 
more officers at our ports of entry to conduct a more thorough and 
efficient inspection and to keep Americans safe.

                              {time}  2030

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. REYES. In addition, this amendment also provides $10 billion to 
support our teachers across the country and another $4.9 billion to 
fill the shortage, as Mr. Obey said, in the Pell Grant program.
  It is vitally important that we recognize that the resources that are 
dedicated here are important not just along the border but to the 
security of Americans everywhere. So, therefore, I urge my colleagues 
to vote for the Obey amendment. And I thank Chairman Obey, Speaker 
Pelosi, Majority Leader Hoyer, and Chairman Price for their leadership 
on this very important issue.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 3 minutes 
to our leader of the Homeland Security Committee, the gentleman from 
Kentucky (Mr. Rogers).
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  I rise today to voice my opposition to the blatant exploitation of 
our brave troops and the brazen process being undertaken here tonight. 
With this ongoing charade, the Democrat majority has chosen to drag out 
the consideration of this supplemental appropriations bill now 5 months 
lagging. They've chosen to bypass a markup by the Appropriations 
Committee. They've chosen to dictate by the few rather than legislate 
by the representative many. And worst of all, they're holding hostage 
vital funding for our troops as a vehicle for more spending, more 
bailouts, more encroachment by the Federal Government into our private 
lives.
  A clean supplemental, Mr. Speaker, could have easily been disposed of 
through regular order months ago. Regrettably, the majority has waited 
until the very last minute, twisted the rules of the House, and put the 
Pentagon and our warfighters in dire straits. This abuse of Congress' 
national security responsibilities would be outrageous if it wasn't so 
sad. And for what? For what? Another bailout? more spending? political 
points? to curry special interest favors?
  The American people want a fiscally responsible government that first 
and foremost provides for the safety and security of this great Nation, 
and the American people expect the Congress to meet that solemn 
responsibility while mindful it is their money, not ours.
  Instead, let's just call this what it is. The Democrat majority has 
hijacked our national security for their perceived political security. 
This is not the governance the American people want nor deserve. We can 
do better.
  And so I plead with my colleagues to restore regular order and return 
to the

[[Page 12617]]

business at hand, which is providing for our warfighters and 
responsibly wielding the power of the purse.
  I urge a defeat of all of these amendments and this bill.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards).
  Mr. EDWARDS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I had the humbling privilege of 
representing Fort Hood, America's largest Army installation, for 14 
years, through three combat deployments. It is now next door to my 
district in central Texas.
  Fort Hood has sent more troops to Iraq and Afghanistan than any other 
military installation in America. And despite that sacrifice, sadly, 
the soldiers and families at Fort Hood had to face an unbearable and 
unspeakable tragedy at the hands of a terrorist in our midst who killed 
12 Fort Hood Army soldiers and one Army civilian just several months 
ago.
  The soldier processing center through which soldiers go--often the 
last building they see before they leave Fort Hood, and it's the first 
building they see when they come home from being a year away from their 
family serving in Iraq or Afghanistan--is a soldier development 
servicing center there.
  At the request of the Pentagon, I want to thank Chairman Obey for 
putting our request for $16.5 million into this amendment. First, 
because that center was old and antiquated, inefficient and too small, 
but most importantly because the soldiers at Fort Hood who've 
sacrificed so much for our Nation's defense in Iraq and Afghanistan 
should not be asked to process through a building where 12 of their 
fellow soldier comrades in that installation were brutally murdered at 
the hands of a domestic terrorist.
  I thank Chairman Obey for putting this in. It is a meaningful, 
dignified way to show support for our troops. And I support this 
amendment and ask my colleagues on a bipartisan basis to support it as 
well.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes 
to the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Smith of Texas.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank the 
ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), for yielding 
me time.
  Mr. Speaker, I'm opposed to the inclusion of the ``Preserve Access to 
Affordable Generics Act'' in H.R. 4899.
  Most cases in the United States, whether civil or criminal, antitrust 
or patent, settle. The reasons for this are simple. Litigation is 
expensive and its outcomes are uncertain.
  The supposed problem involves a payment of cash in a settlement of a 
patent case brought by a generic drug manufacturer. Such payments are 
said to frustrate the intent of Federal law by allowing the brand name 
pharmaceutical company to pay to delay entry of the generic competitor 
into the market.
  The proposed solution to this problem incorporated in this bill goes 
much too far. It creates a presumption that all such settlements are 
unlawful. The bill sets forth the criteria that a court may use to 
determine whether to uphold the settlement. However, the validity of 
the underlying patent is not one of those specified criteria.
  Also, the bill dramatically reduces the ability of the companies to 
settle these cases. If the parties cannot agree on the date of entry 
into the market, then in many cases they would effectively be forced to 
litigate the case. This means that the entry of the generic into a 
particular drug market could be delayed significantly.
  The majority of Federal courts, including the Second, Eleventh, and 
D.C. Circuits, have upheld the validity of these settlements. Congress 
should uphold the well-reasoned judgment of these courts. Innovative 
new drugs, after all, are created in the laboratory, not in the 
courtroom.
  I urge my colleagues to reject this attempt to legislate an unrelated 
domestic issue on a bill that is intended to pay for our troops 
overseas.
  Mr. OBEY. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop).
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, we are here on a bill that allegedly 
provides supplemental funding for our troops, yet within the bowels of 
this House amendment are provisions that have implications for our 
border security, provisions in violation of our rules but nonetheless 
provide a permanent authority to transfer money from border patrol to 
the Department of the Interior with absolutely no limit--$50 million 
this time, but then unlimited after that.
  So to have the situation of Congress appropriating money we think is 
going to border patrol, but then border patrol will have to give that 
money to the Department of the Interior for alleged mitigation issues, 
such concepts and projects as, in the past: hiring three employees of 
the Interior to monitor prong-horned antelope or having a biologist 
watch the erection of 15-foot towers to verify that no animal was 
crushed; or having Fish and Wildlife, for one acre of possible habitat 
loss, insisting border patrol buy 55 acres somewhere else to give to 
them.
  We will have the outrageous situation of Interior and Forest Service 
regulations blocking the border patrol from their patrols and doing 
their job, and yet the same provision, the border patrol has to pay 
DOI, with no oversight from the legislature, no internal rules for 
caution of spending, no limitation, just to do their job.

                              {time}  2040

  Even Secretary Napolitano last year sent us a letter in which she 
said the Border Patrol stops the drug cartels, the human traffickers, 
the potential terrorists, and that is a value in and of itself to the 
environment and should count as mitigation.
  Yet, in the provisions within this particular bill, that does not 
take place. This provision was a dumb idea in the wrong bill. It 
diverts dollars from the Border Patrol and makes our border less 
secure.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, how much time does each side have remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Wisconsin has 6 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from California has 3\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, as the chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations 
Subcommittee, I am happy to remind our colleagues of the provisions in 
this bill that will enhance border security.
  The Obey amendment will add money for urgent needs, to address the 
alarming level of violence attributable to Mexican gangs and drug 
cartels. It will increase the presence of critical Border Patrol and 
Customs personnel at the border, and it will strengthen the protection 
of jeopardized communities.
  There are four critical aspects of these border provisions:
  First, the Obey amendment will strengthen enforcement between ports 
of entry to deter and apprehend smugglers and illegal crossings. That 
means 1,200 new Border Patrol agents. It means up to three additional 
forward operating bases, and it will provide two new unmanned aircraft 
systems for CBP to patrol the border.
  Second, the Obey amendment will tighten enforcement at ports of entry 
while aiding legitimate travel and commerce. It will sustain hundreds 
of critical CBP officer positions at risk of being cut because of 
declining fee collections. It will add 500 CBP officers for inspection 
and enforcement at ports of entry, inbound and outbound, to crack down 
on drugs, weapons, cash, and alien traffickers.
  Third, the bill enhances Immigration and Customs Enforcement's 
(ICE's) investigative operations on the border and their cooperation 
with our Mexican partners to target the cartels, their criminal 
enterprises, and their violent henchmen.
  Four new Southwest Border Enforcement Security Task Forces. 
Additional vetted law enforcement units with the Government of Mexico. 
A 120-day surge in the ICE Joint Criminal Alien Removal Task Force and 
Criminal Alien

[[Page 12618]]

Programs. Training for Mexican officials on investigations of 
transnational drug smuggling, money laundering, human trafficking, and 
child exploitation.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Finally, the bill expands aid to State 
and local partners along the border, expanding the grant assistance 
under Operation Stonegarden to State and local law enforcement in 
cooperation with DHS.
  Mr. Speaker, this Obey amendment would greatly enhance our border 
security. I urge its adoption.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my 
colleague from the Appropriations Committee, the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen).
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to associate my remarks with my ranking member, 
Mr. Lewis.
  Following the time-honored tradition of our Defense Appropriations 
Subcommittee, Chairman Dicks and Mr. Young have put together, in a 
collegial manner, a solid product. The funding for defense operations 
and maintenance, for the Afghan and Iraq Security Forces, for Army base 
operations, M-RAPs, National Guard and Reserve equipment, and the other 
portions of the defense and of the military construction portion of the 
bill are worthy of our support.
  If that's where the story ended, we would be fine, but as Ronald 
Reagan famously said, ``There they go again.''
  This legislation contains over $72 billion in discretionary and 
mandatory spending. Less than half of that total, $35 billion, is 
related to the ongoing fight against the Taliban and al Qaeda in 
Afghanistan or our withdrawal from Iraq and the State Department 
funding related to the war on terror. The rest is earmarked for 
nondefense programs, new bailouts, and pet projects to benefit the 
majority's political allies.
  I share the views of Mr. Lewis on the extraneous spending in this 
bill: the $10 billion State bailout fund, the $5 billion Pell Grant 
infusion, the $500 million to ``forward-fund'' accounts in the fiscal 
year 2011 appropriations bills, thereby freeing up money to spend on 
other activities in fiscal year 2011, the $245 million to allow the IRS 
to ramp up its enforcement activities.
  My colleagues in the majority just don't get it. This is Washington 
``business as usual'' as this Congress uses funding for our deployed 
warfighters, many of them in harm's way as we speak, to provide for 
more unnecessary social spending.
  My colleagues, I urge the adoption of a clean supplemental 
appropriation as quickly as possible so our men and women in uniform 
can continue to do their important work on our behalf.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, it is important for all of my colleagues, especially 
those on the majority side of the aisle, to make note of the fact that 
this is the President's supplemental request. This amendment adds 
almost $17 billion in new domestic spending to a critical war funding 
and disaster assistance bill, most of which was never formally 
requested by the Commander in Chief and none of which is included in 
the Senate-passed bill. These bloated domestic spending add-ons include 
those that either are unnecessary spending or should be considered as 
part of the regular fiscal year 2011 appropriations process.
  For example, the amendment includes language under the Teacher Jobs 
Fund that singles out Texas by requiring that Texas maintain a higher 
level of State support for elementary and secondary education and 
higher education spending than any other State. It adds $4.95 billion 
for Pell Grants that would normally be and should be funded in the 
fiscal year 2011 Labor, Health, and Human Services bill, as has been 
the practice in previous years.
  There is $538 million to game the fiscal year 2011 appropriations 
process by forward-funding certain activities now with fiscal year 2010 
funds, thereby freeing up money to spend on other activities in 2011. 
This includes giving the IRS an additional $245 million now to ramp up 
its enforcement.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous 
consent request to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
  Mr. KUCINICH. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I rise in support of the Obey amendment, amendment No. 2 to H.R. 
4899, Supplemental Appropriations for FY 2010. However, I do so with 
significant reservation because of the $9 billion in nuclear loan 
guarantees that have been inserted into this bill of otherwise badly 
needed funding.
  The nuclear power industry has already received $51 billion in loan 
guarantee authority. The guarantees leave the taxpayer on the hook for 
energy policy so fiscally irresponsible, it has attracted bipartisan 
opposition. Indeed, private investment in new plants is nearly 
impossible to come by because the investment is so unattractive. The 
Congressional Budget Office characterized the risk of default on such 
projects as ``well above 50 percent.'' Even plants under construction 
are being abandoned. If private firms won't invest, should we be 
putting taxpayers on the hook?
  Energy from wind and solar makes more financial sense and creates 
many more jobs when compared with nuclear power sans massive subsidies. 
But the loan guarantees for clean energy sources, which were added to 
make the nuclear loan giveaways easier to swallow, are not an industry 
priority. They need more direct subsidies to get started with the 
urgency required to address global warming.
  This amendment also contains otherwise valuable funding for teacher's 
jobs, Pell grants, and Gulf Coast oil spill clean-up. I voted for this 
amendment because of the dire needs in these areas and others. But 
slipping in $9 billion in nuclear loan guarantees when we struggle to 
find money to extend unemployment compensation and create new green 
jobs is not acceptable.

       The Economics of Nuclear Reactors: Renaissance or Relapse?

  (By Mark Cooper, Senior Fellow for Economic Analysis, Institute for 
       Energy and the Environment, Vermont Law School--June 2009)


                              ISSUE BRIEF

     Findings
       Within the past year, estimates of the cost of nuclear 
     power from a new generation of reactors have ranged from a 
     low of 8.4 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh) to a high of 30 
     cents. This paper tackles the debate over the cost of 
     building new nuclear reactors, with the key findings as 
     follows:
       The initial cost projections put out early in today's so-
     called ``nuclear renaissance'' were about one-third of what 
     one would have expected, based on the nuclear reactors 
     completed in the 1990s.
       The most recent cost projections for new nuclear reactors 
     are, on average, over four times as high as the initial 
     ``nuclear renaissance'' projections.
       There are numerous options available to meet the need for 
     electricity in a carbon-constrained environment that are 
     superior to building nuclear reactors. Indeed, nuclear 
     reactors are the worst option from the point of view of the 
     consumer and society.
       The low carbon sources that are less costly than nuclear 
     include efficiency, cogeneration, biomass, geothermal, wind, 
     solar thermal and natural gas. Solar photovoltaics that are 
     presently more costly than nuclear reactors are projected to 
     decline dramatically in price in the next decade. Fossil 
     fuels with carbon capture and storage, which are not 
     presently available, are projected to be somewhat more costly 
     than nuclear reactors.
       Numerous studies by Wall Street and independent energy 
     analysts estimate efficiency and renewable costs at an 
     average of 6 cents per kilowatt hour, while the cost of 
     electricity from nuclear reactors is estimated in the range 
     of 12 to 20 cents per kWh.
       The additional cost of building 100 new nuclear reactors, 
     instead of pursuing a least cost efficiency-renewable 
     strategy, would be in the range of $1.9-$4.4 trillion over 
     the life of the reactors.
       Whether the burden falls on ratepayers (in electricity 
     bills) or taxpayers (in large subsidies), incurring excess 
     costs of that magnitude would be a substantial burden on the 
     national economy and add immensely to the cost of electricity 
     and the cost of reducing carbon emissions.
     Approach
       This paper arrives at these conclusions by viewing the cost 
     of nuclear reactors through four analytic lenses.
       First, in an effort to pin down the likely cost of new 
     nuclear reactors, the paper dissects three dozen recent cost 
     projections.

[[Page 12619]]

       Second, it places those projections in the context of the 
     history of the nuclear industry with a database of the costs 
     of 100 reactors built in the U.S. between 1971 and 1996.
       Third, it examines those costs in comparison to the cost of 
     alternatives available today to meet the need for 
     electricity.
       Fourth, it considers a range of qualitative factors 
     including environmental concerns, risks and subsidies that 
     affect decisions about which technologies to utilize in an 
     environment in which public policy requires constraints on 
     carbon emissions.
       The stakes for consumers and the nation are huge. While 
     some have called for the construction of 200 to 300 new 
     nuclear reactors over the next 40 years, the much more modest 
     task of building 100 reactors, which has been proposed by 
     some policymakers as a goal, is used to put the stakes in 
     perspective. Over the expected forty-year life of a nuclear 
     reactor, the excess cost compared to least-cost efficiency 
     and renewables would range from $19 billion to $44 billion 
     per plant, with the total for 100 reactors reaching the range 
     of $1.9 trillion to $4.4 trillion over the life of the 
     reactors.
     Hope and Hype vs. Reality in Nuclear Reactor Costs
       From the first fixed price turnkey reactors in the 1960s to 
     the May 2009 cost projection of the Massachusetts Institute 
     of Technology, the claim that nuclear power is or could be 
     cost competitive with alternative technologies for generating 
     electricity has been based on hope and hype. In the 1960s and 
     1970s, the hope and hype analyses prepared by reactor vendors 
     and parroted by government officials helped to create what 
     came to be known as the ``great bandwagon market.'' In about 
     a decade utilities ordered over 200 nuclear reactors of 
     increasing size.
       Unfortunately, reality did not deliver on the hope and the 
     hype. Half of the reactors ordered in the 1960s and 1970s 
     were cancelled, with abandoned costs in the tens of billions 
     of dollars. Those reactors that were completed suffered 
     dramatic cost overruns. On average, the final cohort of great 
     bandwagon market reactors cost seven times as much as the 
     cost projection for the first reactor of the great bandwagon 
     market. The great bandwagon market ended in fierce debates in 
     the press and regulatory proceedings throughout the 1980s and 
     1990s over how such a huge mistake could have been made and 
     who should pay for it.
       In an eerie parallel to the great bandwagon market, a 
     series of startlingly low-cost estimates prepared between 
     2001 and 2004 by vendors and academics and supported by 
     government officials helped to create what has come to be 
     known as the ``nuclear renaissance.'' However, reflecting the 
     poor track record of the nuclear industry in the U.S., the 
     debate over the economics of the nuclear renaissance is being 
     carried out before substantial sums of money are spent. 
     Unlike the 1960s and 1970s, when the utility industry, 
     reactor vendors and government officials monopolized 
     preparation of cost analyses, today Wall Street and 
     independent energy analysts have come forward with much 
     higher estimates of the cost of nuclear reactors.
       The most recent cost projections are, on average, over four 
     times as high as the initial nuclear renaissance projections.
       Even though the early estimates have been subsequently 
     revised upward in the past year and utilities offered some 
     estimates in regulatory proceedings that were twice as high 
     as the initial projections, these estimates remain well below 
     the projections from Wall Street and independent analysts. 
     Moreover, in an ominous repeat of history, utilities are 
     insisting on cost-plus treatment of their reactor projects 
     and have steadfastly refused to shoulder the responsibility 
     for cost overruns.
       One thing that utilities and Wall Street analysts agree on 
     is that nuclear reactors will not be built without massive 
     direct subsidies either from the federal government or 
     ratepayers, or from both.
       In this sense, nuclear reactors remain as uneconomic today 
     as they were in the 1980s when so many were cancelled or 
     abandoned.
     The economic cost of low carbon alternatives
       There is a second major difference between the debate today 
     and the debate in the 1970s and 1980s. In the earlier debate, 
     the competition was almost entirely between coal and nuclear 
     power generation. Today, because the debate is being carried 
     out in the context of policies to address climate change, a 
     much wider array of alternatives is on the table. While 
     future fossil fuel (coal and natural gas) plants with 
     additional carbon capture and storage technologies that are 
     not yet available are projected to be somewhat more costly 
     than nuclear reactors (see Figure ES-2), efficiency and 
     renewables are also primary competitors and their costs are 
     projected to be much lower than nuclear reactors.
       Figure ES-2 presents the results of half a dozen recent 
     studies of the cost of alternatives, including two by 
     government entities, three by Wall Street analysts and one by 
     an independent analyst. Figure ES-2 expresses the cost 
     estimated by each study for each technology as a percentage 
     of the study's nuclear cost estimate. Every author identifies 
     a number of alternatives that are less costly than nuclear 
     reactors.
       One of the central concerns about reliance on efficiency 
     and renewables to meet future electricity needs is that they 
     may not be available in sufficient supply. However, analysis 
     of the technical potential to deliver economically 
     practicable options for low-cost, low-carbon approaches 
     indicates that the supply is ample to meet both electricity 
     needs and carbon reduction targets for three decades or more 
     based on efficiency, renewables and natural gas (see Figure 
     ES-3).
       Figure ES-3 builds a ``supply curve'' of the potential 
     contribution and cost of efficiency and renewables, based on 
     analyses by the Rand Corporation, McKinsey and Company, the 
     National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the Union of Concerned 
     Scientists and the American Council for an Energy Efficient 
     Economy. Clearly, there is huge potential for low carbon 
     approaches to meet electricity needs. To put this potential 
     into perspective, long-term targets call for emissions 
     reductions below 2005 levels of slightly more than 40 percent 
     by 2030 and 80 percent by 2050. Even assuming that all 
     existing low carbon sources (about 30 percent of the current 
     mix) have to be replaced by 2030, there is more than ample 
     potential in the efficiency and renewables.
       With continuing demand growth, it would still not be until 
     2040 that costly or as yet nonexistent technologies would be 
     needed. Thus, pursuing these low cost options first meets the 
     need for electricity and emissions reductions, while allowing 
     time for technologies to be developed, such as electricity 
     storage or carbon capture, that could meet electricity needs 
     after 2040. The contending technologies that would have to be 
     included in the long term are all shown with equal costs, 
     above the technologies that have lower costs because it is 
     difficult to project costs that far out in future and there 
     will likely be a great deal of technological change before 
     those technologies must be tapped to add substantial 
     incremental supplies.
     A comprehensive view of options for meeting electricity needs
       In addition to their cost, nuclear reactors possess two 
     other characteristics that make them an inferior choice among 
     the options available.
       The high capital costs and long construction lead times 
     associated with nuclear reactors make them a risky source of 
     electricity, vulnerable to market, financial, and 
     technological change that strengthen the economic case 
     against them.
       While nuclear power is a low carbon source of electricity, 
     it is not an environmentally benign source. The uranium fuel 
     cycle has significant safety, security, and waste issues that 
     are far more damaging than the environmental impact of 
     efficiency and renewables.
       Figure ES-4 depicts three critical characteristics of the 
     alternatives available for meeting electricity needs in a 
     carbon-constrained environment. The horizontal axis 
     represents the economic cost. The vertical axis represents 
     the societal cost (with societal cost including 
     environmental, safety, and security concerns). The size of 
     the circles represents the risk. Public policy should exploit 
     the options closest to the origin, as these are the least-
     cost alternatives. Where the alternatives are equal on 
     economic cost and societal impact, the less risky should be 
     pursued.
       Nuclear reactors are shown straddling the positive/negative 
     line on societal impact. If the uranium production cycle--
     mining, processing, use and waste disposal--were deemed to 
     have a major societal impact, nuclear reactors would be moved 
     much higher on the societal impact dimension. If one believes 
     that nuclear reactors have a minor impact, reactors would be 
     moved down on the societal impact dimension. In either case, 
     there are numerous options that should be pursued first. 
     Thus, viewed from a multidimensional perspective, including 
     economic, environmental, and risk factors, there are numerous 
     preferable alternatives.
     The impact of subsidies
       As noted, nuclear reactors are very unlikely to be built 
     without ratepayer and taxpayer subsidies. Many of the hope 
     and hype analyses advance scenarios in which carbon is priced 
     and nuclear reactors are the beneficiaries of large 
     subsidies. Under those sets of extreme assumptions, nuclear 
     reactors become less costly than fossil fuels with carbon 
     capture and storage costs. However, they do not become less 
     costly than efficiency and renewables. High carbon costs make 
     efficiency' and renewables more attractive.
       Moreover, public policy has not tended to be quite so 
     biased, although the supporters of nuclear power would like 
     it to be. Imposing a price on carbon makes all low carbon 
     options, including efficiency and renewables, more attractive 
     as options. Subsidy programs tend to be applied to all low 
     carbon technologies. As a result, although the carbon pricing 
     and subsidy programs implemented and contemplated in recent 
     years tend to impose cost on consumers or shift them from 
     ratepayers to taxpayers; they do not change the order in 
     which options enter the mix. In other words, given pricing 
     and subsidies that simply values carbon emission or its 
     abatement, the economic costs as estimated above dictate the 
     order in which options are implemented. Nuclear reactors 
     remain the worst option. It is possible to bias

[[Page 12620]]

     policies so severely that the order of priority changes, but 
     that simply imposes unnecessary costs on consumers, 
     taxpayers, and society.
     Conclusion
       The highly touted renaissance of nuclear power is based on 
     fiction, not fact. It got a significant part of its momentum 
     in the early 2000s with a series of cost projections that 
     vastly understated the direct costs of nuclear reactors. As 
     those early cost estimates fell by the wayside and the 
     extremely high direct costs of nuclear reactors became 
     apparent, advocates for nuclear power turned to climate 
     change as the rationale to offset the high cost. But 
     introducing environmental externalities does not resuscitate 
     the nuclear option for two reasons. First, consideration of 
     externalities improves the prospects of non-fossil, non-
     nuclear options to respond to climate change. Second, 
     introducing externalities so prominently into the analysis 
     highlights nuclear power's own environmental problems. Even 
     with climate change policy looming, nuclear power cannot 
     stand on its own two feet in the marketplace, so its 
     advocates are forced to seek to prop it up by shifting costs 
     and risks to ratepayers and taxpayers.
       The aspiration of the nuclear enthusiasts, embodied in 
     early reports from academic institutions, like MIT, has 
     become desperation, in the updated MIT report, precisely 
     because their reactor cost numbers do not comport with 
     reality. Notwithstanding their hope and hype, nuclear 
     reactors are not economically competitive and would require 
     massive subsidies to force them into the supply mix. It was 
     only by ignoring the full range of alternatives--above all 
     efficiency and renewables--that the MIT studies could pretend 
     to see an economic future for nuclear reactors, but the 
     analytic environment has changed from the early days of the 
     great bandwagon market, so that it is much more difficult to 
     get away with passing off hope and hype as reality.
       The massive shift of costs necessary to render nuclear 
     barely competitive with the most expensive alternatives and 
     the huge amount of leverage (figurative and literal) that is 
     necessary to make nuclear power palatable to Wall Street and 
     less onerous on ratepayers is simply not worth it because the 
     burden falls on taxpayers. Policymakers, regulators, and the 
     public should turn their attention to and put their resources 
     behind the lower-cost, more environmentally benign 
     alternatives that are available. If nuclear power's time ever 
     comes, it will be far in the future, after the potential of 
     the superior alternatives available today has been exhausted.

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, let me simply say that our Republican friends 
are running true to form tonight. In the past 2 weeks, they have voted 
against funding unemployment insurance for people who have been laid 
off in the most excruciating recession in 70 years. Now, today, they 
are refusing to support a proposal which will help us stave off the 
laying off of well over 100,000 additional teachers around the 
country--something which, I think, thoughtful people would recognize 
would injure not just those teachers but their students and the 
communities in which those students are supposed to learn. There is 
nothing as expensive as ignorance, and ignorance is fed when you have 
an inadequate number of quality teachers.
  Let me devote the rest of my time to something that I consider to be 
fairly off the point today because it had been suggested to us that the 
Secretary of Education is somewhat unhappy because of the offsets that 
we have required in order to pay for this additional funding. Let me 
put that into perspective.
  We are trying to provide $15 billion in additional education 
resources to this administration--$10 billion to stave off the firing 
of teachers and about $5 billion to fill the shortfall that developed 
in the Pell program this year because of the economy.

                              {time}  2050

  In order to finance that, we have had to cut many programs. I don't 
like to do that, and the administration certainly doesn't like to see 
it either. But we also had to require that the Secretary's department 
itself take a cut that is equal to about 5 percent of the value of the 
additional education dollars that his department would receive.
  One of the Secretary's objections, evidently, is the fact that last 
year in the stimulus package we provided him with a $4.3 billion pot of 
money to use virtually any way he wanted to stimulate educational 
progress in this country; $4.3 billion. He has spent a very small 
amount of that, about $600 million, and we decided we had to cut about 
$500 million out of that fund in order to finance and fully pay for the 
package before us. That still leaves him with $3.2 billion in money 
that he can spend any way his department wants.
  We had a big discussion yesterday in the Agriculture Appropriations 
Subcommittee about whether or not it was acceptable for the Secretary 
of Agriculture to have a $38 million pot, yet the Secretary of 
Education is somehow offended because he only has $3.2 billion to pass 
around. I would suggest that that loose money, that untargeted money 
that he has available, is roughly functional to what could be called a 
congressional earmark. In fact, what I would call that fund is a fund 
that enables the Secretary to provide executive branch earmarks.
  I would point out that all of the legislative-directed earmarks in 
the Labor-H bill last year amounted to less than $1 billion, and yet 
the Secretary seems to be offended by the fact that he only has three 
times that amount to spread around as he sees fit.
  I would also point out that in the year-and-a-half they have only 
gotten grants out to two States, and the department has already 
announced that at most there will be about 15 other States that might 
get winning grants, which means that more than half the country will 
never see a dime from that money.
  I would suggest that there is nothing wrong with providing the 
Secretary a modest amount of funds to promote educational change. God 
knows we need it. But to suggest that we are being unduly harsh is a 
joke.
  With that, I urge support for this amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate from the Committee on 
Appropriations has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) and 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) each will control 15 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I want to first thank Chairman 
Obey for his incredible leadership on this supplemental. It was a very 
difficult job to put this together, but you have done a phenomenal job.
  Let me also thank the Chair of the Rules Committee, Congresswoman 
Slaughter, and Speaker Pelosi, for their leadership and for allowing 
this important discussion and amendment.
  Also I would like to applaud Congressman McGovern for his thoughtful 
and important amendment. He and Mr. Obey set forth this amendment that 
we will vote on today. I strongly support it and their efforts to get 
an exit strategy to end this war.
  My amendment is very straightforward. It would prevent any escalation 
or any ongoing combat operation in Afghanistan and limit the funding to 
the safe and orderly withdrawal of our troops and military contractors 
from Afghanistan.
  It is critical to understand that this amendment would provide for 
the safety of our troops, civilian personnel, and contractors while 
troop withdrawal takes place. It does not allow funding for ongoing 
combat operations or for this escalation. It is not a cut-and-run 
amendment. It would not leave our troops stranded in harm's way.
  Simply put, this amendment provides for the safe and orderly 
withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan, and we need it because the 
reality is that there is no military solution to Afghanistan. In fact, 
the occupation of Afghanistan is making us less safe. Our occupation is 
a prime recruiting tool for the insurgency and for al Qaeda.
  If we remember, nearly 9 years ago the reason the authorization was 
granted, which I could not support, was to provide authorization to go 
after al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. Well, nearly a decade later, what 
are we doing there? We need to redefine this mission. We need to begin 
the safe, timely withdrawal of U.S. troops and military contractors, 
and we should do so by adopting this amendment today which stops this 
funding.
  A few months from now, the war from Afghanistan will enter, as I 
said, its tenth year. It is already the longest

[[Page 12621]]

war in our Nation's history, longer than Vietnam and the Civil War, and 
there is really no end in sight. In fact, this concern of ``war without 
end'' again is why I opposed the resolution authorizing military force 
on September 14, 2001. It was a blank check then, and it remains a 
blank check now.
  I think it is important to take a moment and put the evolution of 
this war in context, because we have to remember that, again, there was 
no discussion about the potential consequences of invading Afghanistan. 
The debate we are having today should have happened 10 years ago.
  Few people imagined that we would have nearly 100,000 troops there a 
decade later, despite the fact that the CIA estimates that there may be 
only 50 to 100 al Qaeda in Afghanistan. So we have to be honest; the 
war is not working. The Afghan government is plagued by incompetence 
and corruption, The Afghan Security Forces are in shambles, and, 
tragically, just over 1,000 servicemen and -women have lost their 
lives.
  It is clear that our servicemen and -women have performed with 
incredible courage and commitment. They have done everything we have 
asked them to do. As the daughter of a 25-year military officer, my dad 
was a lieutenant colonel in the Army, I understand and know the 
sacrifices these families are making. But the truth is, they have been 
put in an impossible situation. The Afghan government is anything but a 
reliable partner, and conditions on the ground make winning over the 
Afghan people extremely difficult, if not nearly an impossible task.
  Sadly, this war has no end in sight. We are bound to see the generals 
come back to us and ask us for more money, more time, and more troops 
if they say it is going well. If it is not going well, I expect to see 
the generals come back and ask for more money, more time, and more 
troops.
  So regardless of the situation, unless Congress does something, and 
we have to face this, if Congress allows this, it will be an endless 
war. So enough is enough. The U.S. has no choice but to pursue and 
support a political and diplomatic solution in Afghanistan. We must be 
about that hard work now.
  So please join me in supporting the safe and orderly withdrawal of 
our troops. We can and we must responsibly bring them home and end this 
war now.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I rise to oppose the Lee amendment to 
essentially cut off the funding for our troops in Afghanistan.
  I am very proud to yield 5 minutes to my colleague, our leader on the 
Defense Subcommittee, the gentleman from Florida, Bill Young.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding 
the time.
  I rise to give compliments to Chairman Norm Dicks of the subcommittee 
for having worked with the minority and the majority, as well as the 
President of the United States, to develop a very good Defense 
appropriations supplemental appropriations bill for our troops who are 
fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  The bill provides the equipment necessary for those troops to carry 
out their mission. The bill provides for training. The bill provides 
for self-protective measures to keep our troops safe while they fight 
the war they were sent to fight.

                              {time}  2100

  The only problem I have is we're not going to vote on that bill. 
Although this is supposedly a defense supplemental, that bill is not 
going to be voted on. That bill was reported and approved by the 
subcommittee back in May, but yet there has been no consideration 
beyond that date. The subcommittee approved it back in May after the 
President requested it.
  The members of the Appropriations Committee have not had an 
opportunity to vote on a Defense supplemental appropriations bill. The 
Members of the House have not had an opportunity to vote on a Defense 
appropriations supplemental bill. There's something wrong with that.
  Chairman Dicks did a good job. He worked with us, as did Chairman 
Murtha before him, and it was a good bipartisan effort. We're not only 
not going to vote on that good bill, but we're not even going to have a 
chance to vote on the Senate version of the bill that's not quite as 
good as the House version, but it's better than nothing. And it's time 
that we provide the funding for our troops in the field, deployed and 
exposed to danger, so that they're provided with what they need.
  I have a problem with this. I said the subcommittee approved the bill 
back in May. The full committee has not considered it. As a matter of 
fact, we are rapidly approaching the 1-year anniversary of the last 
time the Appropriations Committee met to consider an appropriations 
bill. Now, that's unusual. It seems to me like it flies in the face of 
the Constitution, because Article I, section 9 makes it very clear that 
the executive branch of government cannot spend money from the General 
Treasury that has not first been appropriated by Congress. And if the 
Appropriations Committee doesn't meet to approve the bills or to report 
the bills to the House, how are we going to meet that constitutional 
responsibility? It's pretty tough.
  July 22 last year was the last time the Appropriations Committee met 
to consider an appropriations bill. So I compliment Chairman Dicks for 
creating a good bipartisan product that the President of the United 
States supported, and I am just disappointed that we're not going to 
have a chance to vote on it. Our troops in the field need to know that 
we are supporting them with whatever it is that they need to carry out 
their mission.
  I am opposed to all of these amendments that we are considering 
because none of them do anything to support our troops in the field, 
which is what this bill is supposed to be all about. These amendments 
are not good, and it's just a real shame that we are not considering 
the needs of our troops who are deployed, to provide what it is that 
they need in order to accomplish the mission that we sent them to 
accomplish and to protect themselves while they're doing it.
  Mr. Speaker, typically, I would use my time talking on a Supplemental 
as the Ranking Member of the Defense Subcommittee to congratulate 
Chairman Dicks on a fine bi-partisan package that he and his staff put 
together. I would thank him for treating us fairly and listening to the 
minority's concerns, and suggest that we pass the bill as quickly as 
possible.
  Regrettably, I cannot do that today because the bill before us is the 
product of such an abuse of power and process that we aren't even 
voting on Chairman Dicks' bill.
  Instead, we find ourselves voting on the Senate defense supplemental 
in the hope of getting the Department of Defense the desperately needed 
funds for on-going Afghanistan operations before they run out.
  And I must say that really upsets me. While this is our best chance 
of getting badly needed funds to the Department, Chairman Dicks and his 
staff had produced a very fine, truly bi-partisan supplemental bill . . 
. one that in my opinion was much better than this Senate bill.
  But because of his leadership, that bill never saw the light of day. 
Not because it was controversial, or contained something bad, but 
because procedurally a small group of Members couldn't find a way to 
get unrelated, extraneous domestic spending items attached to it.
  So instead today, maybe it is in my best interest for me to use this 
time making a case for my old spot on the Armed Services Committee.
  That may seem odd, but I can only wonder how much longer the 
Appropriations Committee will exist . . . if it still does.
  I do thank Mr. Dicks for his courtesy and cooperation. I only regret 
that his leadership decided to play politics with what was a good bill 
which supported our troops.
  Ms. LEE of California. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
California, Chairman George Miller.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I want to thank the gentlewoman for 
offering this amendment and for yielding me time.
  This is an important amendment. The time has come to understand what 
is taking place in Afghanistan and the

[[Page 12622]]

incredible price that our soldiers are paying in that country and the 
incredible price that the American taxpayer is paying to fund this war. 
We've got to understand that the ingredients for victory, as people 
identify it and discuss it and describe it, are simply not present in 
Afghanistan:
  The idea that we would expand the franchise of an honest central 
government to the countryside so we could stabilize the countryside. 
There is no honest central government in Afghanistan. It's rife with 
corruption, including the President of the country and his family and 
his relatives and his warlords and his ministers, and that's got to 
stop;
  The idea that we are going to get help from the neighbors. We're 
getting minimal help from the Pakistanis. We're getting no help of any 
consequence from the Russians or the Chinese or the Indians because 
they're all engaged in the same game. They are protecting their 
position while America bleeds, while America bleeds the blood of our 
soldiers, while our Treasury bleeds the dollars of our taxpayers, and 
that's been going on and on and on and on.
  We know how these Taliban were created. We know who supported them. 
We know the double accounting they do. We know the protections that 
they run. We know the sanctuaries that they provide them. And yet our 
soldiers are required to go in and ferret it out over and over and over 
again. We're told that we are going to develop this nation, that if we 
bring development, we'll have peace in Pakistan.
  One of the first requests from the generals 8 years ago, 9 years ago 
was to send small-scale agriculture. You know what the request is 9, 10 
years later? Send small-scale agriculture. Get us a police force that 
is honest. Get us troops that are honest, that will fight. None of that 
has been matched. But what has been matched is the death and the 
maiming and the injuries of our American soldiers. It is time to bring 
them home.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes 
to the gentleman from Missouri, Ike Skelton, the chairman of the House 
authorizing committee on national security or defense.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to all of 
the amendments to end funding for the war in Afghanistan or to withdraw 
our troops before the job is done. Afghanistan is the epicenter for 
terrorism, and it was the genesis of multiple attacks against our 
Nation, including the attacks on September 11. We must not forget why 
we are fighting this war. There's far too much at stake.
  For nearly a decade during the previous administration, Afghanistan 
was the forgotten war with no clear strategy. But now we have a 
strategy, a good strategy. We're already seeing clear signs of success 
even before the surge of an additional 30,000 troops is complete. With 
the help of our allies, we are capturing or killing terrorists every 
week, including the most significant Taliban capture since the start of 
the war.
  We've been in Afghanistan for many years, and I recognize that the 
patience of the American people is not unlimited. But thanks to the men 
and women of our military and the new strategy adopted, we are finally 
on the path to success. Now is not the time to abandon this war, our 
NATO allies, and the Afghan people.
  The amendments to immediately cut off funding for the war in 
Afghanistan or to immediately redeploy our troops are clearly the wrong 
thing to do. But it would be equally unwise to make a decision now to 
leave Afghanistan before the job is done. At long last, we have a 
strategy for success. Now is not the time to abandon that strategy. I 
urge my colleagues to join me in standing behind our troops and the 
security of our Nation by voting against these amendments.
  Ms. LEE of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Kucinich).
  Mr. KUCINICH. Just a few days before his dismissal, General 
McChrystal wrote what has been described as a devastating report on his 
mission. He pointed out that he faced a resilient and growing 
insurgency with too few troops, and he expected no progress in the 
coming months. Why are we continuing to send our troops into a mission 
impossible? Why are we committing our troops to a situation which is 
certainly bound to bring about more casualties, both of our troops and 
innocent civilians?
  General Petraeus is promising an escalation of the war which will put 
more American lives on the line and more innocent civilians killed. Do 
we support our troops? If we do, and if we really paid attention to 
what's going on in Afghanistan, if we really supported our troops, we'd 
bring them home. And that's exactly what the Barbara Lee amendment is 
designed to do, and that's why we should support it.
  As related by William Polk in his recent article in 
``Counterpunch''--Just a few days before his dismissal, General 
McChrystal wrote what has been described as a ``devastating report on 
his mission.'' He pointed out that he faced a ``resilient and growing 
insurgency'' with too few troops and he expected no progress in the 
coming months.
  Why are we continuing to send our troops into a mission impossible? 
Why are we committing our troops to a situation which is certainly 
bound to bring about more casualties, both of our troops and innocent 
civilians? General Petraeus is promising an escalation of the war which 
will put more American lives on the line and more innocent civilians 
killed.
  Do we support our troops? If we do, and if we really paid attention 
to what's going on in Afghanistan, if we really supported our troops we 
would bring them home. That's exactly what the Barbara Lee Amendment is 
designed to do, and that's why we should support it.

                               What Now?

                           Afghanistan Sitrep

                          (By William R. Polk)

       On June 24, the International Herald Tribune published an 
     editorial from its parent, The New York Times, entitled 
     ``Obama's Decision.'' Both the attribution--printing in the 
     two newspapers which ensures that the editorial will reach 
     both directly and through subsidiary reprinting almost every 
     ``decision maker'' in the world--and the date--just before 
     the appointment of David Petraeus to succeed Stanley 
     McChrystal--are significant. They could have suggested a 
     momentary lull in which basic questions on the Afghan war 
     might have been reconsidered.
       That did not happen. The President made clear his belief 
     that the strategy of the war was sound and his commitment to 
     continue it even if the general responsible for it had to be 
     changed.
       The editorial sounded a different note arising from the 
     events surrounding the fall of General McChrystal: Mr. Obama, 
     said The Times, ``must order all of his top advisers to stop 
     their sniping and maneuvering'' and come up with a coherent 
     political and military plan for driving back the Taliban and 
     building a minimally effective Afghan government.''
       In short, Mr. Obama must get his team together and evolve a 
     plan.
       Unfortunately, the task he faces is not that simple.
       First, consider the ``team.'' It has two major components, 
     the military officers whom McChrystal gathered in Kabul. As 
     they made clear in the Rolling Stone interview, they think of 
     themselves as ``Team America'' and hold in contempt everyone 
     else. Those who don't fully subscribe to their approach to 
     the war are unpatriotic, stupid or cowardly. Those officers 
     are not alone. Agreeing with them is apparently now a large 
     part of the professional military establishment. They are the 
     junior officers whom David Petraeus and Stanley McChrystal 
     have selected, promoted and with whom they take their stand.
       The other ``component'' is not a group but many groups with 
     different agendas and constituencies. The most crucial for my 
     purposes here are the advisers to the President; they were 
     dismissed out of hand as ``the wimps in the White House.'' 
     Most, but not all, were civilians. Other senior military 
     officers, now retired, who are not part of ``Team America'' 
     and its adherents were also disparaged. Famously, General Jim 
     Jones, the director of the National Security Council staff, 
     was called a ``clown.''
       These were the comments that forced Mr. Obama's hand and 
     were what the press latched upon to explain the events. But 
     many missed the point that McChrystal had just a few days 
     before his dismissal written a devastating report on his 
     mission. Confidential copies of it were obtained by the 
     London newspaper, The Independent on Sunday, which published 
     it today, but of course the President had seen it earlier. 
     Essentially, its message boiled down to failure.
       McChrystal pointed out that he faced a ``resilient and 
     growing insurgency,'' with too few troops and expected no 
     progress in the coming six months. Despite expenditures of at 
     least $7 billion a month, his politico-military strategy 
     wasn't working. Within weeks

[[Page 12623]]

     of the ``victory'' over the Taliban in the agricultural 
     district of Marja, the Taliban were back and the box full of 
     government he had announced proved to be nearly empty. As the 
     expression went in the days of the Vietnam war, whatever 
     happened during the day, the guerrillas ``owned the night.'' 
     As he described it, Marja was the ``bleeding ulcer'' of the 
     American campaign.
       Behind McChrystal's words, the figures were even more 
     devastating: Marja, despite the descriptions in the press is 
     not a town, much less a city; it is a hundred or so square 
     miles of farm land with dispersed hamlets in which about 
     35,000 people live and work. Into that small and lightly 
     populated area, McChrystal poured some 15,000 troops, and 
     they failed to secure it.
       To appreciate what those figures mean, consider them in 
     context of Petraeus's counterinsurgency theory, on which 
     McChrystal was basing his strategy. As he had explained it, 
     Marja should be taken, secured and held. Then an 
     administration--McChrystal's ``government in a box''--should 
     be imposed upon it. Despite all the hoopla about the 
     brilliant new strategy, it was hardly new. In fact it was a 
     replay of the strategy the French General Lyautey called the 
     tache d'huile (the oil spot) and applied in Indochina over a 
     century ago. We also tried it in Vietnam, renaming it the 
     ``ink spot.'' The hope was that the ``spot,'' once fixed on 
     the Marja, would smudge into adjoining areas and so 
     eventually spread across the country. Clear and simple, but 
     unfortunately, like so much in counterinsurgency theory, it 
     never seemed to work.
       Petraeus's counterinsurgency theory also illuminated how to 
     create the ``spot.'' What was required was a commitment of 
     forces in proportion to native population size. Various 
     numbers have been put forth but a common number is about one 
     soldier for each 50 inhabitants. Marja was the area chosen 
     for the ``spot.'' The people living there, after all, were 
     farmers, wedded to the land, and so should be more tractable 
     than the wild warriors along the tribal frontier. Moreover, 
     it was the place where the first significant American aid 
     program, the Helmand Valley Authority, had been undertaken in 
     the late 1950s. So, if an area were to be favorable to 
     Americans, it ought to be Marja. But, to take no chances, 
     General McChrystal decided to employ overwhelming force. So, 
     what is particularly stunning about the failure in Marja is 
     that the force applied was not the counterinsurgency model of 
     1 soldier for each 50 inhabitants but nearly 1 soldier for 
     each 2 inhabitants.
       If these numbers were projected to the planned offensive in 
     the much larger city of Kandahar, which has a population of 
     nearly 500,000, they become impossibly large. Such an attack 
     would require at least four times as many U.S. and NATO as in 
     Marja. That is virtually the entire fighting force and what 
     little control over Marja and most other areas, perhaps even 
     the capital, Kabul, that now exists would have to be given up 
     or else large numbers of additional American troops would 
     have to be engaged. Moreover, in response to such an attack, 
     it would be possible for the insurgents also to redeploy so 
     the numbers would again increase.
       The more fundamental question, which needs to be addressed, 
     is why didn't this relatively massive introduction of troops 
     with awesome and overwhelming fire power succeed. Just a few 
     days before he was fired, as I have mentioned, General 
     McChrystal posed, but could not answer, that question. I hope 
     President Obama is also pondering it.
       For those who read history, the answer is evident. But, as 
     I have quoted in my book Understanding Iraq, the great German 
     philosopher, Georg Willhelm Friedrich Hegel, despaired that 
     ``Peoples and governments never have learned anything from 
     history or acted on principles deduced from it'' and, 
     therefore, as the American philosopher George Santayana 
     warned us, not having learned from history, we are doomed to 
     repeat it. Indeed, it seems that each generation of Americans 
     has to start all over again to find the answers. Who among 
     our leaders and certainly among college students now really 
     remembers Vietnam? So, consider these simple facts:
       The first fact, whether we like it or not, is that nearly 
     everyone in the world has a deep aversion to foreigners on 
     his land. As far as we know, this feeling goes back to the 
     very beginning of our species because we are territorial 
     animals. Dedication to the protection of homeland permeates 
     history. And the sentiment has never died out. Today we call 
     it nationalism. Nationalism in various guises is the most 
     powerful political idea of our times. Protecting land, 
     culture, religion and people from foreigners is the central 
     issue in insurgency. The former head of the Pakistani 
     intelligence service, who has had unparallelled experience 
     with the Taliban over many years, advised us that we should 
     open our eyes to seeing the Afghan insurgents as they see 
     themselves: ``They are freedom fighters fighting for their 
     country and fighting for their faith.'' We agreed when they 
     were fighting the Russians; now, when many of the same people 
     are fighting us, we see them only as terrorists. That label 
     does not help us understand why they are fighting.
       Instead of asking why they are fighting, counterinsurgents 
     think they can overcome aversion to foreign invaders by 
     ``renting'' the natives. In Marja, we not only put in a large 
     military contingent but, as Rajiv Chandrasekaran reported 
     this month in The Washington Post, we offered to employ 
     virtually the entire adult population, some 10,000 people. 
     Unquestionably such efforts do persuade some of the people 
     for some of the time. But not all or permanently. In Marja, 
     only 1,200 people signed up for the jobs we offered.
       Why so few? After all, the Afghans, as I wrote in an 
     earlier article, have suffered through virtually continuous 
     war for thirty years. Many are wounded or sick, with some 
     even on the brink of starvation. More than one in three 
     subsists on the equivalent of less than 45 cents a day, 
     almost one in two lives below the poverty line and more than 
     one in two preschool children is stunted because of 
     malnutrition. They are the lucky ones; one in five dies 
     before the age of 5. Obviously, the Afghans need help, so we 
     think they should welcome our efforts to aid them. But Marja 
     shows that they do not. Nation-wide, independent observers 
     have found that attitude is common: most do not want us 
     there, even giving them aid. And even those who do are fairly 
     easily dissuaded by the insurgents.
       Threats or attacks by the insurgents have brought them into 
     our gunsights. In Afghanistan, as in Vietnam, we have tried 
     to so weaken the insurgents that they cannot effectively 
     block our programs. Our ``body counts'' in Vietnam showed 
     that we killed off the entire Viet Minh several times over 
     and today we are told that the ranks of the Taliban have been 
     severely depleted. But, because the motivation that energized 
     the first group of insurgents is widely shared, and is 
     usually intensified by foreign military action, which by its 
     nature is regarded by many of the natives as unjustified and 
     brutal, new insurgents as well as supporters of the 
     temporarily evicted insurgents will emerge from among the 
     inhabitants of the oil/ink spot. Outsiders may have come in, 
     but, according to U.S. military intelligence about three in 
     four insurgents fight within five miles of their homes. They 
     were ``home'' and taking up arms within a month in Marja.
       Indeed, the campaign may have been, to use that cumbersome 
     locution of governmentese, ``counter-productive.'' According 
     to the former British counter-terrorism chief and current 
     head of the U.N. monitoring mission, Richard Barnett, as 
     cited in The Guardian/The Observer last week, ``Attempts by 
     British and American forces to expand their control over 
     Afghan territory over the past 12 months have been counter-
     productive and led to a worsening security situation.''
       The second fact is that those insurgents who don't get 
     killed are the ones who have learned three simple ways to 
     defeat the counterinsurgents.
       The first of these ways to defeat counterinsurgents is to 
     use appropriate tactics--never stand and fight. Insurgents 
     can see that their enemies outgun, and usually far out-
     number, them so they should hit and run--lay mines, ambush 
     patrols, disrupt logistics but never get caught. Drawing on a 
     Kenyan fable, this has been termed ``the war of the flea and 
     the lion.'' The flea bites and jumps away. The powerful lion 
     swats, occasionally hits, but eventually tires and moves 
     away. Lions don't defeat fleas.
       The second way insurgents can defeat the counterinsurgent 
     is a form of jujitsu--using his strength against him. His 
     strength is his superiority in weapons. So the insurgent 
     seeks to incite him to use them. Inevitably, caught in the 
     middle, the people--who are after all the ``spoil'' in 
     insurgency warfare--get hurt. And when they get hurt, they 
     naturally come to hate those who fire the weapons. In 
     Vietnam, insurgents would sometimes enter a ``neutral'' 
     village, shoot at an American airplane and then steal away. 
     The attacked airplane would call in troops or gunships. The 
     villagers would suffer and would be confirmed in their hatred 
     of the Americans. It was brutal but very effective.
       Counterinsurgents think they can avoid this problem by 
     withholding as much as possible of their lethal power. But 
     doing so is very difficult. Their soldiers also get hurt and 
     angry. And they come to hate the locals--wogs, gooks, rag 
     heads, untermenschen--who appear to them dirty, slovenly, 
     corrupt and cowardly. No one can be trusted when even 
     children act as spies or carry bombs. Soldiers make bad 
     neighbors to civilians in the best of circumstances and 
     insurgency is not one of those circumstances. As I have 
     pointed out in my book, The Birth of America, it was the 
     presence of even superbly disciplined British troops in 
     Boston that touched off the American Revolution.
       The third way insurgents can defeat invaders is by 
     destroying their local puppets. Ruling another country is, of 
     course, expensive and difficult so foreigners have almost 
     always and everywhere enrolled willing natives to help. In 
     the American Revolution we called those people ``the 
     Loyalists.'' In Vietnam, they were the government of the 
     South. In Afghanistan they are the ``Kabul government.''
       So the insurgents regard collaborators--``Quislings'' as we 
     called them in the Second

[[Page 12624]]

     World War--as their prime target. In America, the colonists 
     threatened, tarred and feathered, lashed, imprisoned, hanged 
     or drove away tens of thousands of the Loyalists. In Vietnam, 
     French police records show that in the 1950s, the Viet Minh 
     virtually wiped out the administration of the southern 
     government, murdering policemen, postmen, judges and other 
     civil servants as well as teachers and doctors. And today in 
     Afghanistan, as Rod Nordland reported in The New York Times 
     on June 10, ``The Taliban have been stepping up a campaign of 
     assassinations in recent months against officials and anyone 
     else associated with local government in an attempt to 
     undermine counterinsurgency operations in the south.''
       One Afghan told Nordland, ``I know many people who are 
     afraid to take jobs with the government or the aid community 
     now. It's a very effective and very efficient campaign; the 
     armed opposition are using this tool because it works.'' Even 
     from a nationalist perspective, this is very rough justice. 
     But many Afghans appear to believe it is both ``justice'' and 
     Afghan justice.
       To validate their actions, the insurgents must themselves 
     supply what the foreigners and their local supporters offer. 
     We have full records of how insurgents did this in Yugoslavia 
     and Greece during the Second World War. The records are not 
     so open for Afghanistan as yet. But, we know from a study by 
     the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) that the 
     Taliban has set up a ``widespread paramilitary shadow 
     government . . . in a majority of Afghanistan's 34 
     provinces.''
       One of the things these shadow governments do is administer 
     the law. For years, I have read reports contrasting what 
     happens in a government court and a Taliban court. In the 
     government court, cases languish for months or years while 
     bribes are collected. A U.N. study found earlier this year 
     that officials shake down their fellow citizens for an amount 
     that is nearly a quarter of the country's gross domestic 
     product. In a Taliban court, there is no bribery and no 
     delay: Islamic law as defined by Afghan custom is immediate. 
     From our point of view, this too is very rough justice, if 
     justice at all, but in insurgencies, people appear willing to 
     put aside the niceties of peaceful life. In our Revolution we 
     did too.

  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 3 minutes 
to Ike Skelton's partner, the gentleman from California, Buck McKeon, 
who is the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee.
  Mr. McKEON. I thank the leader for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed that the House Democratic 
leadership would allow a vote on these three amendments at this time. 
Make no mistake, all three would go far to cripple the war effort in 
Afghanistan and directly undermine the Commander in Chief.
  Just 24 hours ago, the Senate unanimously confirmed General David 
Petraeus as the new commander of the U.S. and international forces in 
Afghanistan. And yet, not a day later, here we are on the House floor 
taking dangerous political potshots at our troops' mission and the 
President's strategy to surge an additional 30,000 troops in the 
region.

                              {time}  2110

  I strongly oppose all three Afghanistan amendments before us. Not 
only would they tie the hands of the Commander in Chief, but they send 
the exact wrong message to our allies and enemies alike at such a 
critical moment in our efforts in Afghanistan.
  Today, our newly confirmed commander walked the halls at NATO 
headquarters, working to reassure our allies that our country is 
committed to this war. And right now he is heading to Afghanistan to 
take command. We should stand in unity with him, not sit here in 
Washington taking vote after vote to strip funding from our warfighters 
before his plan even touches down.
  General Petraeus has proven himself to be one of America's most 
capable military officers. He turned around a perilous situation in 
Iraq, and our combat troops have started coming home. By the end of 
August, our troop levels in Iraq will be down to 50,000 for training 
and reserve purposes.
  I believe the President has chosen the right commander and the right 
strategy in Afghanistan. I'm confident that General Petraeus and our 
troops can succeed if given the time, space, and resources they need to 
complete their mission.
  As the General arrives in Afghanistan, those of us here in Congress 
cannot lose sight of the broader perspective. Our brave military men 
and women and their civilian counterparts are in the midst of a tough 
fight that's critical to the U.S. national security. Cutting off their 
funding in the middle of that fight is tantamount to abandonment.
  In December, and again last week, the President reminded us why we 
are in Afghanistan. It was the epicenter of where al Qaeda planned and 
launched the 9/11 attacks against innocent Americans. After an 
exhaustive 90-day review last fall, the President recommitted the 
United States to defeating al Qaeda and the Taliban.
  The timeline for success in Afghanistan cannot be dictated by 
arbitrary political clocks here in Washington. It must be driven by the 
operational clock in Kabul, Kandahar and the Afghanistan countryside. 
We all hope and pray that the goal can be accomplished by July 2011, 
but the President must adhere to his recent comments that conditions on 
the ground will dictate the pace of any withdrawal next summer.
  I urge my colleagues to reject these ill-timed measures, reject 
attempts to strip funding for our warfighters and, instead, show our 
troops and allies a united front in our efforts.
  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar).
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentlewoman for her courageous lead on this 
issue.
  This $35 billion for Afghanistan is roughly equivalent to the amount 
in the Recovery Act for highways and transit. If instead of Afghanistan 
these funds were invested at home, we could do the equivalent of what 
we did in the Recovery Act, 35,000 lane-miles of highway improved; 
1,262 bridges; 12,000 transit buses and rail passenger cars; 5,000 
transit stations improved; and 1.3 million jobs that we've documented 
on our portion of the Recovery Act.
  But this is a conflict with no exit, no end, no offset; and we should 
not provide more money for it.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).
  Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment and 
also to the underlying bill.
  I have great respect for the gentlelady who brings this amendment. 
She said earlier that there is, in her way of thinking, no military 
solution in Afghanistan. But let me say that surrender is a military 
tactic. I just oppose it.
  This is a very serious time in the life of our country here at home; 
and it's easy, I suspect, for some Americans to forget that we're a 
Nation at war. But we are.
  As I was reminded when I traveled to Afghanistan the day after 
Christmas this last year, at this very hour, we have men and women in 
uniform in harm's way in Afghanistan and Iraq. And we owe them, in this 
moment, the resources they need to complete their mission, get the job 
done, and come home safe. We also owe them the respect of doing that 
without using our soldiers as a vehicle for other domestic spending 
priorities.
  Military spending bills should be about military spending, and 
nothing else. And this legislation fails that test.
  Before us today is a $75 billion spending bill, but less than half of 
this legislation will be used to support the Defense Department's war 
operations. Less than half. The military funding measure will spend 
almost $5 billion, supposedly, on a temporary bailout for a Federal 
Pell Grant program. This so-called military funding measure will spend 
$50 million on the Port of Guam, and $18 million for emergency 
reforestation, and $15 million for a highway safety study.
  This military funding measure will also even spend, as we've heard in 
earlier debate, $10 billion on teacher jobs.
  Now, I've been married, as of a month ago, for 25 years to a teacher. 
I support teachers. I believe education is a State and local function.
  Anybody else remember that we just spent $53 billion in supposedly 
one-time spending for education in the President's failed stimulus 
bill? And now, on the backs of our soldiers, comes another $10 billion 
that has to be appropriated to save teachers jobs?

[[Page 12625]]

  We can do better, men and women.
  To top it all off, $63 billion of this bill isn't even paid for, just 
more deficits and more debt.
  One of the ways the Democrats are saving a little bit of money here 
is by $3 billion in cuts to the Defense Department.
  We can do better. Our soldiers deserve better. Let's reject this 
legislation. Let's do right by our soldiers. Military spending bills 
should be about military spending, and nothing else.
  Ms. LEE of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California, Congresswoman Waters.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support, strong support, of 
Congresswoman Barbara Lee's amendment to the 2010 Supplemental 
Appropriations Act. This amendment would limit the funds appropriated 
within the supplemental to the continued protection of our military and 
civilian personnel in Afghanistan, while a plan is implemented to begin 
their safe and orderly withdrawal from the region.
  Despite nearly $300 billion spent on a predominantly military 
operation, by the way, resulting in the loss of over 1,000 U.S. troops 
in Afghanistan, we have not been able to successfully address 
Afghanistan's economic depravity, political corruption, or social 
divisions that have significantly impeded our military efforts within 
the country.
  The American public is tired of this long, drawn-out war. Moreover, 
many of us in Congress do not see the logic in investing further funds 
toward training the Afghan Army, when all methods utilized to this 
point have failed to achieve tangible gains.
  Furthermore, charges of corruption within the Karzai government have 
negatively impacted our credibility among Afghans, forcing them to 
choose between two different groups of terrorists.
  The counterinsurgency (COIN) strategy is failing in Afghanistan and 
the Afghan government remains corrupt and illegitimate in the eyes of 
many of the Afghan citizens. The critical appropriations being offered 
in other Amendments (disaster relief, education funding, black farmer 
settlements) today underscores why we can no longer afford to continue 
our expensive military strategy in Afghanistan.
  Deploying more combat troops to Afghanistan and continuing Bush 
wartime engagement strategies will fail to help Afghanistan build long-
term sustainable institutions and a credible democratic government. 
Despite nearly $300 billion spent on a predominantly military operation 
(resulting in the loss of over 1,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan), we 
have not been able to successfully address Afghanistan's economic 
depravity, political corruption, or social divisions that have 
significantly impeded our military efforts within the country. The 
American public is beginning to tire of this long drawn-out war. 
Moreover, many of us in Congress do not see the logic in investing 
further funds towards training the Afghan army when all methods 
utilized to this point have failed to achieve tangible gains. 
Furthermore, charges of corruption within the Karzai government have 
negatively impacted our credibility among Afghans, forcing them to 
choose between two different groups of terrorists--the Taliban or the 
corrupt Karzai government comprised of former warlords, responsible for 
some of the same atrocities the Taliban currently inflicts upon 
civilians.
  A strengthened Taliban has resurfaced and is engaged in violent 
attacks throughout the country so that now is the deadliest time for 
American soldiers since the war began. Booming opium production helps 
fund the Taliban, which also receives aid from al Qaeda networks in 
Pakistan. The fledgling Afghan army and police are not ready to defend 
the country from insurgent attacks and operate independently from U.S. 
military involvement, training, and support. The highly organized and 
determined insurgency has continued to exploit the weak central 
government. Although the main insurgent groups may not have the same 
operational structure or long-term goals, they are inherently united in 
their efforts to drive the U.S. out of Afghanistan and unravel the 
central Afghan ``democratic'' government.
  Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote yes on 
Representative Lee's Amendment so that we can begin the process of 
bringing our troops home!

                              {time}  2120

  Ms. LEE of California. Just for clarification, let me make sure that 
the opposition understands that this bill did not leave here as a 
military spending bill. It left here as a government-wide spending 
bill. It is very legitimate to deal with domestic issues because it was 
a disaster-relief bill. The military spending was actually added in the 
Senate. So what we are doing today is very credible, very legitimate. 
We want to begin to end this war, and we want to do it by stopping the 
funding.
  I yield 1 minute to Congressman Rohrabacher, the gentleman from 
California.
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes, there are snowballs in hell. I rise in support 
of amendments 4 and 5. I do so with a heavy heart, as I deeply 
appreciate the Americans whose lives are in danger in Afghanistan. They 
are there to protect us against the radical forces of Islam, which used 
Afghanistan as a base of operations that led to the slaughter of 3,000 
Americans on 9/11, which is almost 9 years ago. After that vicious 
attack on our civilian population, yes, we cannot let down our guard. 
However, that does not mean rubberstamping any military operation, even 
if it does not have a chance of success.
  I have been engaged in Afghanistan since the 1980s, and I can state 
emphatically that if we continue our present strategy in Afghanistan, 
we will not succeed, and America will eventually be weakened by loss of 
lives and the expenditures of hundreds of billions of dollars.
  What works in Afghanistan is what has worked in Afghanistan: Let the 
Afghans pay the price. Let them do their fighting. Putting American 
boys in their place is contrary to our national interests, and will not 
lead to success. Trying to foist upon the Afghan people a corrupt 
centralized government in Kabul will not work. We need to change 
strategy instead of putting our people into a meat grinder in the place 
of Afghans themselves.
  I rise in support of Amendments Nos. 4 and 5. I do this with a heavy 
heart, as I deeply appreciate the brave Americans whose lives are in 
danger in Afghanistan. They are there to protect us against the forces 
of radical Islam, which used Afghanistan as a base of operations. And 
that is what led directly to the slaughter of 3,000 Americans on 9-11 
almost nine years ago. After that vicious attack on our civilian 
population, we must never let down our guard, or show signs of weakness 
before this evil fanatic enemy. However, that doesn't mean rubber 
stamping any military operation even if it does not appear to have a 
chance of success. I have been engaged in Afghanistan since the 1980s 
and I can state emphatically that if we continue our present strategy 
in Afghanistan we will not succeed and America will eventually be 
weakened by loss of lives and the expenditure of hundreds of billions 
of dollars.
  Putting our courageous defenders in a no-win situation will sap the 
will of our people and the capabilities of our military, as it did in 
Iraq. And while going into Iraq was neither illegal nor immoral, it was 
a mistake, because there was no way to succeed and withdraw before 
being stuck in a bloody and costly war of attrition, from which we are 
only presently extricating ourselves.
  Continuing the war in Afghanistan as we are now engaged will lead 
nowhere but to a similar meat grinder, dragging us down and at a 
horrendous cost. None of this means that I believe we should cede 
control of Afghanistan to radical anti-American Muslims. It instead 
means we must be realistic, so the sacrifice of our brave defenders 
will not be in vain.
  We could have and should have eliminated Saddam Hussein through an 
alliance with those forces in Iraq that despised that bloody tyrant-- 
the Kurds, the Shiites, the professional soldiers and bureaucracy.
  A similar strategy already worked in Afghanistan after 9-11, the 
Taliban and al-Qaeda forces were not defeated by an invasion of U.S. 
military troops. Only 200 American military personnel were on the 
ground when this terrorist army was driven out. It was the Afghans 
themselves--the Northern Alliance--who won the day. They had American 
air support but they were the ones on the ground. I'd say it was not 
ours, but their boots on the ground that did the job. However, most of 
them didn't have boots. This ``let the locals do their own fighting'' 
principle is the formula for success. In Afghanistan, let those forces 
who despise the radical Taliban fight them and defeat them with our 
help, but not in their place. Instead, our young people are doing the 
fighting, and the dying. Why? Because we are trying to foist onto all 
Afghans a structure of government that is totally inconsistent with 
their

[[Page 12626]]

culture and tradition--a centralized all-powerful government in Kabul. 
That has never worked in Afghan history, especially when that central 
government is corrupt and backed by a foreign army.
  America needs to rethink our approach in Afghanistan. We owe it to 
those who are risking their lives to not keep them engaged in an 
impossible mission. Nonetheless, I firmly believe radical Islam can be 
defeated in Afghanistan.
  I would suggest that it is time for America to open and honestly 
discuss the various approaches available, and then to move toward a 
plan that will work.
  As for me, I say, let the Afghans who expelled the Taliban in the 
past do the fighting for themselves now. Let them do their own 
fighting--it is a strategy that works.
  Spending more to keep the current situation from deteriorating in the 
long run will be a waste of treasure and a waste of lives.
  I ask my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on Amendments 4 and 
5.
  Ms. LEE of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from 
Maryland, Congresswoman Donna Edwards.
  Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support as a 
cosponsor of this amendment, and I thank Congresswoman Lee for her 
steadfast leadership on this issue.
  This amendment requires that we act on evidence. And we know that 
based on the evidence, our Afghanistan policy is a failure. Numerous 
revised strategies and restated mission statements, from President 
Bush, to Prime Minister Gordon Brown, to Prime Minister Blair, to 
President Obama, restated mission statements that continue to fall 
short of the touted successes, so-called successes.
  The U.S. military reported today that 102 coalition forces were 
killed in June alone, along with countless Afghanis, rivaling the 
heights of the Iraq war. It's time to cast aside a policy of increasing 
entrenchment and use our resources to bring our troops, our treasure 
home.
  I want to be perfectly clear: My opposition to the war is opposition 
to the policy; it's not to the brave men and women who serve this 
country with honor. But we do them an injustice by not having a real 
debate on the floor of this House about this policy and its failure.
  I have seen the conditions on the ground, just recently in May, for 
myself, and I can assure you this war will never end quickly, if at 
all. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. And whether it was 
McKiernan, McChrystal, Petraeus, it's not just about the generals; it's 
about the policy. And it's a failure.
  Ms. LEE of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Texas, 
Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I rise strongly to support the Barbara Lee 
amendment, of which I am a cosponsor. And this is allowing the orderly 
withdrawal of our troops, one thing that we did not do in the Vietnam 
war, when we lost 58,000 of our young men and women, who we treasure 
and thank them for their service.
  Now today we have the opportunity to do what Congress should do. It's 
not to give an unending mandate to a war that is not a constitutionally 
declared war, which this is not.
  So I would say that if we are looking for the terrorists, al Qaeda is 
not there. Our intelligence authorities, and General Petraeus have 
indicated that there are less than a hundred al Qaeda terrorists in 
Afghanistan. There are insurgents who are the Taliban. It is well known 
that if you give to the Taliban the mountains and valleys that have 
been given by General McChrystal, and concentrate your war efforts in 
the cities, you still will lose this war. The Taliban will never 
surrender the mountains and will continue to attack.
  A thousand-plus have died; $37 billion is in this bill. We must do 
what we did not do in Vietnam, and not cry after the fact when we saw 
the 58,000 body bags come home.
  Yes, we salute the young men and women who are on the front lines. We 
thank them for their service and the sacrifice of their families. I 
have been to Afghanistan many times, and I believe we have a better 
way. Now is the time to invest in the Afghan people, and the government 
to make a difference, not continue to lose the precious treasure of 
America. Stand against this war and have an orderly withdrawal for the 
sake of the American people and bring our troops home with honor. 
America has not lost the war. America has created a roadmap for 
Afghanistan to follow and to build its country up.
  Our stated, limited military mission was precisely to hold back 
Talibon momentum--i.e., to ``stalemate'' it--while economics 
development and good governance took hold and we enabled Afghan 
security forces to replace ours. Instead, our military assistance has 
dwarfed our development and government efforts--which are still 
stumbling--and no independent analyst seriously thinks the Afghan army 
and police will be able to take over the nation's security for years. 
Military's momentum has taken over.
  We have changed the Afghan equation, but for the worse. The U.S. 
troop surge illustrates a lesson we learned in Vietnam. Large-scale 
insertion of foreign troops into a domestic insurgency--whatever its 
initial cause--dramatically transforms the hostilities from an internal 
dispute into one focused on driving out ``foreign invaders,'' as 
Afghanistan has done repeatedly throughout its history.
  Even if, contrary to fact, a Taliban takeover threatened our 
security, the Administration's strategy would make no sense. There is a 
basic contradiction between, on the one hand, the claim that defeating 
the Taliban is vital to our safety and, on the other hand, the claim 
that our commitment is short term and of limited extent. The two 
efforts to square that inconsistency have already proven unrealistic.
  The Pentagon told us that successful campaigns in Taliban strongholds 
like Helmand and Kandahar Provinces would break the back of Taliban 
efforts to control the country and bring them to the bargaining table.
  The Pentagon told us that successful campaigns in Taliban strongholds 
like Helmand and Kandahar Provinces would break the back of Taliban 
efforts to control the country and bring them to the bargaining table.
  But it now is very unlikely that our military will be holding a 
decisive upper hand after the Kandahar and similar campaigns. The 
Helmand campaign remains, at best, a ``work in progress,'' with dubious 
results thus far. The supposedly decision campaign to ``win Kandahar 
province'' has been heavily diluted and downgraded, even before getting 
fully underway. The new focus on nighttime raids and air strikes 
continues to kill civilians, badly undercutting U.S. strategy to ``win 
over'' the Afghan people.
  June was the deadliest month of the nine-year-long Afghanistan war. 
Should the U.S. get out of Afghanistan? Why or why not?
  Frank Askin, professor of law at Rutgers University, said: There is 
no use throwing good money (and good bodies) after bad. There can be no 
successful outcome to this war, unless we are prepared to stay in 
Afghanistan forever. We need the money back home, Let's just declare 
victory and get out!
  Paul Kawika Martin, policy and political director of Peace Action, 
said: Yes, the U.S. should get the military out of Afghanistan.
  Today, Representatives in the house will have the opportunity to vote 
against $33 Billion dollars ``emergency'' supplemental funding for the 
failed escalation in Afghanistan. They will also have the opportunity 
to vote for a MdGovern/Obey amendment that will among other things 
require the president to present Congress with:
  (1) a new National Intelligence Estimate on Afghanistan by January 
31, 2011. 2) a plan by April 4, 2011 on the safe, orderly and 
expeditious redeployment of U.S. troops from Afghanistan, including a 
timeframe for the completion of the redeployment.
  The amendment also requires Congress to vote if the president wants 
to change his announce plan to begin to drawdown troops by July 2011 
and expands oversight of private contractors in Afghanistan to deal 
more effectively with corruption, waste, fraud and abuse.
  A large coalition of 20 organization representing nearly 13 million 
people support this amendment because the enormous costs in blood and 
treasure is not necessarily making Americans safer. Instead, focusing 
on regional political solutions and investing in Afghan-led aid and 
development that brings people out of poverty has a far better chance 
of success at a fraction of the cost. Let's not forget that we are 
funding this war by borrowing from China and as Admiral Mike Mullen, 
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said last week: debt is the number 
one threat to America's National Security. It is time to bring our 
troops home with honor.

[[Page 12627]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Total                  Non-                WIA not
                                                             deaths      KIA      hostile   WIA RTD**    RTD**
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               [H01JY0-R1]{H5395}
                               OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) U.S. CASUALTY STATUS:
                                   Fatalities as of: July 1, 2010, 10 a.m. EDT
 
OIF U.S. Military Casualties By Phase:
    Combat Operations--19 Mar 03 thru 30 Apr 03..........        139        109         30        116        429
    Post Combat Ops--1 May thru Present..................      4,261      3,370        891     17,782     13,547
    OIF U.S. DoD Civilian Casualties.....................         13          9          4  .........  .........
                                                          ------------------------------------------------------
        Totals...........................................      4,413      3,488        925     17,898     13,976
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF) U.S. CASUALTY STATUS
                                   FATALITIES AS OF: July 1, 2010, 10 a.m. EDT
 
OEF U.S. Military Casualties:
    In and Around Afghanistan***.........................       1056        840        216      2,973      3,649
    Other Locations****..................................         78          8         70  .........          1
    OEF U.S. DoD Civilian Casualties.....................          2          1          1  .........  .........
                                                          ------------------------------------------------------
        Worldwide Total..................................      1,136        849        287      2,973      3,650
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM includes casualties that occurred on or after March 19, 2003 in the Arabian Sea,
  Bahrain, Gulf of Aden, Gulf of Oman, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Persian Gulf, Qatar, Red Sea, Saudi Arabia, and
  United Arab Emirates. Prior to March 19, 2003, casualties in these countries were considered OEF.
**These columns indicate the number of servicemembers who were Wounded in Action (WIA) and Returned to Duty
  within 72 hours AND WIA and Not Returned to Duty within 72 hours. To determine the total WIA figure, add the
  columns ``WIA RTD'' and ``WIA Not RTD'' together. These figures are updated on Tuesday unless there is a
  preceding holiday.
***OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM (In and Around Afghanistan), includes casualties that occurred in Afghanistan,
  Pakistan, and Uzbekistan.
****OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM (Other Locations), includes casualties that occurred in Guantanamo Bay (Cuba),
  Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Philippines, Seychelles, Sudan, Tajikistan, Turkey,
  and Yemen.

  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have on 
each side?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 2\1/2\ minutes. The 
gentlewoman from California has 3 minutes.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. LEE of California. I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Kagen).
  Mr. KAGEN. I rise in support of this amendment and ask a question: 
Whose side are these gentlemen on? The leader of Iran was there with 
the leader of Afghanistan 1 day after our Secretary of Defense, 
Secretary Gates, was there. Are these our friends? Are these the people 
you are willing to invest $35 billion in?
  Two thousand three hundred years of human history have proven one 
thing in Afghanistan: It's easy to get into Afghanistan, and very hard 
to get out. When you leave, they will shoot you in the rear end.
  Forty percent of all money we are investing in Afghanistan is being 
stolen. One hundred al Qaeda were there before we had the surge. This 
is our time to leave Afghanistan, with all honor and respect. We will 
always support our troops, but not a losing policy.
  Ms. LEE of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Grayson).
  Mr. GRAYSON. I speak tonight in support of peace. The hardest thing 
that we often do as human beings is this, to admit that we are wrong. 
It's not easy. We all know it. We don't look forward to it. And 
sometimes we feel bad afterward. But we have to admit we are wrong when 
we are wrong, because if we don't we keep hurting ourselves. And that's 
exactly what we see in Iraq and Afghanistan. At this point, we are 
hurting ourselves. We are hurting ourselves extremely deeply.
  We have spent over $3 trillion pursuing these wars. That's over 
$10,000 for every man, woman, and child in this country. We have put 
our whole national economy at risk, bringing it to the brink of 
national bankruptcy. We have killed thousands of Americans, hundreds of 
thousands of Afghans, and of Iraqis. We have shed blood all over the 
Middle East at this point.
  And in addition to that, we have done lasting damage to ourselves as 
a country on a moral level, on an economic level, and on a level of the 
health of the young men and women who serve us. A quarter of a million 
of them left with permanent brain abnormalities. We are hurting 
ourselves. We are a strong country. We decide when wars begin and when 
wars end, and we have to decide to end this one right now.
  Ms. LEE of California. How much time do I have now, Mr. Speaker?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Ms. LEE of California. I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous 
consent request to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).
  Ms. CHU. I rise in support of the amendment.
  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Nadler).
  Mr. NADLER of New York. Mr. Speaker, every dollar we spend in 
Afghanistan, every life we sacrifice there is a tragic waste that does 
not enhance the security of the United States.
  We were attacked on 9/11 by al Qaeda. Al Qaeda had bases in 
Afghanistan. It made sense to go in and destroy those bases, and we 
did. But those bases are no longer there. They are in Pakistan and 
Yemen and Somalia, and we are not invading those countries. Why do we 
undertake to invent the corrupt government and try to impose it on the 
country?
  Afghanistan is in the middle of a 35-year civil war. We have no 
business intervening in that civil war. We have no ability and no 
necessity to win it for one side or the other.
  This whole idea of counterinsurgency, that we are going to persuade 
the people left alive after our firepower is applied to love the 
government that we like, is absurd. At this point we must recognize 
that rebuilding Afghanistan is both beyond our ability and irrelevant 
to our purpose of preventing terrorist attacks on the United States.
  We should support this amendment. We should support our troops. We 
should bring them home now.
  Every dollar we spend in Afghanistan, every life we sacrifice there, 
is a tragic waste that does not enhance the security of the United 
States. We were attacked on 9/11 by Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda had bases in 
Afghanistan; it made sense to go in and destroy those bases, and we 
did. But the CIA tells us that there are fewer than one hundred Al 
Qaeda personnel now in all of Afghanistan--their bases are in Pakistan, 
but we are not invading Pakistan. They have bases in Somalia and Yemen, 
but we are not invading Somalia and Yemen.
  An intelligent policy might be to attack the bases from which mayhem 
is being plotted against us, wherever they are--not to try to remake a 
country that nobody since Genghis Khan has managed to conquer. What 
makes us think, what arrogance gives us the right to assume, that we 
can succeed where the Moguls, the British, the Soviets, failed. No 
government in Afghanistan, no government in Kabul, has ever been able 
to make its writ run and rule the country.
  Why have we undertaken to invent a government that is not supported 
by the majority of the people, that is corrupt, and try to impose it on 
the country? Afghanistan is in the middle of what is, at this point, a 
53-year-civil war. We have no business intervening in that civil war, 
we have no ability and no necessity to win it for one side or the 
other. This whole idea of counter-insurgency, that we are going to 
persuade the people left alive after our firepower is applied, to love 
the government that we like is absurd.
  It will take tens of years, hundred of billions of dollars, tens of 
thousands of American lives, if it can be done at all, and we don't 
need to do it. It's their country. If they want to have a civil war, we 
can't stop them. We can't choose the rulers that they have, we don't 
have to like the rulers that they have, we don't have to like their 
choices. It's not up to us.
  Aside from assuring that specific bases are not being used against 
us--we should not spend a nickel, we should not waste a life, in 
pursuit of an unintelligent, unthought-through, unachievable, and 
unnecessary goal.

[[Page 12628]]

  At this point, we must recognize that rebuilding Afghanistan is both 
beyond our ability, and irrelevant to our purpose of preventing 
terrorist attacks on the United States.
  We should support this amendment.
  We should support our troops.
  We should bring them home.

                              {time}  2130

  Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, let me begin by reminding the Members that this 
supplemental originally was sent to us by our Commander in Chief, the 
President of the United States, Barack Obama.
  I understand the concerns about the war in Afghanistan. I have 
similar concerns, especially following the recent turmoil regarding 
command changes. But I also have full faith and confidence in our brave 
and selfless men and women fighting over there.
  The President knows that war is tough and a dirty business. But our 
forces, although tired, are eager for the opportunity to succeed and 
more than capable of doing so.
  I have in my hand a Statement of Administration Policy from our 
Commander in Chief, Barack Obama. In it, his advisers suggest, if this 
amendment is a part of the bill, that they will be recommending to the 
President that he veto this bill.
  Indeed, it is time for us to recognize that the war on terror is very 
real. The challenge in Afghanistan is supported by the President 
because he recognizes it's very real, and it's one of the bases of 
operation for their activities. In fact, I believe that we have to let 
conditions on the ground dictate the process, as General Petraeus just 
testified this week, even if those conditions require forces to stay 
past the President's July 11 withdrawal date.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, as we approach the 10-year mark in this war, which is 
the longest war in U.S. history, we need to ask when is enough enough? 
How many of our brave men and women must be sacrificed in this never-
ending war? How much blood, how much treasure do we have to spend in 
Afghanistan? And, also, we have to ask ourselves do we need another 10 
years to figure it out. I suggest that we don't.
  It's time to change course. It's time for Congress to assert itself 
in our responsibilities, in our role. We control the purse strings, and 
enough is enough. We need to say today that we must begin to safely 
withdraw our young men and women from Afghanistan. No more funds for 
combat operations.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate from the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Lee) and an opponent has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) 
and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) each will control 15 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the McGovern-
Obey-Jones amendment. Quite simply, all this amendment does is make 
sure that the President and the Congress be accountable to the American 
people, our troops, and their families about what our policy in 
Afghanistan is going to be from July 2011 onward.
  At this time I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Obey), chairman of the Appropriations Committee.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, as was pointed out earlier, those who suggest 
that any efforts to add any items to what is called a military 
supplemental are somehow out of line are simply wrong. This legislation 
started out as a disaster relief bill. It went to the Senate, and they 
morphed it into a military supplemental, and we're simply now 
responding to that action.
  I want to talk about the problems in Afghanistan. A year ago, I made 
the statement that while I was dubious about the mission in 
Afghanistan, I would give the President a year to see whether his 
policy would bear fruit. But I warned at the time that we could have 
the best possible policy in the world and, if we did not have the tools 
to implement it, it would be a failure. And I would suggest that the 
only two tools that we have available to use in that region of the 
world are the Pakistan Government and the Afghan Government; and I 
think it's safe to say that both of them have been less than a 
spectacular success, to say the least. Since then, I think it's also 
fair to say that events have gone downhill, especially in Afghanistan.
  And in addition, since we're now spending $167 billion on these two 
wars, I think it's also obvious that we're having a profoundly negative 
effect on our ability to reinvest in and rebuild our own economy. And I 
think the time has come for new consideration.
  Now, last December the President indicated that it was his intention 
to follow a policy which would begin to withdraw our troops from 
Afghanistan beginning in July of 2011. This amendment is meant to 
simply buttress that commitment, and what it says is this: It requires 
that in January, a new intelligence estimate be provided, and that 
after that is provided, the administration, by April 4, must respond to 
it by sending to the Congress an outline of its plans to follow the 
policy which they have announced which would begin to get us out of 
there starting in July of next year.
  What this amendment also says is, if the administration decides to 
follow a different policy by, for instance, extending that date, then 
they cannot do that unless the Congress explicitly votes to allow the 
funds to be used for that purpose.
  What I'm concerned about is this: What I can see happening is come 
next July, we can be told by the Pentagon, well, things are marginally 
better than we thought they would be and so we're going to need more 
time and that target date will be slipped. On the other hand, they can 
also say things are really going badly and so we obviously can't get 
out at this time. We need to have more time.
  I want to know that there is a serious, determined commitment to 
withdraw our troops beginning in June of next year. That is more than 
ample time for the Pakistani Government and the Afghan Government to 
demonstrate whether they are capable of doing this mission or not.
  I think it is obvious that we are not going to be able to rebuild our 
own country and make the investments we need here at home so long as 
we're continuing this mission in Afghanistan. And so I think this 
provides an orderly, rational, responsible, thoughtful way by which we 
can reach a conclusion to get out of that country rather than spending 
another 9 years before we finally face up to reality.
  I thank the gentleman for the time.

                         Disclosure of Earmarks

       The following table lists the congressional earmarks (as 
     defined in clause 9(e) of rule XXI) contained in the House 
     amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 4899. The House 
     amendment does not contain any limited tax or tariff benefits 
     as defined in paragraphs (f) or (g) of clause 9 of rule XXI.

                     TABLE IV--CHAPTER 1--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, ARMY
                                    [Congressionally Directed Spending Items]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Account                     Location               Project           Amount          Requester
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Construction, Army......  Texas: Ft. Hood.....  Soldier Readiness      $16,500,000  Edwards (TX)
                                                          Processing Center.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 12629]]


                                          TABLE IV--CHAPTER 1--GENERAL
                                    [Congressionally Directed Spending Items]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Agency                      Account               Project           Amount         Requester(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA.............................  General Provision...  Reimbursements for    ............  Kennedy; Langevin
                                                          Presidentially
                                                          Declared Disasters,
                                                          RI, TN.
FHWA.............................  General Provision...  Repeal of Section     ............  Carney
                                                          1117(d) of the
                                                          Transportation
                                                          Equity Act for the
                                                          21st Century.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my 
colleague from New Jersey, Rodney Frelinghuysen.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to oppose all 
amendments to this legislation, especially those dealing with our 
operations in Afghanistan.
  Mr. Speaker, my colleagues, how quickly we forget. As Mr. Lewis 
mentioned, as did Mr. Pence, with historic speed, the Senate this week 
unanimously confirmed our new NATO commander in Afghanistan. During his 
brief confirmation hearing, General David Petraeus urged this Congress 
to approve the War Funding Bill in an expedited way. Yet this evening, 
this process guarantees that no funding will be signed into law before 
mid-July. And if that's not bad enough, we find ourselves here on the 
floor debating not one, but three amendments that have the effect of 
defunding our Afghanistan operations, basically tying the hands of our 
Commander in Chief and micromanaging the military at a time when they 
need to do their job and to be successful.
  Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, we are a nation at war. We have 
soldiers and Marines deployed halfway around the world. Many of them 
are in combat at this very hour facing a dangerous enemy. And yet we 
find ourselves here tonight questioning the very mission we've asked 
our troops to execute. What message does that send to them if they're 
watching us? What message does it say to our allies, some of whom may 
question it in their own governments, their resolution to stay the 
course? What message does it send to our enemies, people who would 
launch deadly attacks in our homeland as they've done in their homeland 
each and every day at an early opportunity.
  This is a critical moment in our efforts in Afghanistan. I urge 
rejection of these amendments and support of our troops.
  Let's pass the clean supplemental. Get rid of these amendments that 
do harm to our mission in Afghanistan and get about the business of 
supporting our national defense in a proper way.

                              {time}  2140

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Jones), a cosponsor of this amendment.
  Mr. JONES. Mr. Speaker, I would like to start my comments out with an 
editorial from the Pensacola News Journal, dated June 25: ``Is 
Afghanistan worth it?''
  ``It isn't often that conservative columnist George Will and liberal 
columnist Thomas Friedman are on the same page. Welcome to 
Afghanistan.''
  Mr. Speaker, the reason we need to have this debate tonight is due to 
one issue. The main issue that bothers me greatly is what is called 
``rules of engagement.''
  In fact, on the 20th of June, in The Washington Post, George Will 
wrote an editorial, ``An NCO recognizes a flawed Afghanistan 
strategy.''
  ``A recent email from a noncommissioned officer serving in 
Afghanistan: He explains why the rules of engagement for U.S. troops 
are `too prohibitive for coalition forces to achieve sustained tactical 
success.'''
  I also would like to show, very quickly, two newspapers articles from 
the Marine Times:
  ``Rules of engagement. We are putting our kids out there to fight 
with their hands handcuffed--left to die. They call for help. Negligent 
Army leadership refuse and abandon them on the battlefield. Four 
marines and one Army killed.''
  I actually spoke to this father, Mr. Speaker, from Maine, who was 
featured in the Marine Times, which reads: ``Caution killed my son. 
Marine families blast suicidal tactics in Afghanistan.''
  This is what they call ``rules of engagement.'' We handcuff our 
troops, and we tell them we want them to go out and fight.
  Mr. Speaker, I have a retired general who, for the last 9 months, has 
been my adviser on Afghanistan. I gave him my word that I would not use 
his name publicly on the floor of the House, in a committee or in a 
newspaper. Six weeks ago, I asked him again about Afghanistan, and this 
is what he emailed back to me:
  ``Afghanistan has been too tough a nut to crack for every nation that 
has ever tried to crack it. We need to figure out a way to honorably 
pack our bags and get out. It is not in our national interests to be 
there.''
  That is why I am on this amendment with Mr. McGovern and Mr. Obey. I 
don't see how anybody could be opposed to this. If you are concerned 
about our troops and if you are concerned about the frequent 
deployments that are wearing out our military and their families, if 
you are concerned about the billions of dollars that are unaccounted 
for in Afghanistan, this is a reasonable amendment. It will give hope 
to our troops, and it will give hope to our taxpayers that we are 
watching their moneys. More importantly, the troops will know what is 
in front of them--not 10 more years of going down a road that has no 
end to it.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I will ask the men and women in this room to 
continue to pray for our men and women in uniform and their families. 
Let's pass this amendment. It is a good amendment.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert into the Record two 
articles that appeared in the Washington Post. One is entitled, ``U.S. 
Indirectly Paying Afghan Warlords as Part of Security Contract.'' The 
other is entitled, ``U.S. Officials Say Karzai Aides are Derailing 
Corruption Cases Involving Elite.''

               [From the Washington Post, June 22, 2010]

  U.S. Indirectly Paying Afghan Warlords as Part of Security Contract

                           (By Karen DeYoung)

       The U.S. military is funding a massive protection racket in 
     Afghanistan, indirectly paying tens of millions of dollars to 
     warlords, corrupt public officials and the Taliban to ensure 
     safe passage of its supply convoys throughout the country, 
     according to congressional investigators.
       The security arrangements, part of a $2.16 billion 
     transport contract, violate laws on the use of private 
     contractors, as well as Defense Department regulations, and 
     ``dramatically undermine'' larger U.S. objectives of 
     curtailing corruption and strengthening effective governance 
     in Afghanistan, a report released late Monday said.
       The report describes a Defense Department that is well 
     aware that some of the money paid to contractors winds up in 
     the hands of warlords and insurgents. Military logisticians 
     on the ground are focused on getting supplies where they are 
     needed and have ``virtually no understanding of how security 
     is actually provided'' for the local truck convoys that 
     transport more than 70 percent of all goods and materials 
     used by U.S. troops. Alarms raised by prime trucking 
     contractors were met by the military ``with indifference and 
     inaction,'' the report said.
       ``The findings of this report range from sobering to 
     shocking,'' Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass.) wrote in an 
     introduction to the 79-page report, titled ``Warlord, Inc., 
     Extortion and Corruption Along the U.S. Supply Chain in 
     Afghanistan.''
       The report comes as the number of U.S. casualties is rising 
     in the Afghan war, and public and congressional support is 
     declining. The administration has been on the defensive in 
     recent weeks, insisting that the slow progress of anti-
     Taliban offensives in

[[Page 12630]]

     Helmand province and the city of Kandahar does not mean that 
     more time is needed to assess whether President Obama's 
     strategy is working.
       ``I think it's much too early to draw a negative 
     conclusion,'' said a senior administration official, speaking 
     on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal 
     deliberations. ``I think there's more positive than negative. 
     We're heading toward a year-end assessment, which will be a 
     big one for us.'' The review was set when Obama announced in 
     December that he would send an additional 30,000 troops to 
     Afghanistan and begin to withdraw them in July 2011.
       Tierney is chairman of the national security subcommittee 
     of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
     whose majority staff spent six months preparing the report. A 
     proponent of a smaller U.S. military footprint in Afghanistan 
     and targeted attacks on insurgents, Tierney said in an 
     interview Monday that he hopes the report will help members 
     of Congress ``analyze whether they think this is the most 
     effective way to go about dealing with terrorism. Or the most 
     cost-effective way.''
       The report's conclusions will be introduced at a hearing 
     Tuesday at which senior military and defense officials are 
     scheduled to testify. The report says that all evidence and 
     findings were made available to Republicans on the 
     subcommittee. A spokesman for Rep. Jeff Flake (Ariz.), the 
     ranking Republican, said the lawmaker will not comment until 
     he has seen the entire report.
       In testimony shortly after Obama's strategy announcement, 
     Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said that ``much of 
     the corruption'' in Afghanistan has been fueled by billions 
     of dollars' worth of foreign money spent there, ``and one of 
     the major sources of funding for the Taliban is the 
     protection money.''
       Military officials said that they have begun several 
     corruption investigations in Afghanistan and that a task 
     force has been named, headed by Navy Rear Adm. Kathleen 
     Dussault, director of logistics and supply operations for the 
     chief of naval operations and former head of the Baghdad-
     based joint contracting command for Iraq and Afghanistan.
       Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith, communications chief for U.S. 
     and NATO forces in Kabul, said that the entire Tierney report 
     has not been examined but that Dussault will be ``reviewing 
     every aspect of our contracting process and recommending 
     changes to avoid our contribution to what is arguably a major 
     source of revenue that feeds the cycle of corruption.''
       The U.S. military imports virtually everything it uses in 
     Afghanistan--including food, water, fuel and ammunition--by 
     road through Pakistan or Central Asia to distribution hubs at 
     Bagram air base north of Kabul and a similar base outside 
     Kandahar. From there, containers are loaded onto trucks 
     provided by Afghan contractors under the $2.16 billion Host 
     Nation Trucking contract. Unlike in the Iraq war, the 
     security and vast majority of the trucks are provided by 
     Afghans, a difference that Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, 
     the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has praised 
     as promoting local entrepreneurship.
       The trucks distribute the material to more than 200 U.S. 
     military outposts across Afghanistan, most of them in the 
     southern and eastern parts of the country where roads are 
     largely controlled by warlords and insurgent groups.
       The report found no direct evidence of payoffs to the 
     Taliban, but one trucking program manager estimated that $1.6 
     million to $2 million per week goes to the insurgents.
       Most of the eight companies approved for the contract are 
     Afghan-owned, but they serve largely as brokers for 
     subcontractors that provide the trucks and security for the 
     convoys, which often contain hundreds of vehicles. According 
     to the congressional report, the U.S. officers charged with 
     supervising the deliveries never travel off bases to 
     determine how the system works or to ensure that U.S. laws 
     and regulations are followed.
       The report describes a system in which subcontractors--most 
     of them well-known warlords who maintain their own militias--
     charge $1,500 to $15,000 per truck to supply guards and help 
     secure safe passage through territory they control. The most 
     powerful of them, known as Commander Ruhullah, controls 
     passage along Highway One, the principal route between Kabul 
     and Kandahar, under the auspices of Watan Risk Management, a 
     company owned by two of Afghan President Hamid Karzai's 
     cousins.
       Overall management of who wins the security subcontracts, 
     it said, is often controlled by local political powerbrokers 
     such as Karzai's half brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, head of the 
     Kandahar provincial council.
       Relatively unknown before U.S. forces arrived in 
     Afghanistan in fall 2001, Ruhullah is ``prototypical of a new 
     class of warlord in Afghanistan,'' the report said. Unlike 
     more traditional warlords, he has no political aspirations or 
     tribal standing but ``commands a small army of over 600 
     guards.''
       The ``single largest security provider for the U.S. supply 
     chain in Afghanistan,'' Ruhullah ``readily admits to bribing 
     governors, police chiefs and army generals,'' the report 
     said. In a meeting with congressional investigators in Dubai, 
     he complained about ``the high cost of ammunition in 
     Afghanistan--he says he spends $1.5 million per month on 
     rounds for an arsenal that includes AK-47s, heavy machine 
     guns and RPGs,'' or rocket-propelled grenades. It added: 
     ``Villagers along the road refer to him as `the Butcher.'''
       Despite his ``critical role,'' the report said, ``nobody 
     from the Department of Defense or the U.S. intelligence 
     community has ever met with him,'' other than special 
     operations forces who have twice arrested and released him, 
     and he ``is largely a mystery to both the U.S. government and 
     the contractors that employ his services.''
       Defense regulations and laws promulgated following 
     difficulties with private security contractors in Iraq limit 
     the weaponry that contractors can use and require detailed 
     incident reports every time shots are fired. But such reports 
     are rarely, if ever, filed, investigators said.
       Another trucking contractor described a ``symbiotic'' 
     relationship between security providers such as Ruhullah and 
     the Taliban, whose fighters operate in the same space, and 
     said that the Taliban is paid not to cause trouble for the 
     convoys. ``Many firefights are really negotiations over the 
     fee,'' the report said.
       Among its recommendations, the report calls on the military 
     to establish ``a direct line of authority and accountability 
     over the private security companies that guard the supply 
     chain'' and to provide ``the personnel and resources required 
     to manage and oversee its trucking and security contracts in 
     Afghanistan.''
                                  ____


               [From the Washington Post, June 28, 2010]

    U.S. Officials Say Karzai Aides Are Derailing Corruption Cases 
                            Involving Elite

                  (By Greg Miller and Ernesto Londono)

       Top officials in President Hamid Karzai's government have 
     repeatedly derailed corruption investigations of politically 
     connected Afghans, according to U.S. officials who have 
     provided Afghanistan's authorities with wiretapping 
     technology and other assistance in efforts to crack down on 
     endemic graft.
       In recent months, the U.S. officials said, Afghan 
     prosecutors and investigators have been ordered to cross 
     names off case files, prevent senior officials from being 
     placed under arrest and disregard evidence against executives 
     of a major financial firm suspected of helping the nation's 
     elite move millions of dollars overseas.
       As a result, U.S. advisers sent to Kabul by the Justice 
     Department, the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration 
     have come to see Afghanistan's corruption problem in 
     increasingly stark terms.
       ``Above a certain level, people are being very well 
     protected,'' said a senior U.S. official involved in the 
     investigations.
       Karzai spokesman Waheed Omar denied investigations had been 
     derailed. ``There is no case, no instance, in which the 
     palace or anyone from the palace has interfered with a 
     case,'' he said.
       Afghanistan is awash in international aid and regarded as 
     one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Indeed, even 
     as the United States and its allies pour money in, U.S. 
     officials estimate that as much as $1 billion a year is 
     flowing out as part of a massive cash exodus. The money, as 
     first reported in The Washington Post in February, is often 
     carried out in full view of customs officials at Kabul's 
     airport, where such transfers are legal as long as they are 
     declared. Officials suspect much of the cash is going to the 
     Persian Gulf emirate of Dubai, where elite Afghans, including 
     Karzai's older brother, have villas.
       For the Obama administration, the ability of Afghan 
     investigators to crack down on corruption is crucial. If 
     American voters see Karzai's government as hopelessly 
     corrupt, public support for the war could plunge. Corruption 
     also fuels the Taliban insurgency and complicates efforts to 
     persuade ordinary Afghans to side with leaders in Kabul.
       Afghanistan's attorney general, Mohammed Ishaq Aloko, was 
     seen as a potential ally against corruption when he took the 
     job two years ago. Some investigations have ended in 
     convictions. But U.S. officials said that Aloko, a native of 
     Kandahar province who studied law in Germany, has repeatedly 
     impeded prosecutions of suspects with political ties.
       In meetings with U.S. Justice Department officials, Aloko 
     has seemed almost apologetic and acknowledged coming under 
     pressure from Karzai as well as members of parliament, 
     officials said. On one occasion, according to a U.S. 
     official, Aloko told his American counterparts, ``I'm doing 
     this because that is what the president tells me I have to 
     do.''
       The official, like others quoted in this report, spoke on 
     the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive 
     investigations.
       Aloko referred questions to his deputy, Rahmatullah Nazari, 
     who blamed resource constraints for his office's failure to 
     win more corruption convictions. ``There isn't any kind of 
     pressure on the attorney general's office,'' Nazari said. 
     ``If anyone caves to pressure, they should go to prison.''

[[Page 12631]]

       But U.S. officials point to multiple instances of 
     interference. The most prominent example to surface publicly 
     involves Afghanistan's former minister of Islamic affairs, 
     who fled the country this year as prosecutors were preparing 
     to charge him with extorting millions of dollars from 
     companies seeking contracts to take pilgrims to the Muslim 
     holy land, a trip known as the hajj.
       A travel ban was issued to block the former minister, 
     Mohammad Siddiq Chakari, from leaving. But U.S. officials 
     said Chakari escaped after showing airport security officials 
     a letter he obtained from Aloko's office saying he had 
     cooperated in the case and was not to be detained. Nazari 
     said Chakari had not been convicted of a crime and, 
     therefore, could not be prevented from leaving.
       Chakari, who is now in London, has repeatedly maintained 
     his innocence. Because there is no extradition treaty between 
     Afghanistan and Britain, U.S. officials said it is unlikely 
     that he will ever stand trial. Even so, some regard his 
     departure as a moral victory.
       ``The very fact that the former minister of the hajj had to 
     leave the country is in a way a remarkable achievement,'' 
     said Steve Kraft, director of Afghanistan and Pakistan 
     programs for the State Department's Bureau of International 
     Narcotics and Law Enforcement. ``We would rather see him in 
     jail here. But in the old days, they would have scoffed'' at 
     the idea of pursuing such a probe, he added.


                            Combined efforts

       Critics say Karzai's initiatives are meant to appease the 
     international community. ``It's all a show,'' lawmaker Sayed 
     Rahman said, noting that no senior government official has 
     been imprisoned on corruption charges.
       Over the past year, U.S. officials said, Afghan 
     investigators have assembled evidence against three Karzai-
     appointed provincial governors accused of embezzlement or 
     bribery. All three cases have been blocked. The interference 
     has persisted, officials said, despite Karzai's pledge in 
     November during his second inaugural address to make fighting 
     corruption a focus of his new term.
       The extent of the interference has become evident, 
     officials said, in large part because of improvements in 
     Afghan authorities' ability to pursue corruption cases.
       Over the past two years, U.S. agencies have allied with 
     their Afghan counterparts to create elite investigative and 
     prosecutorial teams. Afghan applicants undergo polygraph 
     tests in which they are asked whether they have taken bribes. 
     Some have been sent to U.S. facilities, including the DEA 
     academy in Quantico, to be trained.
       Still, Karzai's administration has reportedly taken steps 
     to limit the independence of these units. The U.S. official 
     said that Aloko recently created a three-member commission to 
     ``review'' the units'' cases and that it has removed names of 
     politically connected Afghans from prosecutors' files.
       Nazari, Aloko's deputy, said that if others know of a list 
     of names that have been removed, ``they should bring it to 
     us.''
       The long-term aim of the anti-corruption units, Kraft said, 
     is to assemble cases in which the evidence is ``so profound 
     and well-known that the ability to get people off the hook 
     will no longer be there.''


                         Evidence from wiretaps

       A key capability is a U.S.-provided eavesdropping system 
     that allows Afghan investigators to intercept celiphone calls 
     in the most populous parts of the country.
       The wiretaps, approved by Afghan judges, have yielded key 
     evidence in a growing list of embezzlement and bribery cases. 
     U.S. officials said the wiretaps have also caught senior 
     officials and members of parliament discussing efforts to 
     derail certain cases.
       In January, Afghan authorities raided the offices of New 
     Ansari, a firm that has served as Afghanistan's primary link 
     to the ``hawala'' money exchange system. This informal system 
     for transferring cash overseas makes electronic tracking 
     difficult. A second U.S. official familiar with the 
     investigation said the firm is suspected of laundering drug 
     money, delivering funds to insurgents and helping Afghan 
     officials transfer tens of millions of dollars to accounts 
     abroad.
       After the raid, wiretaps picked up conversations indicating 
     that there had been a frantic meeting involving Karzai aides 
     at the presidential palace. U.S. officials said members of 
     Karzai's administration as well as members of parliament held 
     subsequent meetings with Aloko, pressuring him to ensure that 
     certain New Ansari executives not be charged.
       Among those protected was Haji Muhammad Rafi Azimi, deputy 
     chairman of Afghan United Bank, a subsidiary of New Ansari, 
     U.S. officials said. On a wiretap recording, Azimi is heard 
     discussing bribes paid to Chakari. The recorded conversations 
     were played in open court in the trial of a lower-ranking 
     official in the Religious Affairs Ministry, Mohammed Noor.
       ``It's clear to everyone involved he should be indicted and 
     charged,'' a U.S. official said of Azimi. But, the official 
     said, Azimi is ``a businessman who knows a great deal about 
     the finances of government officials.''
       A second U.S. official familiar with the case concurred. 
     ``What happened is a large group of very powerful people . . 
     . went to the attorney general and told him to stand down,'' 
     the official said.
       Phone calls and e-mails to Azimi did not elicit any 
     responses. Guards outside New Ansari's office in Kabul told a 
     reporter that the site had been closed for months. They said 
     they did not know why they were still getting paid to guard 
     it.
       Noor, a civil servant, was sentenced to 15 years in prison 
     after being convicted in May of collecting bribe money for 
     Chakari in Saudi Arabia and bringing it to Afghanistan. Two 
     others in the case are awaiting trial. Azimi remains in his 
     position at Afghan United Bank.
       Aloko has announced that his office is investigating five 
     current and former ministers, reportedly including Mohammad 
     Ibrahim Adel, the mines minister, accused by U.S. officials 
     of taking a $30 million bribe from a Chinese firm. Adel 
     stepped down, but neither he nor any other minister--besides 
     Chakari--has been charged.

  Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).
  Mr. COHEN. I thank Mr. McGovern for granting me the time and for 
bringing this amendment.
  Mr. Speaker, you don't put good money after bad, and this would be 
putting good money after bad.
  I was in this Hall earlier with Senator McGovern, in the Speaker's 
lobby, and I said something to Senator McGovern, former Senator 
McGovern.
  He said, Did I hear Vietnam?
  Well, the echoes of Vietnam are in this Chamber, Mr. Speaker. When 
people on the other side say they don't want to hear about surrender 
and that that is not right, we could still be in Vietnam, and we would 
still be losing American lives and American resources, because that was 
a war we couldn't win, and some people wouldn't accept it. So we lost 
more lives and more American economies and more opportunities in 
America.
  My district cannot afford another $35 billion and $35 billion and $35 
billion in trying to create infrastructure in Afghanistan, which is not 
a Third World country, but probably like a fifth world country--the 
third most corrupt nation on the face of the Earth. That is not what 
the United States of America is known for doing--supporting corrupt 
countries around the world with a man like Karzai, whose brother is in 
the opium trade, with a country that predominantly benefits from the 
growing of poppies and from the spreading of heroin around the world. 
That is who we are supporting.
  We should not be spending our money and our lives. I go to the 
funerals of every soldier in my district who passes, and I don't want 
to go to more of them. I stop every soldier I see in airports and ask 
them about where they are going.
  When they are going to Afghanistan or to Iraq, I ask them, How is it 
going?
  Almost all of them going to Afghanistan say, Not well. They look at 
me and they say, We should not stay there. We are not doing well.
  I went to a function in my district in the west side, almost entirely 
African American, and to a person, we need to spend our money here. On 
the east side of my district, which is entirely Caucasian, and I asked 
this crowd of 30: Does anybody want me to go to Washington and vote for 
more funds for Afghanistan? Not one.
  This war is lost. Bring our troops home. Save our money.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I heard the majority, the leader of the House, during 
the debate on the rule give a really good talk about how we wished that 
every Member could have something to input on this bill and that there 
are 435 of us, so they structured a rule in the way that they think.
  There is one choice that is missing. There is no ability for a Member 
of the House tonight to vote on the Senate bill and send to the 
President of the United States before the 4th of July a clean funding 
bill for the troops who are in the field. Because the rule is self-
executing an amendment already, if that bill passes, it conflicts with 
the Senate bill, and nothing can go to the President. The Senate is in 
West Virginia.

[[Page 12632]]

  So, Mr. Speaker, what I think the House ought to be doing is clearing 
the Senate amendments for presentation to the President, not sending 
more proposals to the Senate, but putting the test that the Senate has 
already passed on the President's desk for approval of law tomorrow.
  So, to that end, I wonder if the proponent of the pending motion, the 
gentleman from Wisconsin, would yield to me for a unanimous consent 
request. I'll even tell you what it is in the hopes that it might be 
propounded.
  I would like to ask unanimous consent that the pending motion to 
concur in the Senate amendment with amendments be considered as 
withdrawn in favor of a motion simply to concur in the Senate 
amendment. I would ask the gentleman if he would yield to me for that 
purpose.
  Will you yield to me to permit the Members of this House to have a 
clean bill on war funding to support the troops? It is a ``yes'' or 
``no'' question.
  Mr. Speaker, I've got to tell you the silence on the other side is 
deafening. There is no ability tonight to cast a vote on a bill that 
the Senate has passed that can go to the President.
  Mr. OBEY. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I am happy to yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. OBEY. The gentleman seems to think the Senate bill is the 
original bill. The Senate amended the House bill, which was a disaster 
bill. If you wanted a clean vote, we would be voting on the disaster 
bill tonight, not the war.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, my 
understanding of where we are is that the Senate hollowed out the House 
bill so that you don't have a motion to recommit, so that you don't 
have any amendments except the ones that you have structured, and you 
have denied the Members of this House the opportunity to cast an up-or-
down vote on the war funding instead.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 additional minute to 
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I only need 10 seconds.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table 
the bill, H.R. 4899, with the Senate amendments thereto, and concur in 
the Senate amendments.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Ohio?
  Mr. OBEY. I object.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, this is really 
unfortunate. We have troops in the field; we have a holiday upon us, 
and no one in this House is going to be able to cast a vote on a clean 
supplemental. The President of the United States, for crying out loud, 
has asked for it. He has issued a veto threat against this charade that 
we're performing tonight, and I think it's a shame that we can't at 
least have a vote and let the House work its will.

                              {time}  2150

  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important for the Members to one more 
time remind themselves, ourselves, that this is the President's 
supplemental and it is designed to provide needed funding for our 
troops who are representing our interests and fighting for freedom in 
Afghanistan.
  I think it is very important that this amendment goes on to restrict 
year 2011 funds from being used in a manner inconsistent with a July 
2011 troop withdrawal unless expressly provided for and by a joint 
resolution of the Congress. The President of the United States has 
indicated in his policy administration statement coming from his chief 
advisers that if the amendments we have been considering this evening 
are a part of this bill, those chief advisers will recommend to the 
President that he veto this funding measure.
  It is very apparent that the other body tomorrow is leaving town, if 
they haven't already left town. Indeed, amendments to this bill will 
cause this bill to involve a considerable delay for funding for our 
troops almost regardless. As I argued under the previous 
administration, we should not tie the President's hands while he is 
executing his duties as Commander in Chief, perhaps the most solemn of 
the Commander in Chief's responsibilities. This amendment would do just 
that.
  Further, just this week the President's new commanding general 
testified that the July 11th date is not a race for the exits. Rather, 
that date will begin a condition-based process. He further left open 
the option of recommending changes or delays in the current plan.
  The amendment further attempts to encumber future year funds, which 
is not only impractical, but the conditions on which those funds would 
be encumbered are questionable.
  Honestly, I fail to see the logic in attempting to fence future year 
funds, and I can't help but wonder why try to do this now when the 
fiscal year 2011 process is working its way through the committee. The 
war on terror, Mr. Speaker, continues to be very real. Our troops 
certainly understand it, even if our majority leadership does not 
understand it.
  Of course, I want our troops home as quickly as possible, but tying 
the hands of the Commander in Chief and the commanders executing the 
war is irresponsible and dangerous.
  Mr. Speaker, for that reason, I have a unanimous consent request.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table 
the bill, H.R. 4899, with the Senate amendments thereto, and concur in 
the Senate amendments.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  Mr. OBEY. I object.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am very surprised there was 
an objection to that recommendation. After all, we are just trying to 
find some way to get the President's original recommendations up here 
so that the Commander in Chief can support our troops so that they can 
come home as quickly as possible. In Afghanistan, whether we believe it 
or not, the war on al Qaeda involves our future freedom, and certainly 
it would have a significant impact upon peace in the world.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Georgia, Jack Kingston.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and 
while I certainly appreciate the sincerity of the people who are 
offering this amendment, I disagree with it, inasmuch as it ties the 
hands of the military.
  I have had the opportunity to go to Iraq and Afghanistan several 
times, and I can say war is complicated. War does not always go your 
way. The enemy does not always cooperate with the best of our plans. 
And yet we here in the safety of the U.S. Congress can dictate to the 
commanders in the field what direction the war should go in and the 
timeframe and what should happen next, according to a political 
guideline and a political deadline as opposed to military guidelines 
and military deadlines.
  When the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations visited General 
McChrystal and Ambassador Eikenberry and the rest of our leadership in 
March in Afghanistan, one of the things that they told us is that there 
had been a difference, some significant differences, in the war. Part 
of it was that the Afghan army was stepping up in a completely 
different way, a new culture, if you will. They were taking ownership 
in the war.
  In Pakistan, troops had been shifted from the Kashmir border over to 
the Afghan border and they were being attacked themselves by Taliban 
terrorists, and so the Pakistanis were showing an interest and an 
energy which up

[[Page 12633]]

until now they had not given us or given the Afghan people. They are no 
longer looking at this war as America's war in Afghanistan. They are 
seeing it as their war that has spilled into Pakistan, and it is 
causing instability in the region.
  But I will say this, that our commander at the time, General 
McChrystal, said, I am not over here to waste our time and to waste 
soldiers' lives. I am keenly aware that the clock is ticking and we 
have to have a resolution on this.
  The campaign in Marja had just been concluded. It went very well. The 
shift to the next campaign in Kandahar was already underway, and people 
were moving in that direction.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important for us to let the 
military make these decisions and not political representatives in 
Washington. I think, furthermore, bogging this bill down with all kinds 
of extracurricular amendments further sends a mixed signal to our 
troops and the international community.
  I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table H.R. 4899, 
with the Senate amendments thereto, and concur in the Senate 
amendments.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. According to the Speaker's announced policy, 
such requests are not entertained that have not been cleared by the 
leadership on both sides.
  Mr. KINGSTON. That is why I was asking for unanimous consent, Mr. 
Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Those requests are not entertained, under a 
previously announced policy of the Speaker.
  Mr. KINGSTON. It is a shame, because when it comes to war, it is too 
bad that we are going to let parliamentary procedures tie our hands in 
doing what is right for the soldiers.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman 1 
additional minute.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I just want to make this point about H.R. 
4899 and the Senate amendment. It's that it gives a clean bill and a 
bill that will unfetter the generals so they can do the right thing. 
They have worked closely with the administration.
  As we know, the transition from McChrystal to Petraeus has probably 
been traumatic or tenuous enough on all of us on a bipartisan basis, 
and at this time we don't need to add to the military woes in the 
international efforts in Afghanistan by sending a bill, which, 
incidentally, is not going to be signed by the President. The President 
has already said he is going to veto it, and the Senate is not going to 
pass it anyway, so why are we doing this on the eve of the Fourth of 
July?
  We need to have a clean bill. That is why I think, Mr. Speaker, the 
best thing for us to do is take H.R. 4899 with the Senate amendment and 
concur with the Senate resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will notify Mr. McGovern that he 
has 6 minutes remaining, and Mr. Lewis has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for 
time; so I will close.
  Mr. Speaker, I think you know that as a result of your interpreting 
existing policy relative to the unanimous consent requests on three 
different occasions in an effort to get the original package here 
before the body so they could vote up or down on H.R. 4899, I know that 
I could speak for my own leadership, they certainly would agree to this 
unanimous consent request. It would appear the leadership on the other 
side, perhaps of the committee, I can't speak for the Speaker, of 
course, but apparently the other side does not want us to have that 
package before the body.

                              {time}  2200

  Mr. Speaker, it is critical for us to remind ourselves continually in 
the weeks and months ahead, the war on terror is very real. America has 
been challenged at home and continues to be challenged abroad. The men 
and women that our Commander in Chief have chosen to send to 
Afghanistan are in need for supplemental funding. To have us 
essentially water down those proposals by way of the amendments that 
have been before us is absolutely unbelievable to me. If the public 
could only know what the people's body is doing tonight to not just our 
people here at home but our people overseas as well, I believe they'd 
essentially make a decision that they ought to change the entire 
Congress.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, at this moment we have close to 100,000 U.S. servicemen 
and -women deployed in Afghanistan. The war has raged for nearly 9 
years, and our mission has changed at least that many times. We have 
lost over 1,000 of our brave soldiers. Thousands more have been 
wounded. We are spending hundreds of billions of dollars in borrowed 
money. In 9 years, neither George W. Bush nor Barack Obama nor this 
Congress has seen fit to pay for the war. That's a burden we are 
placing on our children and our grandchildren.
  All of us, every single one of us, Republicans and Democrats alike, 
are dedicated to defeating al Qaeda and holding to account those who 
committed the horrible atrocities on September 11.
  What we are proposing today in no way lessens our commitment to that 
fight, but our current policy in Afghanistan is deeply flawed. We are 
getting sucked deeper and deeper and deeper into a war with no clear 
end. It is a war that will continue to claim the lives of our soldiers; 
it is a war that will continue to bankrupt us, and it is a war that 
will not enhance our national security.
  My friends, we can no longer go along to get along. All of us have a 
responsibility to make sure that we are doing the right thing. It's not 
just the President's war. It's our war, too. We are the ones who voted 
to put our soldiers in harm's way, and we are the ones who keep funding 
it. My friends on the other side of the aisle who question, Why are we 
asking questions? Why don't we just rubber-stamp what the Senate did or 
rubber-stamp what the President sent us? Well, the reason why we 
shouldn't do that is because that's not our job. We're supposed to 
deliberate, and we are supposed to ask questions, and we're supposed to 
figure out whether we're doing the right thing. They are our 
constituents, our family members who are in harm's way.
  We need to let this administration know that we want a way out. We 
want a plan. That's not a radical idea. We want a plan. We want an exit 
strategy. For the last 30 years, we said, Never again will we commit 
our Armed Forces without a clearly defined mission, and that means a 
mission with a beginning, a middle, a transition period, and an end. 
Well, that's all we're asking for today, a clearly defined mission. 
What's the plan?
  We are dealing with the worst economy since the Great Depression. Our 
citizens, our constituents are hurting, yet we're told that we cannot 
afford to extend unemployment benefits to out-of-work Americans because 
we cannot afford it. We are told we can't help more families afford a 
college education or rebuild our roads and our bridges. But when it 
comes to supporting a corrupt, incompetent Karzai government, we're 
supposed to be a bottomless pit. Don't ask any questions. Just give 
them all the money they want. Look the other way. That's not right. 
That's not our job. I don't have all the answers, but I do know that it 
makes absolutely no sense to quietly endure the status quo.
  Ending a war is not easy. It requires courage and it demands action. 
What this amendment requests is action, a strong signal to the 
administration that we want a plan. It also signals the Congress will 
no longer just sit back and hope for the best.
  To those who say that asking the Afghan Government to stand up and 
take responsibility is somehow a bad idea, I would remind them that 
when we signaled to Iraq that we had a withdrawal plan, officials there 
actually began to act like a real government.
  Ensuring that the President gives us a plan by next April so we can 
figure

[[Page 12634]]

out by July what to do with the money slated for the war is not too 
much to ask. We require, we deserve, and we should demand the 
information we need to do our jobs.
  Let me just close with this: There is a small sliver of America that 
is directly impacted by this war in Iraq, and those are the people who 
are fighting the war and who have family members who are fighting the 
war. The rest of us are asked to do nothing, absolutely nothing. We are 
not even asked to pay for it, hundreds of billions of dollars in 
borrowed money. Well, the least we could do for these brave men and 
women whom we have put in harm's way is debate this issue to make sure 
we're getting it right, to make sure we're not sending these people on 
a mission that commits itself to a war with no end. That is what we're 
asking for here today, a clearly defined mission. I ask all of you, 
every one of us here, to reengage in this policy.
  This issue has been on the back burner for too long. We're at war. 
Our constituents are dying. Each and every day we read about more 
people who are killed in Afghanistan. We have an obligation to do 
better. This policy is deeply flawed. We need a way out, and I ask all 
of you today to vote for the McGovern-Obey-Jones amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will clarify that the procedural 
posture for a unanimous consent request of the type recently broached 
by the gentleman from Georgia is not dictated by guidelines for 
clearances; rather, it is subject to managerial prerogative. In short, 
such a request could be propounded only if the proponent of the pending 
motion yielded for that purpose.
  Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose more funding for a war 
in Afghanistan that has cost too much and accomplished too little.
  Over 1,000 soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan. The toll of this 
conflict is not limited to the battlefield. This year, almost as many 
American troops have committed suicide as have been killed in combat. 
Our troops and their families are paying an extreme price to wage a war 
that has no clear objective.
  The war has also destabilized Afghanistan. Estimates from 
international human rights organizations range from 10,000 to 12,000 
Afghanis killed as a result of the war. Now, we are preparing to spend 
$33 billion more in Afghanistan. We should spend this money on 
infrastructure--like schools and roads--that will open opportunities 
for all of Afghanistan. That is the best way to achieve peace and 
stability in the region.
  Every dollar we waste on war is one less dollar we can invest in our 
children here at home. I support the Obey amendment that will add $10 
billion in domestic education funds to the bill. These funds, though 
inadequate, will protect hundreds of thousands of teacher jobs across 
the country, including 167 in my district.
  While I hope for the inclusion of this education funding, I cannot 
support any more funding for the misguided war in Afghanistan. I urge 
my colleagues to join me in voting no.
  Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of H.R. 4899, the 
Supplemental Appropriations for FY 2010.
  As a member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, I, 
along with many of my colleagues, have been integrally involved in the 
oversight of our nation's funding and support of our efforts in Iraq, 
Afghanistan, as well as other initiatives aimed at supporting our war 
fighters.
  The Senate's bill, which we are considering tonight, provides $58.8 
billion in supplemental funds for FY 2010, including $37.1 billion for 
the war and $5.1 billion for FEMA, as well as $13 billion in mandatory 
funds to Vietnam Veterans exposed to Agent Orange.
  While I do support the President's request for additional funding to 
support our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is important that we 
continue to monitor and assess our mission and role in both of these 
countries, particularly given the array of investments we need to make 
right here at home.
  Since 2001, Congress has provided close to $1 trillion in direct 
funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as part of 18 emergency 
supplemental bills, not including the support we provided for the 
efforts in our regular annual Appropriations bills. Combined, it's 
estimated that we've spent between $1.5 trillion to almost to $3 
trillion so far on these wars.
  So I am very pleased that the amendments made in order by the rule 
will also provide us an opportunity to provide additional funding to 
the Senate passed bill for critical domestic programs, including $10 
billion for education jobs, $5 billion for Pell grants and $701 million 
for border security.
  Of particular note, I am very pleased that the bill will include 
funds to settle both the Cobell v. Salazar and Pigford v. Vilsack class 
action lawsuits and it provides $1 billion for youth jobs.
  Finally, the supplemental will also include funding which is vital to 
an important segment of my constituency, our farmers and agricultural 
producers. The bill provides the Farm Service Agency (FSA), which is 
housed within the Department of Agriculture, with an additional $31.5 
million to cover the costs associated with direct loans, guaranteed 
loans, operating loans and administrative expenses, which are so vital 
to our farmers, particularly in South Georgia.
  The bill will require that the loans be made available to family 
farmers who may not qualify for agricultural credit through other 
commercial institutions in the tight credit market. While the FY2010 
Agriculture Appropriations bill provided enough funding to meet demand 
at the time it was passed last year, demand for the farm ownership and 
operating loan programs has been dramatically higher than historical 
levels due to the lack of availability of conventional credit.
  Mr. Speaker, this Supplemental bill strikes, what I believe to be a 
fair and balanced approach for the emergency needs of our war fighters 
abroad and the critical domestic issues we face right here at home, and 
I support the bill.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the 
supplemental war funding for Iraq and Afghanistan. After 9 years of 
war, the time has come to bring our troops home.
  I would like to thank Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic Leadership 
for bringing this bill to the floor today in a manner that allows clear 
up or down votes on funding for the war and other domestic priorities.
  The challenges in Afghanistan are great. As the violence and attacks 
on our troops continue to increase, we still do not have a clear path 
forward or a way to measure progress there.
  We cannot afford to sustain an open-ended commitment with no clear 
definition of success.
  Reports of corruption abound in Afghanistan, and without a true 
partner in the Karzai government, our prospects for making real 
progress have grown dim.
  Our troops have fought with honor and professionalism in the face of 
great challenges, and at great cost--I am truly humbled by their 
service and sacrifice. These brave men and women in uniform deserve our 
full support and commitment to return them home safely to their 
families and loved ones.
  I support the president and our military leadership in bringing this 
war to a responsible end. President Obama did not start this war, and I 
was among those who have spoken out in support of allowing for the time 
necessary for a new strategy in Afghanistan to turn the tide.
  But after years of war that has strained our military, their 
families, and the country, I am unable to continue to support what 
increasingly looks like an intractable situation in Afghanistan.
  That is why I vote against this war funding today.
  Despite my opposition to the troubling war funding, the bill does 
include critical domestic funding that I will support. These include 
saving teachers' jobs, Pell Grants, emergency food assistance for 
hungry Americans, and disaster aid to respond to the Gulf oil spill 
catastrophe.
  For example, today we are providing $10 billion for an Education Jobs 
Fund to provide additional emergency support to local school districts 
to prevent impending layoffs. Estimates suggest that this fund will 
help keep 140,000 school employees on the job next year.
  Moreover, when we invest in education, we save jobs in other sectors 
and spur economic recovery. According to the Economic Policy Institute, 
for every 100,000 education jobs lost, another 30,000 jobs are lost in 
other sectors due to reduced consumer spending and tax revenues.
  The list of important programs this bill funds is both extensive and 
impressive: Among other priorities, we are providing $304 million for 
the Gulf Coast oil spill; $50 million for the Emergency Food Assistance 
Program for food purchases to distribute through local emergency food 
providers; $13.377 billion for the payment of benefits to Vietnam 
veterans and their survivors for exposure to Agent Orange, which has 
been linked with Parkinson's disease, ischemic heart disease, and hairy 
cell/B cell leukemia; and $2.93 billion for Haiti.

[[Page 12635]]

  These are extremely important priorities which are fully paid for and 
which I support.
  Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in 
opposition to the amendment offered by my colleague, the Gentleman from 
Wisconsin, Mr. Obey.
  As we all know, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill has resulted in the 
worst man-made environmental disaster in history.
  As a result, tens of thousands of Gulf residents are sidelined. From 
rig workers to commercial fishermen and shrimpers, these folks are 
forced to watch their waters, their beaches, and their livelihoods 
succumb to the oil spill.
  My colleagues on the left will tell you that this amendment assists 
those in the Gulf, providing $142 million for Oil Spill Unemployment 
Assistance. But this is merely a token. The underlying bill provides 
$2.93 billion in relief to Haiti, but this amendment only provides 
Americans whose livelihoods hang in the balance only $142 million. Gulf 
Coast Americans should be enraged. Almost $3 billion for Haiti and a 
measly $142 million to Gulf Coast victims.
  The Democrat leadership has filled this amendment with questionable 
provisions diverting education spending, cutting federal charter school 
programs, and paying back their union pals. And then they add 
desperately needed Gulf assistance and say ``you either vote with us or 
you vote for big oil.'' This is a false choice and it is playing 
politics with all my Gulf residents who are out of work as a result of 
this tragedy.
  I oppose this amendment.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Obama 
administration's war strategy in Afghanistan and to the war funding 
contained in this bill. It is evident to me that this strategy is not 
working.
  Just this past weekend, CIA Director Leon Panetta said on national 
television that, regarding Taliban insurgents, ``We have seen no 
evidence that they are truly interested in reconciliation where they 
would surrender their arms, where they would denounce al-Qaeda, where 
they would really try to become part of that society.'' One day later, 
General Petreaus--our newly named commander for the war in 
Afghanistan--told the Congress ``. . . whether or not very senior 
[Taliban] leaders can meet the very clear conditions that the Afghan 
government has laid down for reconciliation I think is somewhat in 
question. So in that regard, I agree with Director Panetta.''
  Substitute ``Viet Cong'' for ``Taliban'' and ``South Vietnamese 
government'' for ``Afghan government'' and you'll understand why all of 
this sounds painfully familiar. It's because we've seen this before, 
and we know how it ends.
  I do not say these things lightly, as I voted for the authorization 
for the use of force in 2001 in order to find and bring to justice the 
al Qaeda leaders who organized the 9/11 attacks against our country. 
Unfortunately, the previous administration did not put enough troops on 
the ground to prevent bin Laden's escape, and nearly 9 years later he 
and his key lieutenants whereabouts remain a mystery to our 
intelligence community, as Director Panetta acknowledged last weekend. 
In other words, the original rationale for going to Afghanistan is 
gone.
  We face a nationalist insurgency that we cannot defeat militarily and 
that will not negotiate a political settlement with the corrupt Afghan 
government. We have tripled the number of troops on the ground since 
the beginning of 2009, and the violence has only soared. Every day we 
remain only increases our national debt and subjects our troops to 
needless peril. Indeed, every month we squander enough money on this 
war that could otherwise be used to put an additional 38,000 police on 
our streets for a full year, or to prevent massive teacher layoffs in 
every state, particularly New Jersey. The cost of this war is directly 
imperiling the hometown security of communities across this nation and 
the economic security of our children and grandchildren.
  Mr. Speaker, when President Obama asked us to support his new 
strategy, I did so reluctantly and with this caveat: I would give the 
President time to show his approach could work, but that my patience 
had limits. In the nearly 18 months that President Obama has had the 
opportunity to demonstrate his approach, we've tripled the number of 
Americans in Afghanistan, our casualties have skyrocketed, and the 
insurgency has deepened and spread across the country. My patience, and 
now support for this strategy, have evaporated. We do more harm than 
good by staying: more harm to our troops and our economy, and more harm 
to innocent Afghans who too often are caught in the crossfire. It's 
time for us to go, and I urge my colleagues to join me in voting to 
bring our troops home by ending funding for this conflict.
  The bill before us makes critical investments in education which are 
fully paid for by cutting funds from existing programs.
  The current economic downturn has hit school districts hard, and many 
are being forced to cut services. Previously, the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act made several sound investments in public education to 
keep teachers in the classroom and help school districts avoid painful 
cuts.
  Most, if not all, of this emergency funding has been spent. Further, 
at this most critical time, Governor Christie made the wrong call in 
cutting state aid to our local schools.
  The $10 billion included for the Education Jobs Fund will help keep 
teachers in the classroom and make sure that class sizes do not balloon 
next fall. This much needed funding will help preserve 140,000 teaching 
jobs nationwide.
  This package also contains almost $5 billion, fully offset as well, 
to ensure college students who receive Pell Grants, 8 million this 
year, will have the financial support for college they need.
  Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4899, the 
Supplemental Appropriations Act.
  While I am extremely disappointed that the House is not simply 
passing the Senate-passed version of this bill and clearing it for the 
President's signature, I will ultimately support this bill. It is my 
belief that voting against this bill even in its current form would 
send a terrible signal to our troops that we do not support their 
efforts and that is unacceptable to me. And, while I still believe this 
is the wrong vehicle for it, I am pleased that the domestic spending 
that is included in this legislation is offset and will not add to our 
deficit.
  We must act as soon as possible to get critical military and Federal 
Emergency Management Agency funding legislation to the President for 
his signature. Our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and families across 
America who have been affected by disasters cannot afford anymore 
delays in funding.
  Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support for key 
provisions and amendment to H.R. 4899, the Supplemental Appropriations 
Act of 2010. The bill provides a myriad of critical emergency funding 
for disaster relief in Haiti, the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, as 
well as fully paid for investments to meet domestic needs, such as 
education jobs and Pell Grants. Unfortunately, this bill also includes 
funding for the war in Afghanistan, the longest war in our nation's 
history.
  While I am grateful to the men and women who serve valiantly in our 
Armed Forces, both at home and abroad, I strongly oppose any additional 
funding for the war in Afghanistan. This war has gone on long enough 
without a clear and sufficient exit strategy. My constituents and I can 
no longer bear to see more Americans die or remain in harm's way, for 
this fruitless war. The time is now to bring our troops home, stop the 
unnecessary spending and stabilize our economy. That is why I support 
the amendments offered by CBC Chairwoman Barbara Lee and James 
McGovern, David Obey and Walter Jones.
  I commend Chairwoman Lee for working diligently to bring her 
important amendment for a vote. I agree we must begin to end the war by 
limiting funds to the safe, timely withdrawal of US troops and military 
contractors from Afghanistan. The people in my district demand it, I 
morally oppose it, and time is of the essence.
  I also want to commend the Chairman David Obey and the Members of the 
Committee on Appropriations for their hard work on the House Amendment 
to the Senate bill. In particular, I want to thank the Committee for 
including funding for school districts, like those in New York City, 
that are poised to receive high concentrations of Haitian child 
refugees. These children are more likely to settle in already 
overburdened school districts. Therefore, schools receiving these 
children will undoubtedly need extra resources to accommodate this new 
population. In April, I joined my colleagues on a letter to Chairman 
Obey, expressing this very concern. I am grateful that this language 
was adopted.
  Additionally the Obey amendment provides major benefits to education 
for all Americans. It includes $10 billion in aid to local school 
districts avert massive teacher layoffs and $5 billion to help close 
the current shortfall in Pell Grants for college students--the absence 
of which would seriously imperil education funding for fiscal year 
2011. This will affect thousands of teachers and students in my 
district and in the Greater New York area.
  I strongly believe that H.R. 4899 is a key tool for Haiti's 
redevelopment. As the Representative of the second largest Haitian 
population of first and second generation Haitians Americans, I am 
greatly pleased that the bill

[[Page 12636]]

includes $2.93 billion dollars for the U.S. participation in the Haiti 
disaster relief, $130 million above the President's request. The people 
of Haiti, its government, USAID and the Department of State cannot move 
forward in their recovery and reconstruction plans without the pledged 
financial support from our government.
  Mr. Speaker, I support our troops, veterans, and military families, 
and in honor of them I voted to reunite our service members in 
Afghanistan with their families here at home. My heart also goes out to 
the people of Haiti and will continue to support our reconstruction 
efforts there. Lastly, I am proud that the advocacy efforts of the New 
York congressional delegation in pushing to save education jobs in New 
York City have paid off.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Senate 
amendments to H.R. 4899, the Supplemental Appropriations Act for 2010. 
This legislation is critically important to providing funding to our 
men and women in uniform who are serving in harm's way.
  However, this legislation also provides funding that is important to 
maintaining our strategic posture in the Pacific. The legislation 
contains $50 million in transfer authority of Department of Defense 
operation and maintenance funding to the Guam Port Improvement 
Enterprise Fund at the Maritime Administration. The $50 million in 
funding is critical for the Port of Guam, in consultation with the 
Maritime Administration, to begin necessary infrastructure improvements 
and modernization.
  The Port of Guam, on many occasions, has been identified as a 
potential chokepoint for the delivery of materials and supplies to 
support the realignment of military forces to Guam and sustain economic 
development on the island. Without these improvements the realignment 
of military forces to Guam would be severely delayed, add additional 
costs to future military construction and potentially harm our civilian 
economic development. Moreover, these improvements are needed to 
facilitate the requirements of being designated a strategic port, in 
fact America's most forward located strategic port in the Western 
Pacific.
  The funding for the Port of Guam in this bill marks an important and 
very positive step forward for the military build-up on Guam. I thank 
the Obama administration for their support and leadership on this 
matter. After Guam was overlooked for important Recovery Act funding, 
the administration acted after repeated calls by our office for funding 
for critical civilian infrastructure projects and requested the 
transfer authority. I also thank Congressman David Obey, Chairman of 
the House Committee on Appropriations; Congressman Norm Dicks, Chairman 
of the Subcommittee on Defense, and Congressman John Olver, Chairman of 
the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and 
Related Agencies, for their support of this provision.
  Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to state how I will vote on the 
war in Afghanistan and why.
  Today Congress considers whether to continue funding operations in 
Afghanistan, and as we do, we must scrutinize the policy, the price 
being paid, and the outcomes for our national security. This is a 
deeply profound examination and its outcome will decide life or death 
for some of our troops.
  It's hard to believe that the eighteen year olds who enlist today to 
fight and die in Afghanistan were in fourth grade when the World Trade 
Center and Pentagon were attacked in 2001. Now it is 2010. This 
conflict is now the longest war in our nation's history and it has been 
accompanied by tragic loss of American lives and those of innocent 
civilians.
  The history of Afghanistan is instructive. It is called the graveyard 
of empires for a reason. No one since Ghengis Khan has been able to 
hold the country--not Alexander the Great, not the Persians, not the 
Ottomans, not the British, not the Russians. It's said that the 
definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and 
expecting different results. We should learn from the examples of those 
who preceded us in Afghanistan.
  President Obama told the troops that the mission must be definable 
and it must be winnable. I believe it is neither.
  We are losing more and more precious lives--102 in June alone. And 
every month security has not improved after $300 billion in military 
spending and more than 1,000 American lives lost.
  We have a corrupt partner with the Karzai regime and when the Afghan 
people see the U.S. supporting their government, they believe we have 
taken one side in their own civil war. No counter insurgency effort has 
succeeded when the partner is corrupt. If the Afghans don't want us 
there, and do not wish to protect their own towns and villages, no 
amount of armies and firepower can change this dynamic.
  I applaud the work our troops have done in disrupting Al Qaeda, and 
the risks they have taken to prevent terrorist attacks here at home. 
According to the CIA Director, Al Qaeda is down to 50 to 100 operatives 
in Afghanistan. We have achieved our goals, and we should leave before 
our continued presence unites the other insurgent groups in the region 
against us.
  I have tremendous respect for the men and women--civilian and 
military--who are risking their lives every day in Afghanistan. I have 
met them, and I am impressed by their selfless dedication to the 
mission and belief in the cause.
  The President's strategy is not succeeding, and rather than ask 
Americans to put their lives on the line for another eighteen months 
for what has become an impossible task, I will vote for Congressman 
McGovern's amendment to require a withdrawal plan by April 2011 and end 
this war.
  Mr. CARNAHAN. Mr. Speaker, the House passed H.R. 4899, the Disaster 
Relief and Summer Jobs Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2010. 
Included in this bill is a rider containing federal law exemptions for 
an Army Corp of Engineers and Transportation project in Dallas, Texas. 
As co-chairman of the House Historic Preservation Caucus and member of 
this Chamber, I want to express my opposition to exemptions like these 
that circumvent the established legislative process, committees of 
jurisdiction, and longstanding administrative processes.
  Section 405 in Chapter 4 of H.R. 4899 would exempt the Army Corps of 
Engineers (Corps) Trinity River Flood Control project in Dallas, Texas, 
from the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), 16 U.S.C. Sec. 470 
et seq., and ``any highway project'' in the ``vicinity'' of the Dallas 
Floodway from Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act, 49 
U.S.C. Sec. 303 and 23 U.S.C. Sec. 138, setting an alarming precedent 
and undermining our country's national preservation program.
  The NHPA establishes preservation as a national policy and directs 
the Federal government to provide leadership in preserving, restoring, 
and maintaining historic and cultural sites significant in American 
history, architecture, archeology, or engineering. To comply with the 
Act, Federal agencies having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a 
proposed Federal or federally assisted undertaking must evaluate the 
effect of the undertaking on any district, site, building, structure, 
or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National 
Register of Historic Places. 16 U.S.C. Sec. 470f (also known as 
``Section 106'').
  In the case of the Trinity River Flood Control Project, the Corps is 
currently complying with Section 106 of the NHPA by determining whether 
or not the Dallas Floodway is eligible for inclusion in the National 
Register. A 55-page research paper produced last November by the Corps 
cited the levees' historic importance to the development of modern 
Dallas and noted that the levees are considered a manmade landmark by 
the American Society of Civil Engineers.
  The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is also planning to build a 
toll road, and one of the potential routes would run between the two 
levees. A determination of National Register eligibility could 
ultimately affect the route by requiring FHWA and local officials to 
seek feasible and prudent alternatives that would avoid and minimize 
harm to the historic levee system--this review is commonly referred to 
as Section 4(f). There is also a need to restore the levees' integrity 
and comply with the Federal Emergency Management Agency's new flood 
risk maps for Dallas.
  There are hundreds, if not thousands of projects similar to this 
underway around the country. Those projects are all following federal 
laws and utilize administrative options to resolve any issues under the 
NHPA and Section 4(f). There was no evidence that a broad, blanket 
exemption from NHPA and Section 4(f) of the Department of 
Transportation Act warranted Congressional intervention to circumvent 
longstanding, successful administrative procedures already in place 
that balance practical needs with the protection of historic resources.
  This exemption was inappropriate, unnecessary, and unprecedented. 
There was no evidence that administrative tools would not have been 
unable to resolve any issues pertaining to the levees on the Trinity 
River. Congress should have ensured that the available administrative 
mechanisms had been fully employed before including this broad and 
unnecessary exemption that would endanger historic resources intrinsic 
to the development of a major American city and set a dangerous 
precedent.
  The whole purpose of the Section 106 of the NHPA and Section 4(f) of 
the Department of Transportation Act is to ensure that federal

[[Page 12637]]

resources are not used to harm historic properties without the 
consideration of adverse effects and alternatives. A National Register 
listing or eligibility does not prevent private property owners from 
harming or even destroying their own historic properties, as long as no 
federal funding or federal permits are involved. But where taxpayer 
dollars are awarded, or federal regulatory authority is invoked, those 
public benefits must be conditioned on compliance with our federal laws 
that require historic preservation and other policies to be included in 
the process of planning specific projects. This does not mean that 
projects cannot proceed where a historic property is involved; it 
simply means that the impacts of the projects on that property must be 
considered and if necessary, mitigated.
  In 1966 Congress created Section 106 of the NHPA and Section 4(f) of 
the DOT Act as tools to balance historic preservation concerns with the 
needs of federal undertakings. These reviews ensure that federal 
agencies identify any potential conflicts between their undertakings 
and historic preservation and resolve any conflicts in the public 
interest. The process has worked efficiently and effectively for nearly 
fifty years. The NHPA and Section 4(f) exemption language contained in 
H.R. 4899 is an affront to the Act's visionary framers.
  America's industrial and engineering infrastructure, and associated 
historic properties are essential to the nation's identity--its 
culture, history, and economy, past, present and future. In the absence 
of the protections afforded by Section 106 of the NHPA and 
Transportation's Section 4(f), those corridors have no meaningful 
procedural guarantees for preservation consideration, ensuring pieces 
of American history will be lost forever.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Representative 
Barbara Lee's amendment to prevent an escalation and limit funding to 
the safe and orderly withdrawal of our troops and military contractors 
from Afghanistan. After 9 years of war, the time has come to bring our 
troops home.
  I will also vote in favor of the McGovern-Obey amendment that would 
require the President to provide Congress with a plan for the 
expeditious redeployment of U.S. troops in Afghanistan and a timeline 
for completion of the redeployment.
  I would like to thank Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic leadership 
for bringing this bill to the floor today in a manner that allows clear 
up or down votes on funding for the war and other domestic priorities.
  The challenges in Afghanistan are great. As the violence and attacks 
on our troops continue to increase, we still do not have a clear path 
forward or a way to measure progress there.
  We cannot afford to sustain an open-ended commitment with no clear 
definition of success.
  Reports of corruption abound in Afghanistan, and without a true 
partner in the Karzai government, our prospects for making real 
progress have grown dim.
  Our troops have fought with honor and professionalism in the face of 
great challenges, and at great cost--I am truly humbled by their 
service and sacrifice. These brave men and women in uniform deserve our 
full support and commitment to return them home safely to their 
families and loved ones.
  President Obama did not start this war, and I was among those who 
have spoken out in support of allowing for the time necessary for a new 
strategy in Afghanistan to turn the tide.
  But after years of war that has strained our military, their 
families, and the country, I am unable to continue to support what 
increasingly looks like an intractable situation in Afghanistan.
  That is why I vote in favor of these amendments today.
  Despite my opposition to our continued military presence in 
Afghanistan, the bill does include critical domestic funding that I 
will support. These include saving teachers' jobs, Pell Grants, 
emergency food assistance for hungry Americans, and disaster aid to 
respond to the Gulf oil spill catastrophe.
  For example, today we are providing $10 billion for an Education Jobs 
Fund to provide additional emergency support to local school districts 
to prevent impending layoffs. Estimates suggest that this fund will 
help keep 140,000 school employees on the job next year.
  Moreover, when we invest in education, we save jobs in other sectors 
and spur economic recovery. According to the Economic Policy Institute, 
for every 100,000 education jobs lost, another 30,000 jobs are lost in 
other sectors due to reduced consumer spending and tax revenues.
  The list of important programs this bill funds is both extensive and 
impressive: Among other priorities, we are providing $304 million for 
the Gulf Coast oil spill; $50 million for the Emergency Food Assistance 
Program for food purchases to distribute through local emergency food 
providers; $13.377 billion for the payment of benefits to Vietnam 
veterans and their survivors for exposure to Agent Orange, which has 
been linked with Parkinson's disease, ischemic heart disease, and hairy 
cell/B cell leukemia; and $2.93 billion for Haiti.
  These are extremely important priorities which are fully paid for and 
which I support.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Lee Amendment.
  The war in Afghanistan is now the longest in our nation's history. It 
has cost the lives of over 1,150 American soldiers, hundreds of allied 
troops and scores of Afghan civilians. It has drained our nation's 
Treasury at a time of immense domestic challenges. It has strained our 
relationships with allies in the fight against terrorism. And it is 
making us less safe, not more, by inciting anti-American sentiment 
across the world.
  I supported this war at its outset. After the horror of September 
11th, our nation faced a clear need to strike the Taliban and the Al 
Qaeda operatives it supported. While I disagreed with the Bush 
administration's conduct of the war, I believe President Obama has 
tried to make a decisive effort to improve the situation and chart a 
course for bringing our troops home.
  However, the Afghan government has proved to be inadequate to the 
tasks before it. President Karzai has not proven to be a trustworthy 
partner. Flawed elections, rampant corruption, missing money, and a 
lack of accountability have crippled international efforts to establish 
the rule of law. This is a fundamental problem of governance, and a 
problem that the continued presence and heroic efforts of our troops 
cannot change.
  In 2007, I cast a similar vote to advance redeployment from Iraq as 
it was clear to me that the Iraqi government would only begin to chart 
a path towards stability once it realized that our commitment was not 
open-ended. I look forward to the completion of our redeployment from 
Iraq by the end of next year.
  Today, as we determine the future of our commitment to Afghanistan we 
must pledge not to completely disappear from involvement in 
Afghanistan, but neither should we be willing to commit to the 
indefinite task of nation-building with a government that has proven an 
unwilling and incapable partner. Although I recognize the significance 
of President Obama's announcement of a timeline for withdrawal 
beginning in July 2011, I do not believe we have the luxury to wait a 
year to begin this process.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 1500, the previous question is ordered.
  The question of adoption of the motion is divided among the five 
House amendments.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 1500, the first portion of the divided 
question is adopted.
  The second portion of the divided question is, Will the House concur 
in the Senate amendment with House amendment No. 2 printed in House 
Report 111-522?
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on the second portion of the divided question will be 
followed by 5-minute votes on the remaining portions of the divided 
question, if ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 239, 
nays 182, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 430]

                               YEAS--239

     Ackerman
     Adler (NJ)
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boccieri
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castle
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Childers
     Chu
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutch

[[Page 12638]]


     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Driehaus
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Giffords
     Gonzalez
     Gordon (TN)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     Kirk
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Markey (MA)
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McMahon
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Minnick
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (NY)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nye
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Pingree (ME)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     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
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Teague
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wilson (OH)
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--182

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Barrett (SC)
     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
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (KY)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Djou
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Fallin
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Guthrie
     Hall (TX)
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Jones
     Jordan (OH)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey (CO)
     Marshall
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Olson
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis (CO)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Snyder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Tanner
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Welch
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

       
     Miller, Gary
       

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Bean
     Capito
     Conyers
     Griffith
     Hoekstra
     Johnson, Sam
     Radanovich
     Rodriguez
     Wamp
     Woolsey
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  2234

  Mr. BRADY of Texas changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. SPRATT, Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida, and Mr. SHULER changed 
their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the second portion of the divided question was adopted.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Ms. BEAN. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 430, the Obey amendment, had I 
been present, I would have voted ``yes.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The third portion of the divided question 
is, Will the House concur in the Senate amendment with House amendment 
No. 3 printed in House Report 111-522?
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. OBEY. 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 25, 
noes 376, answered ``present'' 22, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 431]

                                AYES--25

     Clarke
     Clay
     Duncan
     Edwards (MD)
     Ellison
     Filner
     Garamendi
     Grayson
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson (IL)
     Kucinich
     Lewis (GA)
     Michaud
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Paul
     Pingree (ME)
     Schrader
     Serrano
     Sires
     Stark
     Velazquez
     Welch

                               NOES--376

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Adler (NJ)
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boccieri
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Bright
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Cao
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Childers
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Connolly (VA)
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Djou
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Driehaus
     Edwards (TX)
     Ehlers
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Gordon (TN)
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Guthrie
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harman
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Heinrich
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Jordan (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Maffei
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMahon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Minnick
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (NY)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Nye
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olson
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Peterson
     Petri

[[Page 12639]]


     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis (CO)
     Pomeroy
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Putnam
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Sestak
     Shadegg
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Taylor
     Teague
     Terry
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Wu
     Young (FL)

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--22

     Baldwin
     Castor (FL)
     Chu
     Cohen
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Kagen
     Lee (CA)
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Maloney
     McDermott
     McGovern
     Miller, George
     Rangel
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Schakowsky
     Slaughter
     Thompson (CA)
     Waters
     Watson
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Capito
     Conyers
     Griffith
     Hoekstra
     Johnson, Sam
     Radanovich
     Rodriguez
     Wamp
     Woolsey
     Young (AK)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are reminded there 
are less than 2 minutes remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  2241

  Mr. NADLER of New York changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the third portion of the divided question was not adopted.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The fourth portion of the divided question 
is, Will the House concur in the Senate amendment with House amendment 
No. 4 printed in House Report 111-522?
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. OBEY. 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 100, 
noes 321, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 432]

                               AYES--100

     Baldwin
     Becerra
     Blumenauer
     Campbell
     Capuano
     Chaffetz
     Chu
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Cohen
     Costello
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Doyle
     Duncan
     Edwards (MD)
     Ellison
     Farr
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Grayson
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Holt
     Honda
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (IL)
     Jones
     Kagen
     Kennedy
     Kucinich
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Markey (MA)
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     Michaud
     Miller, George
     Moore (WI)
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paul
     Payne
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis (CO)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Richardson
     Rohrabacher
     Rush
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Schakowsky
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Speier
     Stark
     Stupak
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Velazquez
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--321

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Adler (NJ)
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boccieri
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Bright
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Cao
     Capps
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Childers
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Connolly (VA)
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis (TN)
     Dent
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Djou
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Dreier
     Driehaus
     Edwards (TX)
     Ehlers
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Fallin
     Fattah
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Gordon (TN)
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Guthrie
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Heinrich
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hodes
     Holden
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Israel
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jordan (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey (CO)
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMahon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Minnick
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (NY)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Nye
     Olson
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pomeroy
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Putnam
     Rahall
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Sestak
     Shadegg
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Taylor
     Teague
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Titus
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Wu
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Capito
     Conyers
     Griffith
     Hoekstra
     Johnson, Sam
     Radanovich
     Rodriguez
     Wamp
     Watson
     Woolsey
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  2247

  So the fourth portion of the divided question was not adopted.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The fifth portion of the divided question 
is, Will the House concur in the Senate amendment with House amendment 
No. 5 printed in House Report 111-522?
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. OBEY. 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 162, 
noes 260, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 433]

                               AYES--162

     Baca
     Baldwin
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berry
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Castor (FL)
     Chaffetz
     Chu
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Coble
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings

[[Page 12640]]


     Dahlkemper
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duncan
     Edwards (MD)
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Grayson
     Grijalva
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holt
     Honda
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Jones
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kucinich
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Markey (MA)
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis (CO)
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Richardson
     Rohrabacher
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Shea-Porter
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wilson (OH)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--260

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Adler (NJ)
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boccieri
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Bright
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Cao
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Chandler
     Childers
     Clyburn
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Costa
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis (TN)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Djou
     Donnelly (IN)
     Dreier
     Driehaus
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Etheridge
     Fallin
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gordon (TN)
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Guthrie
     Hall (TX)
     Halvorson
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Holden
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Israel
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jordan (OH)
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey (CO)
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMahon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Minnick
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy (NY)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Nye
     Olson
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pomeroy
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Rahall
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Sestak
     Shadegg
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Snyder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Tanner
     Taylor
     Teague
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Titus
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden
     Welch
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Wu
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Capito
     Conyers
     Griffith
     Gutierrez
     Hoekstra
     Johnson, Sam
     Radanovich
     Rodriguez
     Wamp
     Woolsey
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  2254

  So the fifth portion of the divided question was not adopted.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________