[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 16660-16666]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




     MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 2112, AGRICULTURE, RURAL 
    DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012

  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take 
from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 2112) making appropriations for 
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and 
Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
2012, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendments thereto, 
disagree to the Senate amendments, and request a conference with the 
Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. DesJarlais). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Kentucky?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to instruct at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Dicks moves that the managers on the part of the House 
     at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses 
     on the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 2112, be instructed 
     to insist on (1) the highest level of funding for the 
     ``Federal Highway Administration--Emergency Relief Program'' 
     account, within the scope of conference and only for 
     activities consistent with the definition of ``disaster 
     relief' included in the Budget Control Act of 2011, and (2) 
     the highest level of funding within the scope of conference 
     for the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) programs.

                              {time}  1240

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XXII, the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) and the gentleman from Kentucky 
(Mr. Rogers) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.


                             General Leave

  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the 
motion to instruct.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Washington?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
  The motion instructs conferees to provide funds needed for the 
Federal Highway Administration to eliminate the backlog of repairs to 
highways, roads and bridges damaged in natural disasters. The motion 
also instructs the conferees to fund the Community Oriented Policing 
Services (COPS) programs.
  It is not unusual for Congress to appropriate funds to address the 
backlog of disaster repairs for highways, bridges and roads. Since 
1989, Congress appropriated additional funds to eliminate the emergency 
relief backlog on 20 separate occasions.
  This motion will put nearly 60,000 construction workers to work 
repairing roads and bridges in 37 States. The Federal Highway 
Administration needs about $1.76 billion for emergency relief repairs 
in States that received a Presidential disaster declaration.
  I would remind my colleagues that the Budget Control Act reformed the 
process for determining the total amount available for disaster relief 
funding. Funding is based on objective criteria. Disasters must be 
declared, and the total amount cannot exceed the rolling 10-year 
historical average. If conferees provide the highest level of disaster 
relief funding within the scope of conference, it will be within that 
range. The motion instructs conferees to remain consistent with the 
Budget Control Act. And the act makes clear that if disaster relief 
funding is within the average, it does not need to be offset.
  The motion simply asks the House to honor the agreement on disaster 
relief reached in the Budget Control Act.
  The motion also instructs the conferees to support the highest level 
of funding for COPS within the scope of conference. The House bill, as 
reported by the Appropriations Committee back in July, included no 
funding for the COPS programs. However, the Budget Control Act provides 
a higher discretionary funding total for FY 2012 than the allocation 
the committee was working with during the summer. This permits the 
House to fund some items that were difficult to provide for in July. 
And the COPS programs should be at the top of the list of things to fix 
in the CJS bill with a higher allocation.
  The House has supported COPS on a bipartisan basis, and it is needed 
now more than ever. The economic downturn of the last few years is 
straining the resources of State, local and tribal governments across 
the country. Public safety agencies have been affected along with 
nearly everyone else.
  According to the COPS office, nearly 12,000 police officers and 
sheriff's deputies will have been laid off by the end of 2011. 
Approximately 30,000 law enforcement jobs are unfilled. And an 
estimated 28,000 officers and deputies faced week-long furloughs in 
2010.
  We can't fix all the financial pressures facing local law 
enforcement, but we can do something to help stem the tide. This motion 
would support the hiring or rehiring of approximately 1,500 police 
officers in FY 2012.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge the House to vote ``yes'' on the motion to 
instruct, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers other 
than myself at this point; so I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DICKS. I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), who has been a tireless advocate for both the 
COPS program and our firefighters and for local law enforcement.
  Mr. PASCRELL. I thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding.
  I want to thank Mr. Dicks for his leadership on this issue. I want to 
thank Mr. Rogers for his open-mindedness, as usual, hopefully as we go 
into this discussion.
  As cochair of the House Law Enforcement Caucus, I want to call 
everyone's attention to one of the glaring differences between the bill 
the Senate passed earlier this week and the one reported by our own 
Appropriations Committee: Funding for our local police officers.
  The Senate bill contained $232 million for the COPS office, including 
$200 million for COPS hiring. This bill completely eliminated funding 
altogether. We're here today to try to rectify that situation.
  Mr. Speaker, we know that State and local governments are still 
slashing their budgets as a result of the recession. In fact, just last 
week the Department of Justice released a sobering report, ``The Impact 
of the Economic Downturn on American Police Agencies.'' I think all of 
our Members should read it. I want to place this as Exhibit A in my 
presentation today, Mr. Speaker, into the Record.
  The report revealed that nearly 12,000 law enforcement officers will 
lose their job this year alone. Another 30,000 positions remain 
unfilled, and 2011 would produce the first national decline in law 
enforcement officers in 25 years.
  Less cops on the beat means more crime on the streets, plain and 
simple.

[[Page 16661]]

It is a very specific aspect of this particular problem. It's not going 
to get better.
  I work very closely with my counterpart, Representative Reichert, who 
was a sheriff's officer in Washington State, to cochair the Law 
Enforcement Caucus. Earlier this year, 115 Members of this body, 
Republicans and Democrats, supported these programs in a letter to 
appropriators.
  It is just not enough, Mr. Speaker, to pat our police officers on the 
back. We must support them. The Federal Government has a particular 
responsibility, specifically, to debate the issue and look at the issue 
of homeland security. They're the first there, our firefighters. If 
there's any manmade disaster or act of nature, they show up first 
before anybody from the Federal Government.
  To see the number of police officers being reduced in this country is 
unconscionable, particularly after 9/11. Our crime is rising 
specifically in the towns where these police officers have been laid 
off, furloughed, demoted--and certainly lack the promotions. The 
Federal Government has some responsibility here.
  I would also like to place into the Record a very strong statement on 
the issue of the matter of crime in our cities and in our towns. I will 
make that Exhibit B.
  I think the homeland security issue is a critical issue. But let's 
bring it back to our own towns. Police departments in the United States 
now have put on a list of priorities what they're going to respond to 
and what they cannot respond to.
  Listen to these. They've stopped responding to motor vehicle thefts 
in many towns. They've stopped responding to burglar alarms that go 
off. They've stopped responding to non-injury motor vehicle accidents. 
In many towns, the warrant squads--if you don't know what a warrant 
squad is, then you don't know what police departments do day in and day 
out. They've minimized, two or three people left to try to find the 
folks that have perpetuated crimes in our communities.
  They've reported decreases in investigations of property crimes. You 
talk about a response when you call the police department. Wait till 
you see the response in terms of investigating these particular crimes.
  This has all come out under the Justice Department. I'm not making 
these numbers up. That's why I submit for the Record the numbers.

                              {time}  1250

  Let me just conclude, Mr. Speaker, in saying this has to be a 
priority. Protecting the public is our primary priority, and I ask 
consideration of what the gentleman from Washington is putting forth 
today.

                [From the New York Times, Oct. 21, 2011]

               In High-Crime Areas, Still Too Few Police

                (By Dan Mihalopoulos and Hunter Clauss)

       Despite Mayor Rahm Emanuel's highly promoted efforts at 
     concentrating additional police patrols in the city's most 
     dangerous neighborhoods, many crime-ridden police districts 
     still have fewer officers patrolling their streets than far 
     safer areas of the city have, according to recent data 
     obtained by The Chicago News Cooperative.
       The data included officer-assignment data for all 9,400 
     Chicago police officers, as well as almost 1,000 detectives--
     information that the city has steadfastly declined to make 
     public.
       The analysis found that the distribution of patrol officers 
     among the city's 25 police districts does not correlate to 
     the places where crime rates are highest.
       The 5th police district, which includes the Roseland and 
     Pullman neighborhoods on the Far South Side, has 266 patrol 
     officers, four fewer than the 270 officers in the 12th 
     district on the gentrified Near West Side, the data showed.
       But the 5th district experienced 1,049 violent crimes in 
     the first eight months of this year, while the 12th district 
     recorded 341 violent incidents during the same period, 
     according to police department records.
       Many predominantly black districts on the South and West 
     Sides had more than three or four murders, rapes, armed 
     robberies or assaults for every beat officer assigned to work 
     within their boundaries during that period.
       That contrasted drastically with 10 districts, mostly in 
     more affluent sections on the North Side, where there were 
     one or two such crimes for every officer.
       Many City Council members and neighborhood activists have 
     long campaigned for a police department reorganization that 
     would put more officers in high-crime neighborhoods. Told of 
     the deployment data analysis, they said the results 
     vindicated their demands.
       ``It basically validates the need for redeployment and 
     reallocation,'' said Alderman Anthony Beale, whose 9th Ward 
     is largely in the 5th district.
       Mr. Beale said this week that he would call for Council 
     hearings on staffing levels in police districts. He said he 
     had unsuccessfully sought deployment statistics from the 
     police for years.
       ``Putting the most police in the areas with the most 
     crime--it's just that simple,'' said the Rev. Marshall Hatch, 
     whose New Mount Pilgrim Missionary Baptist Church is in a 
     West Side police district with the second-lowest proportion 
     of police officers to violent crimes.
       Lt. Maureen Biggane, a spokeswoman for the police 
     department, said officials were in the process of ``right-
     sizing the department'' and had focused initial redeployment 
     efforts on the highest-crime districts. The debate over how 
     best to deploy police officers has raged for decades, with 
     representatives of more tranquil corners of the city 
     successfully blocking repeated attempts to shift greater 
     resources away from their neighborhoods to the most violent 
     districts.
       The topic has become especially heated as City Hall's 
     budget problems have worsened in the past few years. Even 
     after the planned closing of three district stations, the 
     police department would remain by far the largest component 
     of the budget.
       Police spending is slated to drop by 4.4 percent in 2012, 
     to about $1.26 billion out of the total city budget of $6.28 
     billion.
       During economic boom times, former Mayor Richard M. Daley 
     promised and delivered expansion of the police ranks. When 
     the city's budget deficits grew, the Daley administration 
     allowed the police force to dwindle.
       In 2008, officials reluctantly confirmed that they had been 
     forced to renege on Mr. Daley's vow to hire new officers, and 
     police academy classes ceased training cadets. Retirements 
     and other attrition quickly drove down the count of sworn 
     officers on the payroll.
       Since his inauguration in May, Mayor Emanuel and his new 
     police superintendent, Garry McCarthy, have faced reality. In 
     presenting his 2012 budget-proposal, Mr. Emanuel said he 
     would delete more than 1,200 perennially unfilled officer 
     positions from the books ``to end the charade of carrying 
     hundreds of police officer vacancies without actually hiring 
     them.''
       While acknowledging that they will have a smaller force 
     than the Daley administration once commanded, Mr. Emanuel and 
     Mr. McCarthy are as leery as Mr. Daley was of moving officers 
     from safe neighborhoods to higher-crime areas. Instead, City 
     Hall's new leaders say they have shifted personnel from the 
     specialized units that Mr. Daley built up and reassigned them 
     as beat officers in districts across Chicago.
       Mr. Emanuel said he had transferred more than 1,000 
     officers ``to beat patrols in our neighborhoods,'' removing 
     them from desk jobs and special units.
       ``Every police district across our city received additional 
     officers,'' Mr. Emanuel told aldermen in his budget speech on 
     Oct. 12. ``Those districts with the most crime got the 
     biggest increases, as it should be.''
       Ms. Biggane, the police spokeswoman, said eight high-crime 
     districts had benefited from the first redeployment wave, 
     involving 500 officers, and other parts of the city have 
     since received additional patrols.
       But the Emanuel administration has declined to provide 
     documentation of those moves. The new administration has 
     adhered to longstanding policies of the Daley administration, 
     whose officials denied Freedom of Information Act requests by 
     contending that public disclosure of documents detailing 
     officer deployment levels would compromise security.
       The Chicago News Cooperative recently obtained a list of 
     the unit assignments for the 10,300 sworn Chicago police 
     department employees from a police source who requested 
     anonymity because the department leaders have declined to 
     release it.
       The records described the unit assignments as of early 
     October and appeared to reflect the vast majority of the 
     recent personnel moves ordered by the Emanuel administration.
       Most of the detectives were assigned to one of the 
     department's five area headquarters, while about 2,400 of the 
     police officers were either assigned directly or detailed to 
     specialized units, including the narcotics section and the 
     internal affairs division.
       It was impossible to deduce from the data exactly where the 
     officers in specialized units were working. The list also did 
     not include supervisors.
       The other 7,000 police officers, representing a majority of 
     the department's sworn members, were each assigned to patrol 
     beats in one of the 25 districts. The number of officers in 
     each district ranged from a low of 191 in the 23rd district 
     to 386 in the 7th district.
       A comparison of the beat deployment figures with department 
     statistics for property crimes and violent crimes in each 
     district this year shows:

[[Page 16662]]

       Four districts--the 25th, 8th, 6th and 4th--had higher 
     ratios of both property crimes and violent crimes per officer 
     than the citywide average.
       The highest ratios of property crimes to beat officer 
     counts were in the 14th, 8th and 25th districts, each of 
     which reported at least 15 property crimes per patrol officer 
     in the year's first eight months.
       The lowest proportion of violent crimes to officers was in 
     the 1st district, which covers downtown Chicago, followed by 
     the 19th district on the North Side.
       The 4th district, in the city's southeast corner, had the 
     largest gap between staffing level and violence, with 4.05 
     violent crimes per officer.
       The 4th district covers most of the 7th Ward, whose 
     alderman, Sandi Jackson, praised Mr. Emanuel for adding 
     officers to areas of greater need, despite tight budget 
     constraints. But asked about the Chicago News Cooperative 
     findings, Ms. Jackson replied: ``There is absolutely a 
     disparity. We are not where we would want to be ideally.''
       Some experts say the reaction of aldermen in apparently 
     underserved districts, though politically astute, would not 
     lead to the wisest policies for fighting crime.
       ``It is reasonable and rational to expect that there should 
     be more officers in areas with more crime,'' said Arthur 
     Lurigio, a professor of psychology and criminology at Loyola 
     University. ``But there is no evidence that would necessarily 
     be the case.''
       Mr. Lurigio said saturating areas with officers often 
     merely pushed criminals to other places that then witnessed a 
     spike in violence.
       Still, the city should deploy its police officers based on 
     a formula that would account not only for crime rates but 
     also for average response times to service calls, said Wesley 
     Skogan, professor of political science at Northwestern 
     University's Institute for Policy Research.
       ``This is Chicago, so everybody wants more and nobody wants 
     to give up officers,'' Mr. Skogan said. ``Emanuel should use 
     his crisis clout and allocate police resources based on 
     workload.''
                                  ____


     The Importance of Community Policing in Tough Financial Times

       Many of the cost saving techniques discussed within this 
     report are directly related to community policing efforts. 
     Community policing is a philosophy that promotes 
     organizational strategies, which support the systematic use 
     of partnerships and problem-solving techniques, to 
     proactively address the immediate conditions that give rise 
     to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and 
     fear of crime (COPS Office 2009a). The three tenets of 
     community policing--community partnerships, organizational 
     transformation, and problem solving--are of increased 
     importance when facing budget cuts that reduce the number of 
     officers on the streets.
       Collaborative partnerships to develop solutions to problems 
     and increase trust in police can be seen in many of the 
     solutions police agencies are using in light of the economic 
     downturn. Specifically, the use of volunteers, partnerships 
     between the police and private agencies, and the use of 
     social media as a means to communicate effectively with the 
     community in order to meet their needs, are all examples of 
     how collaborative partnerships act as a cost-saving tool.
       Organizational transformation exists through the alignment 
     of organizational management, structure, personnel, and 
     information systems to support community partnerships and 
     proactive problem solving. From its inception, community 
     policing's goal is one of forging strong relationships 
     between law enforcement and the communities they serve. It 
     aims to redesign the practice of public safety into a 
     collective, collaborative effort (COPS Office 2009a).
       The current economic crisis, which has thwarted many police 
     activities, requires police agencies to place a greater 
     emphasis on problem-solving techniques. By engaging in the 
     proactive and systematic examination of identified problems 
     and developing and rigorously evaluating effective responses, 
     they will be able to best use the limited resources that are 
     available to them.
       Unfortunately, when agencies are forced to make widespread 
     budget cuts, some have done so by reducing or eliminating 
     some of their community policing programs. In fact, according 
     to the MCCA survey, 39 percent of respondents who have 
     reduced budgets stated that those budgets cuts were made to 
     their community policing efforts (MCCA 2011).
       Herein lies one of the major fallacies as it relates to 
     community policing. Community policing should not be viewed 
     as a particular program within a department, but rather as a 
     department-wide philosophy. Programs are typically initiated 
     as a response to a specific problem, in which only a small 
     portion of the organization is involved and once the problem 
     has been addressed the program is dissolved (Trojanowicz and 
     Bucqueroux 1994). Instead, community policing must be 
     understood as a philosophy that promotes the systematic use 
     of partnerships and problem-solving techniques to proactively 
     address the conditions within a community that are cause for 
     public concerns over crime and social disorder issues 
     (Melekian 2011d).
       Community policing is an organizational strategy. It can be 
     used to govern the way police services are delivered, 
     recognizing the police officer as an organizer of resources 
     in pursuit of public safety rather than someone designated to 
     perform specific tasks (Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux 1994).
       In an article in The Police Chief, COPS Office Director 
     Melekian articulates the importance of the community policing 
     philosophy in the face of the current economic climate. He 
     argues that the downturn in the economy has affected the 
     country in ways that could not have been predicted even 5 
     years ago. The enhancement of community policing and the 
     myriad of social outreach programs that have been employed by 
     local law enforcement were initially brought about in large 
     measure by the combination of federal grant dollars and 
     readily available local funding sources. That financial 
     foundation is now in serious jeopardy in many local 
     jurisdictions.
       Melekian further highlights how some have made the argument 
     that these economic challenges may compel us to abandon 
     community policing because we simply cannot afford it 
     (Melekian 2011d). However, experience has shown that 
     community policing is a more cost-effective way of utilizing 
     available resources than simple traditional policing 
     practices, for a number of reasons. Primarily, community 
     participation in crime-prevention amplifies the amount of 
     available resources, while community partnerships used to 
     address problem solving provides a more efficient 
     distribution of combined police and community resources than 
     simply reactive policing program models (Brown 1989).


          The Importance of Community Policing in a Recession

       Concord, Massachusetts--Deputy Police Chief Barry Neal has 
     utilized the proactive approach of community policing to 
     prevent crime and reduce victimization. ``We recognize that 
     we can't solve problems alone, we need to engage the 
     community and work in partnership with them,'' he said. ``It 
     gives us direct daily face-to-face contact between the 
     community and the officers, and also gives us the ability to 
     prevent problems from occurring instead of reacting to them'' 
     (Ball 2009).
       Albuquerque, New Mexico--Chief Schultz of Albuquerque is 
     having officers develop partnerships with retailers to 
     address shoplifters and boosters. The Police Department has 
     experienced a 20 percent reduction in their workforce and is 
     developing partnerships with retailers with the goal of 
     sharing information in order to link petty crimes together to 
     prosecute larger and stronger cases and get repeat offenders 
     off the street. In addition, they are offering rewards to 
     housekeepers at hotels to report the accumulation of large 
     amounts of merchandise, which can often be found in hotel 
     rooms (Stelter 2011).
       Kansas City, Missouri--``When we talk in Kansas City about 
     `doing something different,' a mention of community policing 
     usually follows. And surely, the thought of police officers 
     working hand in hand with neighborhood folks is enticing. But 
     successful, citywide community policing would require a 
     culture change for a police department that places more faith 
     in arrest statistics than relationships as a crime-fighting 
     tool. [In looking for a new police chief, Kansas City] 
     believes a chief who finds a way to make it acceptable, 
     indeed desirable, for officers to connect with citizens and 
     help solve problems will be the start of the change that 
     everyone talks about'' (Shelly 2011).


                               Conclusion

       In 2008, the entire country was introduced to the largest 
     fiscal crisis since the Great Depression. Many who have 
     worked in the field for decades have never seen an economic 
     situation that has affected law enforcement like the one our 
     country currently faces. As cities and counties across 
     America are experiencing a downturn in local revenues, the 
     effects on public safety budgets have been significant. 
     Americans are faced with a new economic reality, in which 
     they are challenged to develop new and innovative ways to 
     leverage resources and maximize productivity in the face of 
     diminishing financial means. Police agencies have not escaped 
     the effects of shrinking revenues. In fact, the economic 
     challenges facing many Americans are amplified when it comes 
     to public safety.
       To compensate for shrinking budgets, many individuals focus 
     on what can be sacrificed from their normal lifestyle in 
     order to offset the reduction in available spending. Families 
     may forego their annual summer vacation, or choose to only 
     shop in discount stores rather than their favorite department 
     stores. However, law enforcement agencies face the more 
     difficult and ever important task of maintaining the same 
     quality of service that they always have provided despite a 
     severe reduction in available resources. Therefore, to 
     successfully deliver the high levels of community protection 
     and emergency responsiveness communities depend on, law 
     enforcement agencies must develop new and innovative 
     techniques to address the needs of their communities in cost-
     effective and sustainable ways.
       The recognition and acceptance of this new economic reality 
     is more important than ever in developing strategic 
     management practices to ensure the effective and efficient 
     delivery of police services. Never before has

[[Page 16663]]

     the law enforcement community experienced such significant 
     cuts to operating budgets and available resources. Rather 
     than continuing to provide services through traditional means 
     in hopes that the economy will return to pre-recession 
     levels, police nationwide are shifting, adapting, and 
     redeveloping the ways in which they do their job--to ensure 
     the highest levels of public safety.
       In every corner of the United States, state, local, and 
     tribal police departments are being forced to lay off 
     officers and civilian staff, or modify their operations as a 
     result of budget cuts. Over the last 2 years, many agencies 
     have experienced considerable affects from budget 
     constrictions, including mandatory furloughs and hiring 
     freezes, which have resulted in significant reductions in 
     staffing levels never experienced before. Indeed, American 
     law enforcement is changing, and the effects are likely to 
     last over the next 5 to 10 years, if not longer.
       While the exact nature of how these changes will take place 
     is unclear, the data within this report suggest that changes 
     may occur on several fronts. First, there may be greater 
     application of ``force-multiplier'' technologies such as 
     closed-circuit TVs, automated emergency dispatch systems, 
     video teleconferencing equipment, and social media usage. 
     Utilization of technologies such as these has the ability to 
     provide law enforcement agencies with a way to maximize 
     available information while alleviating the need for an 
     immediate response.
       Another fundamental alteration that has been seen in 
     delivery of police services as a result of the changing 
     economy is the increased application of non-sworn 
     individuals--both as employees and as volunteers. More and 
     more police agencies have begun to shift some of the 
     responsibilities that have traditionally been performed by 
     sworn staff to civilian personnel as a means to mitigate 
     payroll costs and maintain staffing levels. Further, some 
     agencies have even engaged citizen volunteers to help 
     alleviate the strain on police work loads. Such approaches 
     can provide sworn staff with more time to focus on pressing 
     and time-sensitive issues that can only be successfully 
     managed by a law enforcement officer.
       Some agencies have had to drastically change their methods 
     for handling non-emergency situations and administrative 
     duties. Many police agencies are no longer able to dispatch 
     an officer to every call for service. Instead, more often 
     police managers are forced to direct their resources to focus 
     on situations which pose the most threat to public safety. 
     For example, some agencies are no longer able send officers 
     to collect crime reports for cases that don't involve 
     suspects, or dispatch patrol officers to every non-emergency/
     non-injury service call. The primary focus on law enforcement 
     is protecting the safety of their communities. Therefore, 
     agencies experiencing limited resources must adjust their 
     approach to focus in on situations that are an immediate 
     threat to public safety.
       A more drastic change that is being seen as a result of the 
     economic downturn is the increase in the number of agencies 
     combining efforts and resources through consolidation, shared 
     services, and regionalization. When agencies are faced with 
     maintaining services levels with less and less, collaborating 
     or combining agency's efforts often is the only way to 
     maximize available resources, training, and information.
       As this report has shown, the recent economic downturn has 
     placed serious constraints on police budgets and severely 
     diminished the availability of resources. As an additional 
     step to help compensate for declining resources, many 
     departments have also begun collecting and disseminating 
     crime data in real-time via new technology. This has allowed 
     for the effective management and strategic deployment of 
     resources to focus on specific problems as they develop. With 
     the increased use of technology and information-sharing 
     policies being institutionalized throughout many police 
     departments nationwide, it has become essential that the 
     collection of national census data relating to law 
     enforcement agencies be collected with the same urgency.
       It is crucial for policy makers to create proactive, 
     aggressive, and productive problem-solving strategies based 
     on relevant and current data. However, the delay in the 
     current methods of data collection and dissemination makes it 
     difficult to present an accurate picture of the state of 
     police agencies as things happen. In turn, a true 
     understanding of the challenges confronting law enforcement 
     agencies as seen through comprehensive analysis takes time 
     and resources. It will be important for federal partners to 
     collaborate on a way to collectively participate in data 
     collection efforts in the future that will increase the 
     availability of up-to-date data, and its analysis and 
     dissemination. By collecting data more frequently and 
     comprehensively, policy makers and government agencies will 
     be able to adjust and realign their strategic goals to 
     provide relevant assistance where law enforcement agencies 
     need it most.
       Institutionalization of the community policing philosophy 
     is vital to the ability of law enforcement agencies to 
     succeed and thrive in the current economic climate. Agencies 
     must systematically use partnerships and problem-solving 
     techniques to proactively address the problems that their 
     communities are facing. Development and enhancement of 
     symbiotic relationships between police and the communities 
     they serve is key to ensuring community safety.
       It is clear that the challenges facing America as a result 
     of the economic decline that began in 2008 have been 
     significant. Law enforcement communities are facing a new 
     reality in American policing--one that requires a shift in 
     the methods they use to uphold levels of service while 
     dealing with ever shrinking budgets. However, the importance 
     of maintaining and expanding community policing practices 
     during this time of economic hardship is paramount. Research 
     and feedback from the field indicate that community policing 
     is a successful practice in both small and large agencies 
     with significant public safety problems. Thankfully, many of 
     the law enforcement agencies in the United States already 
     practice community policing, and more are coming to recognize 
     the value of community partnerships in this time of limited 
     resources.

  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts, the ranking member of the Transportation, HUD 
Subcommittee, Mr. Olver.
  Mr. OLVER. I thank the gentleman for yielding time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to instruct conferees. 
This motion would instruct the conferees to provide adequate funding to 
the Federal Highway Administration's Emergency Relief program in order 
to eliminate the backlog of repairs needed as a result of hurricanes, 
earthquakes, floods, and other natural disasters.
  Since the Hayden-Cartwright Act of 1934, Congress has repeatedly 
recognized the need to provide assistance to States when unanticipated 
disasters occur without conditioning the support on cuts to other 
programs.
  Currently, there is roughly $1.75 billion in emergency relief backlog 
covering disasters in 37 States. The 2012 year has been an unusually 
active one for natural disasters, and 33 States have experienced 
declared disasters totaling $1.4 billion since the beginning of this 
year alone.
  This includes $50 million in repairs that are needed in my State, 
Massachusetts, due to tornadoes in the spring and damage from Hurricane 
Irene; $42 million needed by Iowa to repair damage from Missouri River 
spring floods; and $100 million in Ohio due to severe rainfalls in the 
early spring.
  Mr. Speaker, as we have done 20 times since 1989 during both 
Republican and Democratic Congresses, we have a responsibility to our 
neighbors to provide them funding needed to address their emergency 
relief needs.
  Mr. Speaker, the chart I have in my hand references those 20 acts of 
Congress. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support 
the motion to instruct conferees.

                                            EMERGENCY RELIEF PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS 1989-PRESENT
                                            [Excludes $100 million annual authorization under 23 U.S.C.-125]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Highway Trust
            Public Law               Date signed           Title                Fund           General Fund           Purpose              Waivers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------PL 101-130.................      10/26/1989  Fiscal Year 1990         $1,000,000,000  .................  September 1989        Waived 23 U.S.C.
                                                    Dire Emergency                                              Hurricane Hugo and    120(f) [now
                                                    Supplemental to                                             October 17, 1989      120(e)] by
                                                    Meet the Needs of                                           Loma Prieta           extending the 100%
                                                    Natural Disasters                                           Earthquake.           Federal share from
                                                    of National                                                                       90 days\1\ to 180
                                                    Significance.                                                                     days and extending
                                                                                                                                      this to all
                                                                                                                                      projects
                                                                                                                                      (emergency and
                                                                                                                                      permanent
                                                                                                                                      repairs). Waived
                                                                                                                                      the $100 million
                                                                                                                                      State cap.
PL 102-368.......................       9/18/1992  Supplemental                $30,000,000  .................  Hurricane Andrew,     none
                                                    appropriations for                                          Hurricane Iniki,
                                                    Fiscal Year 1992.                                           and Typhoon Omar.

[[Page 16664]]

 
PL 103-75........................        1/5/1993  Emergency                  $175,000,000  .................  Midwest floods of     none
                                                    supplemental                                                1993 and other
                                                    appropriations for                                          disasters.
                                                    relief from the
                                                    major, widespread
                                                    flooding in the
                                                    Midwest for the
                                                    fiscal year ending
                                                    September 30, 1993.
PL 103-211.......................       1/25/1994  Making emergency         $1,665,000,000  .................  January 1994          Waived 23 U.S.C.
                                                    supplemental                                                Northridge            120(e) by
                                                    appropriations for                                          earthquake in         extending the 100%
                                                    the fiscal year                                             Southern California   Federal share from
                                                    ending September                                            and other disasters   90 days to 180
                                                    30, 1994, and for                                           including an          days and extending
                                                    other purposes.                                             additional $315       this to all
                                                                                                                million for the       projects
                                                                                                                Loma Prieta           (emergency and
                                                                                                                Earthquake.           permanent repairs)
                                                                                                                                      related to the
                                                                                                                                      Northridge
                                                                                                                                      earthquake. Waived
                                                                                                                                      the $100 million
                                                                                                                                      per State cap for
                                                                                                                                      the Northridge
                                                                                                                                      earthquake.
PL 104-134.......................       4/26/1996  Making                     $300,000,000  .................  January 1996          Waived the $100
                                                    appropriations for                                          flooding in the Mid-  million per state
                                                    fiscal year 1996 to                                         Atlantic,             cap for the
                                                    make a further down                                         Northeast, and        January 1996
                                                    payment toward a                                            Northwest States      flooding in the
                                                    balanced budget,                                            and other disasters.  Mid-Atlantic and
                                                    and for other                                                                     Northwest States.
                                                    purposes.
PL104-208........................       9/28/1996  Making Omnibus              $82,000,000  .................  Hurricanes Fran and   none
                                                    Consolidated                                                Hortense and for
                                                    Appropriations for                                          other disasters.
                                                    Fiscal Year 1997.
PL 105-18........................       6/12/1997  1997 Emergency             $650,000,000  .................  For an additional     Waived the $100
                                                    Supplemental                                                amount for the        million per State
                                                    Appropriations Act                                          Emergency Relief      cap for the
                                                    for Recovery From                                           Program for           December 1996 and
                                                    Natural Disasters                                           emergency expenses    January 1987
                                                    and for Overseas                                            resulting from        flooding in the
                                                    Peacekeeping                                                flooding and other    western States.
                                                    Efforts, Including                                          natural disasters.
                                                    Those in Bosnia.
PL 105-174.......................        5/1/1998  1998 Supplemental          $259,000,000  .................  For an additional     Waived the $100
                                                    Appropriations and                                          amount for the        million per State
                                                    Rescissions Act.                                            Emergency Relief      cap for projects
                                                                                                                Program for           resulting from
                                                                                                                emergency expenses    flooding during
                                                                                                                resulting from        the fall of 1997
                                                                                                                floods and other      through the winter
                                                                                                                natural disasters.    of 1998 in
                                                                                                                                      California.
PL 106-346.......................      10/23/2000  Department of              $720,000,000  .................  For an additional     none
                                                    Transportation and                                          amount for the
                                                    Related Agencies                                            Emergency Relief
                                                    Appropriations,                                             Program for
                                                    2001.                                                       emergency expenses
                                                                                                                resulting from
                                                                                                                floods and other
                                                                                                                natural disasters.
PL 107-117.......................       1/10/2002  Department of              $100,000,000  .................  For emergency         none
                                                    Defense and                                                 expenses to respond
                                                    Emergency                                                   to the September
                                                    Supplemental                                                11, 2001, terrorist
                                                    Appropriations for                                          attacks on the
                                                    Recovery from and                                           United States, for
                                                    Response to                                                 ``Miscellaneous
                                                    Terrorist Attacks                                           Appropriations,''
                                                    on the United                                               including the
                                                    States Act, 2002.                                           operation and
                                                                                                                construction of
                                                                                                                ferries and ferry
                                                                                                                facilities.
                                                                               $75,000,000  .................  For emergency         none
                                                                                                                expenses to respond
                                                                                                                to the September
                                                                                                                11, 2001, terrorist
                                                                                                                attacks on the
                                                                                                                United States, for
                                                                                                                the ``Emergency
                                                                                                                Relief Program,''as
                                                                                                                authorized by
                                                                                                                section 125 of
                                                                                                                title 23, United
                                                                                                                States Code.
PL 107-206.......................        8/2/2002  2002 Supplemental          $167,000,000  .................  For an additional     Waived 23 U.S.C.
                                                    Appropriations Act                                          amount for            120(e) or projects
                                                    for Further                                                 ``Emergency Relief    resulting from the
                                                    Recovery from and                                           Program,'' as         2001 NYC WTC
                                                    Response to                                                 authorized by 23      terrorist attacks
                                                    Terrorist Attacks                                           U.S.C. 125, for       by allowing all
                                                    on the United                                               emergency expenses    projects to be
                                                    States.                                                     to respond to the     eligible at 100%
                                                                                                                September 11, 2001,   without any time
                                                                                                                terrorist attacks     limit. Waived the
                                                                                                                on New York City.     $100 million per
                                                                                                                                      State cap for such
                                                                                                                                      projects.
                                                                               $98,000,000  .................  For an additional     none
                                                                                                                amount for the
                                                                                                                ``Emergency Relief
                                                                                                                Program,'' as
                                                                                                                authorized by
                                                                                                                section 125 of
                                                                                                                title 23, United
                                                                                                                States Code.
PL 108-324.......................      10/13/2004  Military                 $1,202,000,000  .................  2004 Hurricanes       Waives the $100
                                                    Construction                                                Charley, Frances,     million per State
                                                    Appropriations and                                          Gaston, Ivan, and     cap for projects
                                                    Emergency Hurricane                                         Jeanne, as            arising from
                                                    Supplemental                                                authorized by 23      Hurricanes
                                                    Appropriations Act,                                         U.S.C. 125.           Charley, Frances,
                                                    2005.                                                                             Ivan, and Jeanne.
PL 108-447.......................       12/8/2004  Consolidated               $741,000,000  .................  For an additional     none
                                                    Appropriations Act,                                         amount for the
                                                    2005.                                                       ``Emergency Relief
                                                                                                                Program'' as
                                                                                                                authorized under
                                                                                                                section 125 of
                                                                                                                title 23, United
                                                                                                                States Code.
PL 109-148.......................      12/30/2005  Department of         .................     $2,750,000,000  Hurricanes Katrina,   Waived 23 U.S.C.
                                                    Defense, Emergency                                          Rita, and Wilma.      120(e) for
                                                    Supplemental                                                                      Hurricanes
                                                    Appropriations to                                                                 Katrina, Rita, and
                                                    Address Hurricanes                                                                Wilma. Waived the
                                                    in the Gulf of                                                                    $100 million per
                                                    Mexico, and                                                                       State cap for
                                                    Pandemic Influenza                                                                Hurricanes Dennis,
                                                    Act, 2006.                                                                        Katrina, Rita or
                                                                                                                                      Wilma and for the
                                                                                                                                      2004-2005 winter
                                                                                                                                      storms in the
                                                                                                                                      State of
                                                                                                                                      California.
PL 109-234.......................       6/15/2006  Emergency             .................       $702,362,500  For an additional     Waived the $100
                                                    Supplemental                                                amount as             million per State
                                                    Appropriations Act                                          authorized under 23   cap for Hurricane
                                                    for Defense, the                                            U.S.C. 125, for       Dennis and for the
                                                    Global War on                                               expenses identified   2004-2005 winter
                                                    Terror, and                                                 under ``Formal        storms in the
                                                    Hurricane Recovery,                                         Requests'' in the     State of
                                                    2006.                                                       Federal Highway       California.
                                                                                                                Administration
                                                                                                                table entitled
                                                                                                                ``Emergency Relief
                                                                                                                Program Fund''
                                                                                                                Requests--updated
                                                                                                                06/06/06.
PL 110-28........................       5/25/2007  U.S. Troop            .................       $871,022,000  For an additional     Waived the $100
                                                    Readiness,                                                  amount for the        million per State
                                                    Veterans' Care,-                                            Emergency Relief      cap for the 2005-
                                                    Katrina Recovery,                                           Program as            2006 winter storms
                                                    and Iraq                                                    authorized under      in the State of
                                                    Accountability                                              section 125 of        California.
                                                    Appropriations Act,                                         title 23, U.S.C.
                                                    2007.
PL 110-161.......................       2/26/2007  Consolidated          .................       $195,000,000  For replacement of I- PL 110-56 waived 23
                                                    Appropriations Act,                                         35W bridge in         U.S.C. 120(e) and
                                                    2008.                                                       Minneapolis,          lifted the $100
                                                                                                                Minnesota as          million per State
                                                                                                                authorized in         cap for the I-35W
                                                                                                                Public Law 110-56.    bridge
                                                                                                                                      replacement.
PL110-329........................       9/30/2008  Consolidated          .................       $850,000,000  For an additional     PL 110-329 lifted
                                                    Security, Disaster                                          amount as             the $100 million
                                                    Assistance, and                                             authorized under      per State cap for
                                                    Continuing                                                  section 125 of        Hurricanes Gustav
                                                    Appropriations Act,                                         title 23, United      and Ike.
                                                    2009.                                                       States Code.
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total from GF................  ..............  ....................  .................     $5,368,384,500
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total from HTF 1989-present..  ..............  ....................     $7,264,000,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The time limit for eligibility of emergency repair work [currently 23 U.S.C. 120(e)] was increased from 90 days to 180 days in 1998 (TEA-21).

  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania, the ranking member of the Commerce, Justice, Science 
Subcommittee, Mr. Fattah.
  Mr. FATTAH. I thank the gentleman from Washington State, who's the 
ranking member on the Appropriations Committee, and I thank our 
chairman, Chairman Rogers. I'm very pleased that we are having a motion 
to instruct and that actually we're moving appropriation bills.
  I rise in support of the gentleman from Washington's motion to 
instruct, particularly in support of additional disaster relief and 
also the COPS program.
  It's critically important that we continue the national declining 
crime rates, and because of the layoffs or dismissals of over 12,000 
police officers and the fact that we have over 30,000 law enforcement 
jobs that are unfilled today in our country, we see in many cities now 
a rising level of criminal activity.
  I want to mention that in Paterson, New Jersey, we heard from the 
gentleman who used to be mayor of Paterson that they've had to lay off 
125 police officers, a fourth of the police force there, and they've 
experienced a 15 percent increase in crime. And I think that one could 
draw a correlation between these two. In Flint, Michigan, the police 
force has been cut by two-thirds over the last 3 years, and its murder 
rate is higher than that of Baghdad. Last January, Camden, New Jersey, 
was cut by 163 officers, 44 percent of the total force.
  It's critically important that we understand the direct nexus between 
the Federal effort which began many years ago to put cops on the street 
and to assist local officers and the dramatic declines that we've seen 
for more than a decade now in criminal activity in our

[[Page 16665]]

country, and I would hope that this motion to instruct would inform all 
of the conferees how important this is in addition to the disaster 
relief.
  When we call 911, we want to be calling for a police officer, not 
dialing for a prayer.
  So we need real help, and the conferees will have an opportunity to 
adjust the figures hopefully in line with what we want as an ideal. If 
we can fund police officers in Iraq and Afghanistan, we can fund them 
in Flint, Paterson, and in Camden, New Jersey, and in other cities 
similarly situated.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, does the gentleman have further 
speakers?
  Mr. DICKS. I have one additional speaker, and then I will close very 
briefly.
  I have the right to close, I believe.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is correct.
  Mr. DICKS. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. 
Welch), a very distinguished Member of the Congress and a person whose 
State has been very hard-hit by disasters, and we're going to do 
everything we can to work to assist him on this important endeavor.
  Mr. WELCH. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Speaker, on August 28 of this August, Hurricane Irene left a path 
of destruction from the Carolinas to Vermont. The districts of 55 of 
our colleagues were hit and hit hard. And that storm did damage without 
regard to partisan affiliation or income distribution. If you were in 
the path of that storm, you suffered.
  The 55 Members of Congress who were affected by it created the 
Hurricane Irene Coalition, Republicans and Democrats, and we are united 
in the single goal of getting the aid to our people back home that they 
need to get back on their feet.
  Hurricane Irene, Mr. Speaker, saved its greatest fury to the end, 
when it descended upon Vermont. It was the biggest damaging storm that 
we've had in 100 years. We lost 700 homes of hardworking Vermonters, 
many of whom had no flood insurance, 260 roads and 30 bridges were 
impassable, 13 communities were entirely cut off.
  The good news was that the Vermont response is extraordinary. People 
came together. They started a school on the town green in Pittsfield 
when they were unable to go north or south because the road was cut 
off. Then when the main artery was reopened so school buses could pass 
but they couldn't get out on their road, they got their chainsaws out 
and cut a half-mile path through the woods so the kids could get to 
school. That's the kind of spirit that we find in our districts, and 
I'm very proud of Vermont, and all of our colleagues are as well.
  Mr. Speaker, I also want to express a statement of gratitude. I've 
had the opportunity to visit with Mr. Rogers. I've had the opportunity 
to visit with Mr. Latham, with Mr. Olver, with Mr. Kingston, with Mr. 
Dicks, with Mr. Cantor, where they've given me the opportunity to tell 
them the specific story of Vermont and hear my request that Vermont be 
treated as Vermonters have treated others.
  I rise in support of this motion to instruct so that this Congress 
can do what it's always done. It's come forward to help people in this 
country who have been on the bad end of a tough storm.

                              {time}  1300

  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Is the gentleman from Washington prepared to 
close?
  Mr. DICKS. Yes, I am prepared to close and to yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  The motion to instruct conferees on the fiscal year 2012 bill will 
encourage the conferees to consider and support several funding items 
as they negotiate the final agreement on this three-pack of bills. 
While I believe that this motion is unnecessary, I am willing to accept 
the gentleman's motion as it does address some important issues that 
will be considered by the conferees. As we move forward, I expect the 
ranking member and myself to work together to negotiate these issues, 
and therefore, today, I can accept this motion.
  First, if approved, this motion would express the House's support for 
funding for the COPS program within the Department of Justice.
  While local law enforcement is primarily a State and local 
responsibility, there is strong bipartisan support for a variety of 
Federal programs that help first responders, including the COPS program 
for State and local police.
  The Commerce/Justice/Science bill has historically included a range 
of programs to strengthen local law enforcement, including Byrne 
grants, State Criminal Alien Assistance, Juvenile Accountability, 
programs to combat violence against women, and COPS programs. COPS has 
not only supported the hiring and rehiring of new officers, but it has 
also allowed local police departments to modernize their technology and 
to address the enforcement and cleanup challenges of the meth epidemic.
  However, we must make these funding decisions very carefully to avoid 
adverse impacts. State and local budgets are often incapable of 
sustaining new first responder positions when Federal money runs out, 
and this risk is especially high given the current economic challenges 
in our local communities.
  Second, this motion encourages the conferees to support funding for 
the Highway Emergency Relief Program, commonly referred to as the ``ER 
Program.''
  This program is authorized, and provides States with funds to repair 
eligible roads damaged by disasters and catastrophic events. This 
program was created to rebuild after disasters and get businesses and 
everyday life back up and running. Unfortunately, in 2011, the total 
amount of eligible disaster-stricken roads exceeded the level of 
available ER funds. It's important that we now provide the appropriate 
level of funding to ensure that States and communities receive the 
legitimate assistance that they are relying upon.
  Mr. Speaker, again, while I don't think this motion is necessary, I 
will accept it, and I look forward to working with both sides on these 
important issues in order to come up with a satisfactory solution.
  Mr. DICKS. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. I want to commend the chairman for his commitment this 
year to return to regular order. I wish we could have finished all 12 
bills, but we at least got six of them done. I just want to thank him 
and his staff and the staff of the minority for working together in a 
collegial way.
  I think it's important for the American people to know that the 
Appropriations Committee here is working together on a bipartisan 
basis. Now, we may have differences on economic theory and everything 
else, but we are committed to getting these bills passed and bringing 
as many as we can to the floor. I hope that, next year, we can start a 
little earlier and get the budget resolution and move these bills. I 
would love to see us in the second session of this Congress get all 12 
bills to the floor where the Members can offer their amendments. I 
think that still should be our goal and objective.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I thank the gentleman for those words.
  He is exactly right. He and I started out this year both new to our 
jobs on the committee; but determined, we agreed with each other and 
committed to each other that we would work together to try to restore 
the regular order that used to prevail on these appropriations bills, 
where we had heated debate but collegial debate, realizing that we have 
to finally come to some agreement on these bills that keep the 
government going. We don't have the luxury of failing. The gentleman 
has been a great partner in this work all year long, and I look forward 
to the rest of the work.
  Now, on this year's bills, the 2012 bills that we're working on now, 
it is my hope and ambition--I know you share this with me--that we 
finish these bills before the end of this calendar year.

[[Page 16666]]


  Mr. DICKS. Absolutely, we are determined to do that. I'm glad to see 
that the other body is actually bringing some of these minibuses to the 
floor and allowing their Members to have a vote. I think we may have 
inspired them.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. That would take some doing.
  Nevertheless, I agree with you. I'm tickled to death to see the 
Senate is finally acting. They only passed one bill, up until 2 days 
ago, of the 12. We've passed six through the House, and have sent them 
over there without a response until now.
  I want to finish the 2012 bills right away so that we can begin work 
in January on the 2013 bills and so that we'll have plenty of time to 
do them one by one, which is the regular order and what we all want to 
see happen. I know that's my goal and ambition, and I know the 
gentleman shares that.
  Mr. DICKS. I concur with what you've said, and I concur with the 
direction we're going in. I just hope we can do a little better and 
finish the job next year. It has been done before. It's not impossible. 
We also have to think about the impact of these bills on the economy 
and the country. That's very important as well.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. We were sidelined a good part of this year 
from our regular business with H.R. 1. We inherited a House that had 
not passed an appropriations bill for fiscal '11, so we spent the first 
5 months or so of the year trying to pass a bill to fund that current 
year, fiscal '11.
  Mr. DICKS. Your point is that that's why it's so important to finish 
these in 2011, before the end of the calendar year, so we don't have to 
waste time next year in finishing the job.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Exactly.
  Nevertheless, it held us up for 5 months and kept us from doing our 
chores for fiscal '12. Then came along the debt ceiling increase 
debate, which took weeks and sucked all of the air out of everything 
else, so we were prevented on the committee from doing our regular 
chores.
  As the gentleman says, we want to finish these bills for fiscal '12 
so that finally, in fiscal '13, we can have a real clean year, taking 
each bill one by one.
  Mr. DICKS. Speaking of a clean year, let's try to get rid of as many 
of those riders as we can, Mr. Chairman. You know it's the right thing 
to do.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. By the way, in closing, we're going to 
conference with the Senate on these three bills this afternoon--as a 
matter of fact, at 5 o'clock. That's the first time that there has been 
a House-Senate appropriations conference in years. So, between us and 
the Senate, we are achieving something almost historic here, and that 
is going to conference with the Senate, which used to be a routine 
thing, and we hope to restore that idea.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to instruct.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________