[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 2]
[House]
[Pages 2596-2648]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             FULL-YEAR CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2011

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 92 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, 
H.R. 1.

                              {time}  2213


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 1) making appropriations for the Department of Defense 
and the other departments and agencies of the Government for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes, with Mr. 
Hastings of Washington (Acting Chair) in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, 
amendment No. 8, printed in the Congressional Record, offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) had been disposed of and the bill 
had been read through page 359, line 22.


                 Amendment No. 377 Offered by Mr. Flake

  Mr. FLAKE. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used for the construction of an ethanol blender pump or an 
     ethanol storage facility.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each 
will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, the taxpayers have subsidized ethanol for 
far too long. This amendment will simply bring that slowly to a stop.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, this amendment clearly limits consumer 
choice, and is yet another attack on our Nation's progress to try and 
achieve energy security. The technology that he is trying to prohibit 
basically would allow individuals to have a choice as to whether, what 
percentage plan they would want, whether E-10, E-30, E-50 or E-85, 
whatever suits their best needs, their affordability and their 
performance and gas mileage.
  It would actually make us much more dependent long term on foreign 
oil because you are going to limit the choices that are there. And 
without the blender pumps that he wants to prohibit, most Americans are 
left with just one option, and that's the E-10.

[[Page 2597]]

  If we continue to limit the amount of U.S.-produced ethanol we can 
use in our vehicles, we will be continuing to be beholden to foreign 
sources of energy, and we will be importing more oil every year.
  I urge my colleagues to vote against this.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, this is not a choice at all. It's a mandate. 
That's why we've got to end it. It's been a boondoggle for 30 years. It 
remains so. Let's vote for this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief. This is limiting 
consumer choice; it's going to increase our dependence on foreign oil.
  I would again ask my colleagues to vote against this ill-founded 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will 
be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 367 Offered by Mr. Flake

  Mr. FLAKE. I have an amendment at the desk, No. 367.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following new section:
       Sec. __. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act may be used to pay the salaries and 
     expenses of personnel of the Department of Agriculture to 
     provide any benefit described in section 1001D(b)(1)(c) of 
     the Food Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308-3a(b)(1)(C) to a 
     person or legal entity if the average adjusted gross income 
     of the person or legal entity exceeds $250,000.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Arizona and a Member opposed each will control 
3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. FLAKE. This amendment would be to save the taxpayers roughly 
$30.5 million by preventing the funding of Radio and TV Marti.
  I have decided to withdraw this amendment in the interest of time and 
also to work on it in committee with the gentleman from Florida. So we 
will enter into a colloquy for just 1 minute and go from there.
  I happen to feel that we have spent hundreds of millions of dollars 
on Radio and TV Marti over the past 20, 25 years. TV Marti is seen by 
very few. The gentleman from Florida has a different view. We have 
agreed to scuttle the debate here and take it up in committee.
  I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I thank the gentleman from Arizona.
  We do have a disagreement here, as I think most of us know. I 
obviously will continue to work on this issue.
  Mr. DICKS. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FLAKE. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. Did the gentleman from Arizona say he was going to 
withdraw his amendment on Marti?
  Mr. FLAKE. Yes.
  Mr. DICKS. I was just curious to hear that. Thank you.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Again I will continue to work on this issue. 
Obviously the issue of freedom is something that I think is cherished 
by this House. There is a history of supporting freedom, and I know we 
will continue to support freedom. But we will have ample opportunity to 
debate this and discuss this and other opportunities.
  Mr. FLAKE. I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.


                Amendment No. 166 Offered by Mr. Guinta.

  Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available for this Act may 
     be used to enter into, after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, a Government contract that requires a project labor 
     agreement.

                              {time}  2220

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Guinta) and a Member 
opposed each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment, a 
proposed ban on Project Labor Agreements, also known as PLAs.
  President Obama signed an Executive order nearly 2 years ago imposing 
PLAs on Federal construction projects. A PLA mandates that whenever the 
government pays for a project, union workers must be hired for the job. 
This stifles competition and inflates the project's cost by steering 
scarce tax dollars straight into directly union pockets. The previous 
administration banned PLAs. And according to a study cited by the Cato 
Institute, the ban saved taxpayers as much as $2.6 billion in 2008 
alone.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a spending reduction bill focused on saving 
taxpayer dollars to the tune of $2.6 billion annually. My amendment 
simply states no government money can be used to pay for any project 
that requires a PLA. This solves a significant problem. This is not 
against our unions. It is about providing equal footing between union 
and nonunion contractors.
  Considering the massive debt and deficit we are now struggling under, 
I feel we can't afford at this point to waste more taxpayer dollars. My 
goal here is to get more effective and efficient government. This 
amendment creates a level playing field that encourages fair and open 
competition for Federal construction contracts funded by this bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Connecticut is recognized for 
3 minutes.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield myself 1 minute.
  This amendment prohibits use of funds in this act for any government 
contract that includes a Project Labor Agreement. The amendment is 
nothing more than another example of a union-busting Republican agenda.
  Project Labor Agreements contribute to the economy and efficiency of 
Federal construction projects, help keep them on time and on budget. 
They bring all the contractors and subcontractors to agree to a 
standard set of conditions from the beginning of the project. And 
despite all the rhetoric on the other side that PLAs increase the cost 
of construction projects, there is no evidence for that.
  Two years ago, the Economic Policy Institute reviewed a series of 
studies for and against prevailing wage laws and concluded that there 
was no adverse impact on government contract costs.
  Mr. Chairman, this is nothing else but a distraction. PLAs are 
nothing new. They have been used on some of the most famous 
consequential construction projects in our history: the Hoover dam 
bypass bridge and the projects under the Tennessee Valley Authority 
just to name a few.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chair, I would add that currently in New Hampshire, 
my home State, we have a Job Corps center that is slated to be built, 
$35 million project, which is going to help up to 500 youth annually in 
the State of New Hampshire. The PLA is exactly what is stopping this 
project from occurring. We would like to not only expand the 
opportunity here in New Hampshire but across the country to get these 
projects moved forward, do them in a fair and equitable way.
  And I also note that our friends from the Associated Builders and 
Contractors support this amendment, the U.S.

[[Page 2598]]

Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Businesses, 
as well as the National Black Chamber of Commerce.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Miller).
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding, and I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  Contrary to what the author of the amendment has said, there is no 
requirement in a PLA that you have only union contractors at that. This 
is a time when you come together pre-project to decide how this project 
shall be developed, whether there will be a training project involved 
in this, whether there will be local hires, whether there will be 
participation by minority and women subcontractors and others on this.
  In my area, some of the largest energy projects in the Nation are 
being built by worldwide companies and being built with Project Labor 
Agreements. In our cities Project Labor Agreements are used, and the 
record continues over and over again, on time, done right the first 
time, and it's a mix of contractors that get accepted.
  There is nothing in the Executive order that requires union 
contractors. There is nothing in the Executive order that requires a 
PLA. I know, because I tried to get a few, and the administration 
didn't go there.
  So let's not overstate the case here. It encourages them. But the 
fact is PLAs have worked both on public projects and on private 
projects very, very well.
  Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chairman, I would simply reiterate that the study 
pointing to 2008 shows the ban on PLAs saved taxpayers $2.6 billion. 
Let's allow all small business owners throughout our country to go 
after these types of projects. It's fair and it's equitable.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Andrews).
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment 
because I believe it's based upon two false premises. The first is that 
evidence shows that contracts performed under PLAs are not as 
efficient. The data simply don't exist that show that. And second is 
the implication that this is somehow a politically connected decision 
by governments to reward building trades unions.
  First of all, it doesn't have to be a union contractor. And second, 
and I think most importantly, all kinds of nongovernmental users use 
PLAs: the Disney Corporation, Inland Steel, ARCO, Boeing, Harvard 
University. These are all institutions and companies that use PLAs 
because they believe they are a good, sound business judgment.
  Why should the Federal Government of the United States be precluded 
from exercising a similar sound business judgment? This is a poorly 
thought-out amendment, and the right vote is ``no.''
  Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chairman, I finally reiterate this proposal is a 
spending reduction bill to the tune of approximately $2.6 billion 
annually in savings. It allows our small business owners and 
subcontractors to bid on projects across our Nation, get them back to 
work. I would ask my colleagues to vote in favor of the Guinta 
amendment.
  Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to the Guinta 
Amendment (#166), which prohibits the government from entering into any 
contract that requires a project labor agreement (PLA). I oppose the 
amendment because prohibiting the use of PLA's cannot assure savings to 
the taxpayers.
  Project labor agreements, also known as Community Workforce 
Agreements are not new and contain several benefits: PLA's normally 
include a local hire component; PLA's establish and set a fair wage; 
PLA's avoid labor disputes and construction delays; under PLA's, 
workers are trained to perform required work safely and correctly.
  Mister Chair, a project labor agreement establishes the terms, 
conditions, and safety standards for workers on construction projects. 
One of the major advantages of a PLA is that because it is an agreement 
negotiated prior to construction, there is minimal, if any, disruption 
in the construction schedule arising from contract disputes. This saves 
taxpayers money and at the same time providing jobs offering steady 
employment at livable wages to local communities where the need is 
greatest.
  PLA's establish rigorous safety standards that save time and save 
lives. There is absolutely no evidence that PLA's increase the cost of 
construction projects; instead properly trained workers improve product 
quality which saves taxpayers money.
  Finally, Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote against the Guinta 
amendment.
  Mr. GUINTA. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Guinta).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New 
Hampshire will be postponed.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DICKS. I yield to the gentleman from Vermont.
  Mr. WELCH. I thank the gentleman from Washington.
  I stand here today to discuss the Yellow Ribbon Program, which is 
critical in my home State of Vermont, but it's critical in every State 
that has returning soldiers from Afghanistan and Iraq.
  In Vermont, we have recently welcomed home 1,500 National Guard men 
and women from a year-long deployment in Afghanistan. The Yellow Ribbon 
Program, as you know, Mr. Ranking Member, helps deploying and 
redeploying National Guard and Reserve members and their families when 
they get home.
  Prior to deployment, they educate members and their families in 
affected communities on what to expect while their loved ones are gone. 
After deployment, they focus on reconnecting members and their families 
with service providers such as TRICARE, the Department of Veterans 
Affairs and Judge Advocate Generals to ensure a clear understanding of 
the benefits they are entitled to and they need. In addition, combat 
stress and transition and how members and their families can address 
these issues are integral to the post-deployment phase.
  In Vermont, we have the fourth highest per capita participation rate 
in the Nation in the National Guard. These are very valuable services 
that get to the heart of supporting our troops and their families. I 
hope to work with the subcommittee to ensure that any unmet needs of 
this program are addressed as expeditiously as possible.
  Mr. DICKS. I thank the gentleman from Vermont.
  I yield to the chairman of the Defense Subcommittee, our good friend, 
Mr. Young.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time, I will 
simply say we support this program. The former chairman, Mr. Dicks, 
supports it. The present chairman, Mr. Young, supports it.
  The committee added additional funding for the program. Florida 
National Guard had an extremely large return home from the 53rd Combat 
Brigade Team. We understand the importance of the program. We support 
what the gentleman is asking and will continue to work with the 
gentleman.

                              {time}  2230

  Mr. DICKS. I thank the chairman.
  I agree that the Yellow Ribbon Program has been a top priority of the 
subcommittee. We have worked tirelessly to ensure our brave men and 
women and their families are taken care of when they are serving the 
Nation. I too will work with the gentleman from Vermont and the 
gentleman from Florida to ensure the needs of our troops and their 
families are met.
  I yield back the balance of my time.


                 Amendment No. 495 Offered by Mr. Hall

  Mr. HALL. I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:


[[Page 2599]]

       At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the 
     following new section:
       Sec. 4002. ``None of the funds made available by this act 
     may be used to implement, establish, or create a NOAA Climate 
     Service (NCS) as described in the `Draft NOAA Climate Service 
     Strategic Vision and Framework' published at 75 Fed. Reg. 
     57739 (September 22, 2010) and updated on 12/20/2010.''

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Texas and a Member opposed each will control 3 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. HALL. My amendment would prohibit the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, as we call them, from creating or 
implementing a National Climate Service. The release of the President's 
FY 2012 budget request this week included a significant reorganization 
of NOAA, the largest since it became an agency in 1970. This is an 
action that they took, ignoring congressional requests to cease and 
desist. The new line office will take vital resources from the Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Research Office, essentially gutting fundamental 
research at NOAA and shifting the main focus of the agency to climate. 
This shift threatens to harm important NOAA activities, such as helping 
with the restoration of the Gulf of Mexico to pre-spill conditions.
  These present day concerns require attention and focus. As it is, 
this continuing resolution is going to force NOAA to make some official 
and very difficult decisions with respect to priorities. As a matter of 
policy, NOAA has not even requested funding for the Climate Service in 
FY 2011. However, we are aware that implementation of the Climate 
Service is already underway in the form of significant planning, 
transitioning, and reorganization of resources. My amendment would 
ensure that NOAA does not move forward with this reorganization without 
congressional consideration and approval, specifically from the 
authorizing as well as the appropriating committees.
  My amendment does not cut NOAA's budget and is not an attempt to 
hinder the agency from providing useful and authoritative information 
but, rather, to communicate congressional priorities when it comes to 
public safety and economic prosperity. And they're not above complying 
with congressional requests. I urge Members to support the amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. One, this is a budget-neutral reorganization of NOAA. 
Two, a third of our gross domestic product requires accurate 
information in terms of climate and weather conditions. And the third 
and most important point, this reorganization, this Climate Service 
would allow the private sector to get data that NOAA is already 
collecting and use it to better forecast for their activities.
  I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the great State 
of California, the ranking member on the Agriculture Subcommittee, Mr. 
Farr.
  Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition.
  If any of you live in coastal communities, you want to oppose this 
bill. Ocean acidification is a real threat to this Nation. Climate 
change is happening, and the ocean is where climate is born. The coast 
of California is seriously considering all of what the rising oceans 
will do to the economic value of the most valuable coastal property in 
the United States.
  So you don't want to take out the partner in working with State and 
local governments on these issues. If tourism is in your community, if 
fishing is in your community and, in fact, educational institutions. 
Yesterday, hundreds of high school students from all over the United 
States were here working, showing their science projects on ocean 
acidification. They won awards from government entities and nonprofit 
entities. Their future is about studying these issues. This is the kind 
of program that we want to invest in. Smart technology, smart energy, 
that is the way we are going to handle this problem in the future. 
Those are jobs.
  ``No'' on this amendment.
  Mr. HALL. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Broun.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank the chairman.
  This is a half-baked idea. The chairman and I have written NOAA over 
and over again trying to get information. It has not come before our 
Science Committee. It has not been vetted. It may be a good idea; it 
may not be.
  I ask that Members of this body vote ``yes'' so that the Science, 
Space, and Technology Committee can look at this issue, can talk to 
NOAA, can find out all about it. It's not going to prevent people from 
getting climate information or weather information. We should not 
launch out into something when we don't know what the consequences, or 
even what may be bad consequences, of this might be.
  So we need to support this amendment. Please vote ``yes'' so that the 
Science Committee can come and totally vet it, find out what NOAA's 
doing, as we should. We have the jurisdiction in the Science, Space, 
and Technology Committee, so it's absolutely important for us to do 
this without NOAA just launching off on its own.
  Mr. FATTAH. How much time do I have left?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. FATTAH. Thank you.
  This is a budget-neutral reorganization that will allow private 
business to get data that NOAA has already collected. That's all it is. 
It's critically important information for those businesses. And a third 
of our gross domestic product is reliant on good information about 
climate so that they can have it. It's transparency, it makes sense, 
and it's budget neutral.
  Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chair, I respect the gentleman's 
interest in the issues before NOAA.
  But I will have to oppose this effort.
  Representative Hall's amendment sends the wrong message about the 
need to meet the growing demands of our nation's businesses and 
communities for reliable and relevant climate information.
  Some of us might disagree on the extent climate change is taking 
place.
  But to discourage research is a big mistake.
  Regardless of your opinion, timely and relevant climate information 
benefits communities, local governments, and businesses.
  A significant portion of the success of the U.S. economy depends on 
accurate weather and climate information.
  Local governments in my home region of San Diego are planning for 
future trends or changes to sea levels--and NOAA' s research is 
critical to their work.
  This amendment also sets poor precedent and policy.
  NOAA is implementing an internal, budget-neutral organizational 
structure with the Climate Service office.
  Using a budget CR to restructure an agency without input or 
sufficient debate is questionable.
  Major restructuring efforts should be well thought out and involve 
study.
  Let the scientists and the researchers decide what's worthy of their 
attention.
  I ask my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  Mr. FATTAH. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will 
be postponed.


               Amendment No. 233 Offered by Mr. Kucinich

  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by division A of 
     this Act may be used for the missile defense program of the 
     Department of Defense.


[[Page 2600]]


  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) and a Member opposed each 
will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would prohibit funds 
authorized in H.R. 1 to be used for the missile defense program at the 
Department of Defense. The amendment does not cut overall defense 
spending but merely places a limitation on spending on the hapless and 
hopeless missile defense system.
  According to the Congressional Research Service, the U.S. has spent 
over $150 billion on ballistic missile defense since 1985, and there is 
no working, reliable missile defense system to show for all that 
investment. H.R. 1 dedicates approximately $10 billion more for 
ballistic missile defense.
  Some have argued that such systems are necessary for national 
security. In fact, no missile defense system under development has ever 
passed an unrigged test. According to experts at CRS, the performance 
in wartime for our newest capabilities is unknown. In December of last 
year, our ground-based interceptors known as GMDs failed the test 
again, a test that cost $100 million.
  According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, the United States 
``is no closer today to being able to effectively defend against long-
range ballistic missiles than it was 25 years ago.'' Missile defense 
systems are unproven and unworkable. They are worthless as national 
security.
  But even though we have never in 25 years created a missile defense 
system that worked, our misguided commitment to spending billions on 
this failed program is having a counterproductive effort with other 
countries. Both the Bush administration and the Obama administration 
have mistakenly argued and insisted that the ballistic missile defense 
system is solely for deterrence and protection against potential future 
threats. This argument contradicts logic. Missile defense concepts are 
perceived by both our foes and allies as defensive threats. If we 
increase our arsenal, we encourage other countries to increase theirs.
  I want to conclude by saying that when will Congress act 
appropriately in response to the record of failure in missile defense? 
Shouldn't we apply the same standard to missile defense as we apply to 
our schools and No Child Left Behind? If you can't pass the test, then 
you lose your funding.

                              {time}  2240

  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 3 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, the Kucinich amendment totally 
ignores the reality of the real threat against our troops, our allies 
and our deployed forces. It basically destroys our missile system. And 
as we know, the enemies and the potential enemies have continued to 
develop their offensive missiles. We just cannot do this. This is one 
of those amendments you just can't do.
  I would like to yield at this time 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Turner).
  Mr. TURNER. This amendment is so 1980s. It's when Ronald Reagan 
proposed STAR Wars and the Democrats were opposed, and we're well past 
that. Missile defense now has total bipartisan support. President 
Clinton pursued it, President Obama pursued it and both of the 
Presidents Bush pursued it. We know two things--the threat is real, and 
the system works. The gentleman from Ohio said this hasn't passed 100 
tests. Well, we haven't funded 100 tests. It is absolutely a system 
that works and is needed.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KUCINICH. Could I ask the Chair how much time remains.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 1 minute remaining.
  Mr. KUCINICH. I would just like to say in response to my friends that 
my amendment will correct a bipartisan error and, second, that you 
can't destroy a missile system that doesn't work.
  I will just conclude by saying that Philip Coyle, a former Assistant 
Secretary of Defense, has said the national missile defense system has 
become a theology in the United States, not a technology. We may have 
faith that it works, but we are taught that we have to justify our 
faith by good works. They don't have any good works connected to this.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, we're talking about the Patriot 
missile system, we're talking about the Aegis missile system, and we're 
talking the Arrow system that we cooperate with Israel for their 
protection. We're talking about basic defense of our troops in the 
field who are in harm's way anyway. You just can't do this.
  Mr. Kucinich is my friend. He is not always right. He is not always 
wrong, but he is wrong tonight. And this is just not something that we 
can tolerate. Our military would never stand for this. We're not going 
to approve this amendment, Mr. Chairman.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
  The amendment was rejected.


                  Amendment No. 141 Offered by Ms. Lee

  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise as the designee of the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Stark) to offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. (a) None of the funds made available by division A 
     of this Act for any account of the Department of Defense 
     (other than accounts listed in subsection (b)) may be used in 
     excess of the amount made available for such account for 
     fiscal year 2008.
       (b) The accounts exempted pursuant to this subsection are 
     the following accounts in division A:
       (1) Military personnel, reserve personnel, and National 
     Guard personnel accounts of the Department of Defense.
       (2) The Defense Health Program account.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) and a Member opposed 
each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment today along with Mr. 
Stark, Ms. Woolsey, Ms. Loretta Sanchez, Mr. Nadler and Mr. Polis.
  Our amendment would reduce appropriations for the Department of 
Defense in this bill to fiscal year 2008 levels. If you want to cut 
domestic spending to 2008 levels, you can't exempt defense.
  I want to thank Representative Stark for this amendment and for his 
leadership in promoting an end to the era of unlimited spending and no 
accountability at the Pentagon. Unfortunately, this week my colleagues 
on the other side of the aisle are proposing an economic blueprint that 
would slash Federal investment in our Nation's infrastructure, 
education system, health care and programs to meet basic human needs 
and to create jobs. These cuts, trumpeted as a means of long-term 
deficit reduction, come at a time of severe economic distress for 
American families.
  Earlier this year, the House passed a resolution to reduce non-
security domestic spending to 2008 levels. This amendment gives us a 
chance to put our money where our mouths are. It simply says that 
defense spending should be reduced to 2008 levels. If we are serious 
about getting our fiscal house in order, then we need to apply the same 
rules, mind you, to defense as non-defense discretionary spending.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 3 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, this year we have already done 
something unusual. We have reduced the defense budget by $14.8 billion 
already in this bill. To reduce the defense

[[Page 2601]]

funding to 2008 levels would cut over $50 billion from the DOD--
severely impacting both our troops on the ground and jeopardizing 
national security.
  Now, if you want to reduce or cancel training for our troops that are 
coming home from the war, then you would vote for this amendment. If 
you want to cancel Navy training exercises, then you would vote for it. 
If you want to reduce Air Force flight training hours, you would vote 
for this. If you want to delay or cancel maintenance of aircraft, ships 
and vehicles, then you would vote for this. If you want to delay 
important safety and quality-of-life repairs to facilities and 
barracks, then you would vote for this.
  But I don't support any of that. And I don't think most of our 
colleagues support any of that. And a time of war is not the time to be 
withdrawing from our national defense capability, the readiness and 
security of our Nation.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Woolsey).
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I have to express my absolute bafflement 
at the debate we've been having all week in this Chamber.
  My colleagues on the other side of the aisle wax on and on about how 
we have to restore fiscal discipline and cut all kinds of very 
necessary programs to the bone. Yet they won't even bring to our debate 
one of the most costly expenses we have in this country, and that's 
Afghanistan. This war in Afghanistan has cost us nearly 1,500 American 
lives and the taxpayers a staggering $379 billion and counting.
  Yet during this debate, the majority, which is enthusiastic in its 
support for more and more Afghanistan war spending, wants to eliminate 
a homeless veterans initiative. That's their approach. Send our brave 
men and women halfway around the world to be chewed up and traumatized, 
then pull the plug on the support they need when they get home. That's 
what they call supporting the troops.
  We need to cut that expense.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, can I inquire as to how much time 
I have remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 1\3/4\ minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to 
the former chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Washington 
(Mr. Dicks).
  Mr. DICKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  I want to rise in strong opposition to this amendment. First of all, 
working together on a bipartisan basis for the first time, we cut 
nearly $15 billion from the Obama budget request in 2011 for defense, 
and we did it on a very careful basis.
  This amendment would add another $56 billion to that cut. It would do 
damage to all of our acquisition programs. It would threaten the people 
in Iraq and Afghanistan and our efforts to conduct the global war on 
terrorism. So, again, I hope that on a very strong bipartisan basis we 
can reject this amendment.

                              {time}  2250

  Ms. LEE. How much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California has 30 seconds 
remaining.
  Ms. LEE. Let me just say in closing that the bipartisan sustainable 
defense task force report released last year identified at least $1 
trillion in cuts over the next 10 years without sacrificing our 
strategic capabilities.
  According to the GAO, major weapons programs have suffered from $300 
billion in cost overruns, and in fact, it's time to end this war in 
Afghanistan. These wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are costing the 
taxpayers $1 trillion. We know al Qaeda is not in Afghanistan, and we 
need to put our money where our mouth is. Cut the defense budget the 
same way we're talking about cutting non-discretionary.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California 
will be postponed.


         Amendment No. 109 Offered by Mr. Griffith of Virginia

  Mr. GRIFFITH of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act to 
     the Environmental Protection Agency, the Corps of Engineers, 
     or the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 
     may be used to carry out, implement, administer, or enforce 
     any policy or procedure set forth in--
       (1) the memorandum issued by the Environmental Protection 
     Agency and Department of the Army entitled ``Enhanced Surface 
     Coal Mining Pending Permit Coordination Procedures'', dated 
     June 11, 2009; or
       (2) the guidance (or any revised version thereof) issued by 
     the Environmental Protection Agency entitled ``Improving EPA 
     Review of Appalachian Surface Coal Mining Operations under 
     the Clean Water Act, National Environmental Policy Act, and 
     the Environmental Justice Executive Order'', dated April 1, 
     2010.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Griffith) and a Member opposed 
each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. GRIFFITH of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, amendment 109 is a timeout on 
the EPA. The EPA and its guidelines for the water quality coming out of 
mines issued on April 1, 2010, came up with a conductivity test, a test 
which did not go through the Administrative Procedures Act, a test 
which is relying on science which is not yet fully accounted for or 
reliable. In fact, in the document, in 31 pages, they use words like 
``expect'' and ``anticipate'' what the science will be on 27 of those 
31 pages.
  Mr. Chairman, President Johnson had a war on poverty. There are some 
in my district and in Appalachia who believe that President Obama and 
his EPA have a war for poverty in the Appalachian region.
  That conductivity test is so severe that the distilled water would 
pass, the Deer Park would pass, the Fiji is just barely going to make 
it outside of the zone of question, but Evian water that you purchase 
to drink would not pass. Perrier water that you purchase to drink would 
not pass. It's not good enough. And Pellegrino is not good enough 
either.
  There is a bumper sticker that is very popular now in my district. It 
says if you think coal is ugly, wait until you see poverty. There are 
some who believe--and I think that there are some in Washington who 
think--that southwest Virginia and other parts of Appalachia should 
just be a giant park for rich folks to visit, and that those of us who 
live there, the folks in Washington think, ought to be happy to have 
the jobs changing the sheets for the rich folks.
  Ladies and gentlemen, that is not good enough and this amendment 
should pass, and we should put a stop to this regulation.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GRIFFITH of Virginia. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I want to congratulate the gentleman. This 
amendment is well-deserved, and it's exactly the right thing to do. I 
appreciate the gentleman taking up the fight to save the jobs in 
Appalachia--in Virginia and Kentucky, West Virginia, Ohio, and the 
other States where coal is mined. This administration declared war on 
coal when they took office and they're trying to carry it out. I 
appreciate the gentleman carrying the fight.
  Mr. GRIFFITH of Virginia. Thank you.
  I reserve the remainder of my time, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. MORAN. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 3 
minutes.

[[Page 2602]]


  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, this is the second of three amendments 
designed to kill regulation of mountaintop mining. The amendment would 
prevent EPA from working with other Federal agencies and mining 
companies to ensure that mountaintop mining is carried out in a manner 
that protects public health, the environment, and the economy using the 
best available science.
  Mountaintop surface mining removes entire mountaintops to access the 
coal underneath but then deposits toxic mining waste in nearby streams. 
Practices not carried out carefully and responsibly can be devastating 
to the environment and to local economies.
  There's been longtime uncertainty regarding what laws applied, 
uncertainty about which Federal agencies to work with, and uncertainty 
about potential liability. This uncertainty was eliminated when 
Interior, EPA, and the Corps of Engineers agreed to work with mining 
companies and implement a common procedure for reviewing permits. And 
it was with the goal of--and I quote--to strengthen the Appalachian 
regional economy and to lay out common procedures on mountaintop 
mining.
  This memorandum of understanding brought clarity for all the 
parties--States, mining companies, environmentalists, and Federal 
agencies--so that mining could move forward. But what we have here is 
an effort at good government punished by legislators with an ax to 
grind. Agencies are punished for not working together. Then when they 
do, we punish them for working together.
  Permit reviews will just take longer and the process will be more 
confusing to companies because this amendment won't change the law. 
This amendment could extend the mining company's permit process for 
years and cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars in delays. That's 
why this amendment should be defeated.
  I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. GRIFFITH of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have left?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 30 seconds remaining.
  Mr. GRIFFITH of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, this amendment will not bring 
jobs. It will take our $60,000-a-year-plus jobs and give us either 
unemployment or part-time jobs at minimum wage, and what's interesting 
is, the data that we do have shows that there's a greater biodiversity 
after mountaintop mining than there was before.
  I reserve the remainder of my time.
  Mr. MORAN. How much time do I have remaining, Mr. Chairman?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 30 seconds remaining.
  Mr. MORAN. Well, the point is we have three agencies responsible for 
this permitting function. They weren't necessarily working together. 
Now, they're working together. We have a memorandum of understanding. 
They know that their goal is to strengthen the Appalachian regional 
economy, and to work with all the parties to bring them together. 
That's what memorandum of understanding says.
  This amendment eliminates all the progress that has been achieved. 
They were attempting to promote good government and a good relationship 
with the mining companies. It's not going to happen. If this amendment 
goes through, this amendment kills that memorandum of understanding. 
The law remains, but they can't cooperate now if this amendment was to 
pass.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. GRIFFITH of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, again, this, if not passed, 
will bring us unemployment, not a good economy. Thank you.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Griffith).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 548 Offered by Mr. Jones

  Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to develop or approve a new limited access privilege 
     program (as that term is used in section 303A the Magnuson-
     Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1853a) for any fishery under the jurisdiction of the South 
     Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic, New England, or Gulf of Mexico 
     Fishery Management Council.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) and a Member 
opposed each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina.
  Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prohibit the Federal 
Government from spending millions of taxpayers dollars expanding job-
destroying catch shares programs in fisheries along the Atlantic 
seaboard and the Gulf of Mexico.
  Mr. Chairman, I have two cosponsors of this legislation. I yield 1 
minute to Mr. Pallone from New Jersey.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, the fishing industry is a crucial part of 
our Nation's economy, and catch shares pose a serious threat to the 
vitality of the fishing industry. Catch shares is a system where 
fishermen have to buy the right to fish, and only those who buy this 
right are given the opportunity to catch a portion of fish. I don't 
believe any fisherman should have to buy the right to go fishing.

                              {time}  2300

  What is perhaps most concerning is NOAA's use of important 
cooperative research and monitoring funds in a carrot-and-stick 
operation that pressures regional fisheries management councils to 
adopt catch share programs.
  Mr. Jones' amendment would simply prevent NOAA from spending funds to 
push another restrictive management system before they get the current 
system right. Despite our calls on NOAA to make programs that gather 
scientific data and keep fisheries open their priority, NOAA has failed 
to listen. And that is why I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment by Mr. Jones.
  Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to yield 1 minute 
to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), also a cosponsor of 
this amendment.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, in the Magnuson Act renewal 
of 2006, we set up a procedure whereby there can be a referendum in 
each fishery to do the equivalent of catch shares. NOAA's getting 
around that. There are some places I'm told where people like that.
  The procedure under the Magnuson Act whereby they can, by referendum, 
impose that remains available but it would require the approval of the 
men and women in the fishery. In much of the east coast, people don't 
like that. And what NOAA is doing is going around that referendum 
requirement by a new thing which they call catch shares. They can do 
the equivalent in another way.
  I am particularly puzzled to have in the Obama administration people 
tell us, Well, it's okay. What it does, of course, is to lead to 
consolidation. They say it's the same amount of income, but it goes to 
a small number of larger entities, and the smaller individuals are 
frozen out. And in the area that I represent, the fishing industry 
doesn't want it.
  So what I hope we would do is--and the gentleman's amendment does not 
affect that part of the Magnuson Act that would allow referenda, so 
that when the fishery, where the fishermen like it, they can get a 
system of quotas, and they can get a system of the transferable quotas. 
And that's what's in the Magnuson Act, transferable quotas with a 
referendum because they couldn't--NOAA was insisting on imposing that 
over the objection of fishermen. They've come up with a new

[[Page 2603]]

system called catch shares. That's what we're banning. We leave the 
referendum process in place.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, these programs put together by the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are designed to replenish 
diminishing fish stocks. They assign shares to individuals, 
cooperatives, other fishing communities, because what we have seen that 
has resulted in depleted fish stocks and overfishing is a race to fish 
where the concern is that the stock is being depleted. And so they run 
out to get what's left.
  NOAA is trying to intervene and equitably divide up what's left, what 
we scientifically understand is left, and try to cooperate.
  Now, I can understand there are many fishing communities that don't 
want NOAA's intervention. But NOAA has been successful in ensuring 
sustainable fisheries and preventing overfishing and creating more 
stable and lucrative fishing jobs in communities from Alaska to 
Florida. And they bring a lot of economic and biological benefits. They 
eliminate what many think are dangerous races to fish, or what are 
called ``derby'' conditions, and they improve safety for fishermen.
  NOAA seems to know what they're doing. Where they've done it, it's 
been successful. I think we should look to the experts and understand 
that we've got to have greater sustainability of our fishing stock.
  How much time do I have at this point, Mr. Chairman?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia has 1\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. MORAN. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Farr).
  Mr. FARR. Thank you for yielding.
  I represent a lot of fishermen in the west coast in California and up 
the west coast all the way up to Alaska. The catch share program has 
worked very well.
  The reason you have it is, one, you only have two systems in 
fishing--you have a season and you have a limit or quota. The pounding 
of all of the boats going at the same time regardless of weather is a 
very risky thing. Now we've given that up to share. We give shares to 
boats.
  So what happens if you're a small fisherman in a small boat, you've 
got a share. You've got your right. You can go out when you want to. 
Not just when the weather is really foul and may be dangerous. People 
like this. It's sustainable. They can get loans on their boats. They 
know they've got all kinds of certainty that they've never had before.
  To wipe this out, it may be uncomfortable in some other communities, 
but if you'd much rather direct it, if you want to get mad, do it to 
those communities because wiping it out this way, you're going to 
really hurt where it works. And where it works, it works really well. 
So please oppose this amendment.
  Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, in closing, I must say this is an east coast 
issue. That's why you have Mr. Pallone and Mr. Frank and myself 
speaking.
  And with that, the fishermen on the east coast need fairness from 
their government, and this amendment will help give fairness to the 
commercial and recreational fishermen on the east coast of America.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MORAN. Well, Mr. Chairman, I can understand where my very good 
friends are coming from. They represent a lot of professional and very 
responsible fishermen. And I know they know what they're talking about. 
On the other hand, NOAA does, too.
  And NOAA has been successful. They have been successful from Alaska 
to Florida in allocating assigned limits to various fishing entities 
that were at serious risk of losing their fishing stock.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MORAN. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. When you get from Alaska to Florida, 
don't you have to pass Massachusetts, New Jersey, and North Carolina? 
Because the three of us think it's a terrible idea.
  Mr. MORAN. Reclaiming my time, the point is, NOAA's objective is to 
sustain the fish supply so that these fishermen will continue to have 
jobs--not just now but in the future and for their children and 
grandchildren. That's NOAA's objective. That's why I think we should 
reject the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from North 
Carolina will be postponed.


              Amendment No. 47 Offered by Mr. Luetkemeyer

  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used for the study of the Missouri River Projects 
     authorized in section 108 of the Energy and Water Development 
     and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009 (division C of 
     Public Law 111-8).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer) and a Member 
opposed each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  My amendment would eliminate funding for the Missouri River 
Authorized Purposes Study, also known as MRAPS.
  This $25 million study was originally earmarked under the guise of a 
review of the 1944 Flood Control Act and relevant court rulings to 
determine if current authorized project purposes are contemporary.
  MRAPS comes on the heels of another comprehensive $35 million, 17-
year study completed in 2004 that showed that the current authorized 
purposes are appropriate and do not need to be altered.
  For river communities, few issues are as important as water supply, 
power, and navigation. This study puts in jeopardy the flow of the 
lower Missouri and Mississippi Rivers, which would have devastating 
consequences for navigation and transportation along those rivers and 
result in barriers for agriculture, waterways operations, and every 
product that depends on the Missouri and the Mississippi Rivers to get 
to market.
  MRAPS is duplicative and wasteful of taxpayer dollars. We've already 
spent $35 million to examine the Missouri River Master Manual. After 17 
years, hundreds of public meetings, and countless lawsuits, the U.S. 
Army Corps of Engineers concluded that the current uses of the river 
are appropriate.
  It is careless and irresponsible to conduct another multiyear, 
multimillion dollar study at taxpayers' expense, particularly given the 
dire state of our Nation's economy.

                              {time}  2310

  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. 
Hartzler).
  Mrs. HARTZLER. Mr. Chairman, I wholeheartedly support this amendment, 
which saves taxpayers from funding a duplicate study which is 
unnecessary, wasteful, and ill-advised.
  The Corps of Engineers just completed a 15-year study at a cost of 
$35 million. The Missouri River Master Water Control Manual has been 
published, and businesses, municipalities and utilities have been 
planning accordingly. There is no need to restudy the issue of the 
Missouri River again at an additional cost of $25 million.
  Farmers, businesses and cities in Missouri's Fourth Congressional 
District support this amendment, and I

[[Page 2604]]

urge my colleagues to support this commonsense proposal.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PASTOR of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 3 minutes.
  Mr. PASTOR of Arizona. To my colleague from Missouri, I would tell 
him that the objective of this amendment has pretty much been 
accomplished. The last funding that occurred for this study was in, I 
think, 2009, which was an earmark. So now that earmarks have been 
eliminated in the CR and eliminated for the future, you would not have 
that funding as a possibility for this study. Also, the administration 
has not put any money in its budget, so therefore there is no money in 
the budget. So for all practical purposes, the funding for the study is 
not going to continue. So therefore, it's very unlikely that the 
funding level provided in the bill will receive anything more than the 
amount to close the study.
  And I would tell my friend that the reason I oppose it is that this 
language I think may be unnecessary because it may impact the orderly 
termination of the study. And that's why I rise in opposition, because 
I believe since this study, at least in my opinion, has been 
terminated, that we at least go through an orderly order with the 
funding that's available so we can have an orderly termination.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. With all due respect to the gentleman, I would 
appreciate some certainty, and I think that's what the purpose of this 
amendment is all about.
  You indicate that it's still in existence; it's still being funded. 
We want it out. We don't want it funded any longer. The purpose of it 
is duplicative. The study has been done before. And I think it's time 
that we called a stop to it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PASTOR of Arizona. Well, I think I heard the gentleman tell me 
that the last time the study occurred was in 1944. And because earmarks 
are no longer the practice and the administration is not providing any 
funding, it's my belief and my opinion that this study will not go 
further, and the few dollars that may be left from the former earmark 
will be used to terminate the study in an orderly fashion.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, the last study was done, completed in 
2004 at a cost of $35 million. It took 17 years, and now we want to do 
it again. I don't believe it's appropriate for our taxpayer dollars to 
be used in this manner.
  And with that, I ask for the support of the body.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PASTOR of Arizona. Again, I would ask my colleagues to vote 
``no'' on this amendment because the objective of the amendment has 
pretty much been met. There is no funding available to continue it. The 
few dollars that remain will only be used to terminate the study in an 
orderly manner. That's the proper way of doing it, and I would ask my 
colleagues to vote ``no'' on the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Missouri 
will be postponed.


              Amendment No. 149 Offered by Mr. Luetkemeyer

  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I have another amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used for contributions to the Intergovernmental Panel on 
     Climate Change (IPCC).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer) and a Member 
opposed each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prohibit U.S. 
contributions to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 
Change, an entity that is fraught with waste and engaged in dubious 
science. The IPCC advises governments around the world on climate 
change, and supporters of cap-and-trade legislation have used the 
questionable science, the findings of the IPCC, as reasons to support 
onerous legislation.
  Criticism of this science intensified over the last 2 years when 
emails publicly released from a university in England showed that 
leading global scientists intentionally manipulated climate data and 
suppressed legitimate arguments in peer-reviewed journals. Researchers 
were asked to delete and destroy emails so that a small number of 
climate alarmists could continue to advance their environmental agenda.
  Since then, more than 700 acclaimed international scientists have 
challenged the claims made by the IPCC in this comprehensive, 
independent 740-page report. These 700 dissenting scientists represent 
some of the most respected scientific institutions at home and around 
the world, including U.S. Departments of Energy and Defense, U.S. Air 
Force and Navy, NASA, and even the Environmental Protection Agency.
  Take, for example, famed Princeton University physicist Dr. Robert 
Austin, who has published 170 scientific papers and was elected a 
member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Austin told a 
Senate committee that ``unfortunately climate science has become 
political science. It is tragic that some perhaps well-meaning but 
politically motivated scientists who should know better have whipped up 
a global frenzy about a phenomena which is statistically questionable 
at best.''
  Mr. Chairman, if the families in my district have been able to 
tighten their belts, then surely the Federal Government can do the same 
and stop funding an organization that is fraught with waste and abuse. 
My amendment simply says that no funds in this bill can go toward the 
IPCC. This would save taxpayers millions of dollars this year and 
millions of dollars in years to come. In fact, the President has 
requested an additional $13 million for the IPCC in his fiscal year 
2012 budget request. Our constituents should not have to continue to 
foot the bill for an organization to keep producing corrupt findings 
that were used as justification to impose a massive new tax on every 
American. They deserve better.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, my colleagues, this amendment would 
eliminate funding to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or 
the IPCC.
  The U.S. contributes only $2.3 million to the IPCC, and our $2.3 
million contribution leverages a global science assessment institution 
with global outreach and global technical input, a process we could not 
carry out alone and one that could come to a halt without U.S. support.
  Their work on climate change is unparalleled. In its four assessment 
reports to date, they have brought together thousands of scientists 
around the world in disciplines ranging from atmospheric science, to 
forest ecology, to economics to provide objective and policy neutral 
information. The panel has attracted hundreds of the best U.S. 
scientists. In fact, a majority of the research that's reviewed is 
undertaken in U.S. institutions.
  The IPCC's work has been lauded by the U.S. Academy of Sciences and 
by

[[Page 2605]]

the InterAcademy Council, a body comprised of the national academies of 
the world. In fact, in 2007 that organization won the Nobel Prize for 
its assessment work. This institution is a nonpartisan and technically 
extraordinarily sound organization.
  The Republican majority has already voted to prevent the EPA from 
using funds to regulate greenhouse gases. Now we're being asked to 
defund the work of international scientists to learn about the threat.
  Now, the assumption, I assume, is that there is no threat and, 
therefore, let's not study it. I think that is not a wise assumption. 
This is a very shortsighted proposal to cut these funds. It's like 
putting our heads in the sand, denying the science, and then stopping 
the scientists from working because they might come to a different 
conclusion than the Republican majority's ideology in believing that 
there is no such problem and therefore we don't need to know about it 
or do anything about it. If we're not going to do anything here at 
home, let's at least work internationally to understand the threat and 
to deal with other countries to combat it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2320

  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. For the last year or two, the International Panel 
has been funded at the rate of about $12.5 million per year. The 
President has it in his FY12 budget at $13 million. This group has been 
in the headlines for their activities with regard to how they are 
trying to tinker with the data that they put out.
  Why would we want to fund a group of folks who is nefarious and gives 
us incorrect information? It's beyond me.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I don't understand how the gentleman from 
Missouri can say that this is a nefarious group of people. After all, 
these are people who are scientists, who've won the Nobel Prize for 
their scientific activities.
  I used to think that people from Missouri were from the Show-Me 
State. Now I gather what this gentleman from Missouri is suggesting is 
``I don't want to know about it.'' I don't think that is what the 
position ought to be of the United States Congress. Let's learn the 
facts and then decide what to do about it but not stop trying to know 
what the science is behind the global threats.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Missouri 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 569 Offered by Mr. Issa

  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to fund periodic step increases described in Section 
     5335 of Title V of the United States Code.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) and a Member opposed 
each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Chairman, President Obama announced a pay freeze. 
Within his Executive order, he froze all pay he could freeze. The one 
he could not freeze was step increases. This simple amendment adds to 
President Obama's 2-year freeze a 7-month freeze for the period he was 
unable to cover of step increases. Step increases are simply pay 
increases because you're on the job, period.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. MORAN. We all agree that we all need to be financially 
responsible with regard to the Federal budget, but this continuing 
resolution already substantially reduces funds for every single agency 
of the government. A freeze in civilian pay for Federal employees is 
already in effect for 2 years. It prevents cost of living and locality 
pay increases for the entire Federal workforce, including civilian 
employees of the Defense Department, although uniformed employees can 
get raises. If you're a political appointee you can get an increase but 
not if you're a civil service employee.
  Mr. Chairman, a little over a majority of the Federal workforce is 
eligible for retirement over the next 5 years. We are going to make 
their lives far more difficult with the restraints on program funding 
we're putting in this bill, and then we're going to say they're not 
going to be able to get compensated when we tell them they have to do 
more with less funding for their agencies? We are going to lose our 
best and brightest people in the government, and as a result, the 
American people are going to lose the quality of service they've come 
to trust and expect.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ISSA. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MORAN. How much time is remaining, Mr. Chairman?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. MORAN. I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Wolf).
  Mr. WOLF. I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  Timothy McCarthy, who was the Secret Service agent who stopped the 
bullet that would have killed one of the greatest Presidents we've ever 
had, Ronald Reagan, would have deserved a step increase.
  Dr. Collins, who has mapped the human genome system to be able to 
deal with pancreatic cancer and breast cancer and who could go outside 
and get a job anywhere, would deserve a step increase.
  The FBI agent who is tracking down and working to find al Qaeda and 
terrorism and radicalization would deserve a step increase.
  Lastly--lastly--some Members of this Congress have employees who have 
done such a good job--many of them are perhaps on the Appropriations 
Committee--they would deserve a step increase. If you vote for this, 
you can never give any of your employees a step increase for the rest 
of this year.
  This is a bad amendment. I urge its defeat.
  Mr. ISSA. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I just want to clear up some facts because I believe, 
in the effort to try to make a point, people have failed to be quite as 
accurate as they should be. First of all, as for political appointees, 
the President has already frozen their pay. Second of all, awards, 
raises, and bonuses are not limited by this freeze. The fact is, if 
somebody is meritorious of a raise, award or bonus, he will still be 
able to get it.
  When they say that budgets have been cut, if budgets have been cut, 
not having this $500 million in the first year and another $500 million 
in the second year will, in fact, allow those budgets to go further.
  When they say that these are effectively meritorious, from the Office 
of Management and Budget of the Obama administration, we have received 
the figure. It is 99.94 percent of all eligible Federal employees, 
meaning only six out of every 10,000 employees, failed to get this 
automatic increase.
  This saves over $500 million in 7 months and over $700 million the 
next year. It is consistent with President Obama's freeze, and the 
freeze is exactly what we're trying to do--give the President what he 
said in the spirit in which he said it.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MORAN. With 30 seconds remaining, I think I should let the 
gentleman from California conclude his remarks.

[[Page 2606]]

  I reserve the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 1\1/4\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. ISSA. Thank you. I won't use it all.
  It has been a long night, and the American people are hopefully still 
watching. As they watch what we are doing here and as they see people 
coming and crying for the Federal worker, I hope what they realize is 
that the Federal worker is not losing a day's pay. We are not 
eliminating Federal workers, and Federal workers will be able to get 
awards, bonuses, any meritorious increase or promotion. We are simply 
saying that, for 99.94 percent of all non-uniformed Federal workers, to 
simply get longevity increases after the President has ordered a pay 
freeze is disingenuous to the process. We want to be genuine to the 
President's Executive order and genuine to the process here. The House 
of Representatives rolled back our funding by 5 percent, and that was a 
good start; but if we don't do this, we're not even genuinely freezing 
the pay of our own Federal workforce.
  I strongly urge support for this amendment in keeping the promise of 
the President and the promise to the American people.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MORAN. I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Dicks).
  Mr. DICKS. I rise in strong support of the position of our committee 
in opposition to this amendment, and I want to associate myself with 
the remarks of Mr. Moran and Mr. Wolf.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, we are the world's superpower, and much of 
the responsibility for maintaining the status of being that superpower 
falls on the shoulders of our Federal civil service.
  Already, they get about a third less than what they would be getting 
in the private sector for the same responsibilities. We desperately 
need the best and the brightest, from all over this country, to serve 
the American people. If we punish them by limiting their salaries, by 
making them scapegoats, we are doing a disservice to the American 
people. Let's not do this. Defeat the amendment.

                              {time}  2330

  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Issa).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 94 Offered by Mr. Sullivan

  Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec.__. No funds made available by this Act may be used to 
     implement--
       (1) the decision of the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency entitled ``Partial Grant and Partial Denial 
     of Clean Air Act Waiver Application Submitted by Growth 
     Energy To Increase the Allowable Ethanol Content of Gasoline 
     to 15 Percent'' published in the Federal Register on November 
     4, 2010 (75 Fed. Reg. 68093 et seq.); or
       (2) the decision of the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency entitled ``Partial Grant of Clean Air Act 
     Waiver Application Submitted by Growth Energy To Increase the 
     Allowable Ethanol Content of Gasoline to 15 Percent'' 
     published in the Federal Register on January 26, 2011 (76 
     Fed. Reg. 4662 et seq.).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Sullivan) and a Member opposed 
each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma.
  Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would simply delay the 
implementation of the EPA's E15 waivers for the remainder of the fiscal 
year, which would allow Congress time to address safety concerns 
related to the higher blend of ethanol gasoline before the EPA puts it 
in our general fuel supply.
  Despite alarming consumer, environmental and economic concerns, the 
Environmental Protection Agency has approved a 50 percent increase in 
the amount of corn-based ethanol allowed in gasoline used by cars and 
light trucks manufactured in the 2001 model year and newer.
  This is simply another attempt by the EPA to engineer ethanol 
mandates and drive ethanol subsidies forward. And, yes, this is a 
mandate.
  The EPA has mandated that we use 36 billion gallons of renewable 
fuels, like ethanol, annually in our motor engines by 2022 and through 
incremental steps and backhanded attempts just like this, the EPA is 
mandating.
  The EPA's move from E10 to E15 fuel over the next several months is 
in effect a backhanded 50 percent increase in the corn ethanol mandate 
putting consumers, engine makers and gasoline retailers at risk. 
Gasoline station owners are terrified of how they will comply with this 
E15 mandate because not all of the existing infrastructure is certified 
for the fuel. Under the EPA waiver, they will have no liability 
protections.
  Quik Trip, a major gasoline retailer across the Midwest, which is 
headquartered in my hometown of Tulsa, Oklahoma, offers an 
unconditional guarantee on every drop of gasoline they sell. Because of 
the lack of liability protection, they will be left on the hook if 
someone puts the wrong blend of gas in the wrong kind of car. That will 
open up a litigation nightmare.
  Why do we want to further mandate a fuel consumers don't want and 
retailers are afraid to sell? This is a major consumer safety issue 
that could adversely impact up to 60 percent of cars on the road today.
  It is also important to point out the environmental impacts of this 
as well. The higher a fuel blend like E15, the higher the toxic air 
pollutant emissions. Since ethanol contains just 66 percent of the 
energy that gasoline does, E15 will lead to an actual drop in gasoline 
mileage. The EPA has even said you get 5 percent less fuel economy with 
E15 than clear gasoline.
  The EPA has completely ignored calls from lawmakers, industry, 
environmental and consumer groups to address important safety issues 
raised by the 50 percent increase in the ethanol mandate waivers. 
Putting the brakes on E15 is the right thing to do for the people that 
we represent.
  I ask my colleagues to join me in passing this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to a 
very thoughtful and informed expert on this issue, the gentleman from 
Iowa (Mr. Latham).
  Mr. LATHAM. I thank the gentleman very much for yielding.
  I understand the gentleman from Oklahoma represents oil and the 
reason that he is doing this, but current government regulations 
restrict the ethanol blend to 10 percent by volume. Meanwhile, ethanol 
producers have hit the 10 percent cap and are producing more ethanol 
than can be used under current restrictions that are in place.
  I have to correct the gentleman when he said EPA mandates this. It's 
Congress, us, that mandated the 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel by 
2022. And it's essential, with that mandate from Congress, this is not 
EPA, that we increase E10 to E15 to continue our investment in 
renewable fuel for the economy.
  Raising the limit will accelerate the use of renewable fuels made in 
the U.S. We are not importing this oil, Mr. Chairman. We are lessening 
our dependence on foreign sources of oil and encouraging continued 
investment and research for advanced biofuels like cellulosic ethanol.
  As importantly, raising the limit will grow our economy here in the 
U.S., create about 136,000 jobs in the United

[[Page 2607]]

States. This is oil that we are not importing from oversees and 
spending billions and billions of dollars with our military to defend 
the oil coming into this country.
  These are good-paying jobs; they are very excellent as far as jobs in 
rural America. They cannot be outsourced overseas. Science supports 
E15. It's the most tested fuel in history, with the EPA and the 
Department of Energy stating that the higher ethanol blend does not 
harm engine durability nor emissions equipment for vehicles aged 2001 
and newer, which represents more than 70 percent of the vehicles on the 
road today in the United States.
  It's clear that science supports the decision. There's no doubt that 
the E15 blend limit is good for our economy, it's good for our energy 
independence and everybody talks about all of the above.
  This is part of all of the above of energy independence for the 
United States. It's good for continuing investment in the renewable 
fuels, energy and for the rural parts of this country that need an 
awful lot of help these days.
  I certainly oppose this amendment.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have left?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia has 15 seconds 
remaining.
  Mr. MORAN. I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Green).
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. I want to thank my colleague from Virginia.
  For 15 seconds, I want to associate myself with the remarks of my 
colleague and member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. 
Sullivan. I think we need to think how we are doing this with ethanol. 
It costs more. I don't want to import oil either. That's why we need to 
produce it in our own country.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Sullivan).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma 
will be postponed.


               Amendment No. 216 Offered by Mr. McKinley

  Mr. McKINLEY. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
     Agency to carry out section 404(c) of the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1344(c)).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley) and a Member 
opposed each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia.
  Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, we all should be concerned about the 
recent actions by the EPA and how it continues to destroy jobs by 
exceeding its statutory authority as envisioned by Congress. In West 
Virginia, our State's economy is highly dependent upon the coal and 
natural gas industries.
  On January 13, 2011, the EPA took an unprecedented action by 
retroactively revoking a lawfully issued 4-year-old permit for the 
Spruce No. 1 surface mine in Logan County, West Virginia. This permit 
had been issued by the Secretary of the Army under the Clean Water Act 
and was approved by the Corps of Engineers in January 2007.
  For nearly a decade, the Corps of Engineers worked with the EPA to 
rigorously review this Spruce mine project before it was approved. The 
permit was issued after this extensive environmental review, which 
included a 1,600-page Environmental Impact Statement in which the EPA 
fully participated and agreed to all terms and conditions included in 
the authorized permit.

                              {time}  2340

  Just to be clear, the EPA had every opportunity to address any 
concerns and work together with the Corps of Engineers prior to the 
permit being issued. By giving the EPA the funds to retroactively veto 
this permit, a dangerous precedent is being set for future job-
producing ventures by businesses and industries throughout this 
country.
  These actions by the EPA continue to justify why so many Americans 
worry about the EPA's relentless war on coal. If the EPA can be allowed 
to retroactively revoke a permit in West Virginia, they can continue 
this onslaught wherever water permits exist throughout America. Any 
entity discharging water is vulnerable to having their permits pulled 
and will put at risk city sewage treatment plans, farms, mines, steel 
mills, and chemical plants.
  EPA's veto at Spruce mine caused the loss of 253 mining jobs and 298 
indirect jobs in West Virginia. In addition, it prevented the 
investment of nearly $250 million. The EPA's action has had a chilling 
effect on many types of companies, all of which rely on the certainty 
of the permitting process in order to make crucial business planning 
decisions. It's virtually impossible for companies to take the 
necessary steps to obtain financing and create jobs if they must endure 
the threat of retroactive revocation of the very permits that allow 
them to do business.
  Today, this injustice happened at Spruce mine in West Virginia. 
Tomorrow, the EPA could very well pull an existing water permit at a 
steel mill in Indiana, a chemical plant in Texas, a sewage plant in 
Iowa.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from West Virginia's amendment 
tries to prohibit EPA from carrying out section 404(c) of the Clean 
Water Act. It's one more effort to deregulate all aspects of 
mountaintop mining. Section 404(c) authorizes EPA under especially 
serious circumstances to pull back permits for dredging and filling 
with toxic material if they would have a substantially adverse effect 
upon the quality of water, wildlife, and fishery areas. EPA has only 
used this 404(c) authority 13 times in the 39 years of the Clean Water 
Act.
  But this amendment and its backers don't want EPA using that 
authority to prevent the coal industry from polluting the contiguous 
waters to their mountaintop mining. We know that mountaintop surface 
mining removes entire mountaintops so that they can get to the coal 
underneath, but then in the process invariably deposits toxic mining 
waste in the nearby streams. And then that gets into the public's water 
supply. It costs substantial sums of money to subsequently clean it, 
and toxically polluted can be not only devastating to the environment, 
but devastating to local economies.
  Only in the most egregious instances has EPA used this authority. 
They should have the right to pull permits when companies carelessly 
and seriously harm the environment. That's EPA's responsibility. It's 
understandable that mining companies don't want any restriction on 
their mining, but it's not excusable for this Congress to prevent the 
EPA from carrying out its lawful responsibilities and not to heed the 
long-term health impacts on the American people and of the quality of 
the water in these regions. So I urge the defeat of this amendment, Mr. 
Chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, I think that the body knows where we stand, on the side 
of responsible environmental preservation and clean water for our 
children to drink.
  At this point, in deference to the chairman of the full committee, I 
yield what time remains to the gentleman from Kentucky, because I see 
him standing, and I suspect he wants to be heard on this.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I appreciate the gentleman's kindness.

[[Page 2608]]

  Mr. Chairman, I wanted to thank the gentleman from West Virginia for 
offering this amendment. This retroactive veto of the Spruce mine is 
the poster child for EPA's regulatory overreach, but there are 
thousands more permits like this throughout Appalachia that the EPA 
could put on notice. But coal is not the only industry relying on these 
404 permits.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. The EPA's action at Spruce will have severe 
implications for the agriculture, construction, and transportation 
sectors because it sets a dangerous precedent that EPA can revoke any 
permit at any time for any reason, or for no reason.
  Mr. Chairman, we need these jobs. And our job-creating industries 
need regulatory certainty, not more of the same regulatory roulette 
from the EPA. The gentleman from West Virginia's amendment would inject 
some certainty into the regulatory environment by stripping the EPA of 
its authority to retroactively veto existing permits at their whim, 
with no appeal.
  We in Congress need to keep our hand on the reins of this EPA, which 
is running roughshod over small businesses, family farms, even the 
constitutional authority of this Congress. I want to thank again the 
gentleman from West Virginia for offering this amendment, and I hope 
that we can have the support of all Members of this body.
  I yield to the gentleman from West Virginia.
  Mr. RAHALL. I thank my colleague, the distinguished chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee, for yielding, and I rise in support of my 
colleague from West Virginia's amendment, Mr. McKinley. This particular 
action in regard to the Spruce permit is an insult to the integrity of 
the mine-permitting process.
  The particular mine in question is located in my congressional 
district. The permit was negotiated with the EPA in good faith by the 
coal company over a space of 10 years. The permit was then granted 3 
years ago and just recently was revoked by the EPA. It goes against the 
grain of what I think should be good-faith efforts by coal companies to 
negotiate with the EPA, recognizing that they can't get all they want 
in a permit application and therefore some withdrawal, some compromise 
is necessary. That was done in this particular case in a painstaking 
process over 10 years, and the permit was granted. Now to have it 
revoked is indeed an insult to the integrity of the mine permitting 
process.
  The EPA was given authority in the Clean Water Act to weigh in on 
permitting decisions of the Corps of Engineers to help ensure a balance 
between environmental protection and activities like energy 
development.
  In that regard, the EPA could and should be a positive, constructive 
force. But its methods over the last two years have reformulated the 
permitting process in ways never envisioned under the law.
  It has used its limited legal role to wrest control of the process 
from the Corps of Engineers where the chief responsibility for 404 
permitting legally lies.
  Nowhere is this more evident than in EPA's veto of the Mingo-Logan 
Coal Company's Section 404 permit for its Spruce Fork No. 1 mine.
  In 1998, the operator of that mine applied for a permit to construct 
what was, at the time, the largest surface mine ever attempted. The 
mine was immediately the target of a lawsuit, of legislative debate, 
and federal regulatory action.
  Over the course of the next several years, the company, the Corps, 
and the EPA engaged in intensive negotiations. The mine became the 
subject of an Environmental Impact Statement--the first ever written 
for a surface mine.
  In the end, in January of 2007, as a result of much compromise and 
revision, an Individual 404 permit was awarded by the Army Corps. That 
was nearly ten years from the date the company first made application.
  But on September 3, 2009, the EPA reneged. It sent a letter to the 
Corps of Engineers asking that the Corps suspend, revoke, or modify 
that 2-year-old permit--a request the Corps flatly refused. Then the 
EPA took the further, ground-breaking step of issuing its own veto.
  So, under one EPA Administrator, the 404 permit for this mine was 
approved. Under another Administrator, it was vetoed.
  If the EPA can veto this permit--a permit 10 years in the making--not 
a single, solitary thing stands in the way of this EPA, or some future 
EPA, should it decide--for whatever reason--to reach back and veto a 
previously granted permit for coal mining or any other activity. 
Without some degree of finality, permitting is worthless.
  I still believe that achieving balance between energy development and 
environmental protection is a goal we can and must achieve.
  But the EPA must not be allowed to dwell in the mindset that job 
losses are an inevitable result of protecting the environment. The coal 
miners of the Appalachian region deserve a fair, clear, and consistent 
regulatory process.
  Toward that end, Mr. Chairman, I join in urging my colleagues to 
support this amendment to rein in an EPA gone too far.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I thank the gentleman for his comment.
  Mr. Chairman, let us work. Give us the jobs. Give us the jobs.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from West 
Virginia will be postponed.


               Amendment No. 217 Offered by Mr. McKinley

  Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used by the Environmental Protection Agency to develop, 
     propose, finalize, implement, administer, or enforce any 
     regulation that identifies or lists fossil fuel combustion 
     waste as hazardous waste subject to regulation under subtitle 
     C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.) or 
     otherwise makes fossil fuel combustion waste subject to 
     regulation under such subtitle.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley) and a Member 
opposed each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia.
  Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I first want to thank my colleague and 
fellow committee member, Cliff Stearns from Florida, for offering a 
similar amendment. This amendment will specifically bar the use of 
funds to carry out the regulation of fossil fuel combustion wastes 
under subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. In 2010, the EPA 
proposed this regulation, and here we are today standing against this 
emotional reaction triggered by a structurally unstable dam in 
Tennessee.
  What happened there is tragic and should be dealt with by the proper 
agency regarding the dam's integrity. It should not be used to advance 
an ideologically motivated agenda regarding the environment.
  Let me frame the issue. Fly ash is an unavoidable byproduct of 
electric power generation using coal. It is captured before being 
emitted into the atmosphere. The fine grain, dust-like particles are 
then recycled into concrete mixtures for our roads, our bridges, and 
buildings. It's an additive in masonry production of concrete blocks 
and bricks. It's been widely used in drywall panels used in houses, 
schools, and offices.

                              {time}  2350

  The fly ash is even used in agricultural fertilizers and soil 
amendments. If the EPA were allowed to continue with their plan to 
designate fly ash as a hazardous material, all of these time-tested 
energy-saving uses would come to a halt.
  The expense of handling the product would increase logarithmically, 
and so would our electric prices. By increasing

[[Page 2609]]

the cost of power, it understandably causes the cost of producing 
American-made products to increase and put American businesses at 
another disadvantage against our foreign competition. This EPA rule 
will be an unmitigated job-killer.
  Coal ash use and disposal has been studied by the EPA for over 20 
years. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act directed the EPA to 
study the ``adverse effects on human health and the environment, if 
any,'' of current practices for disposal and utilization of fossil fuel 
combustion wastes. The EPA's conclusion was that these wastes do not 
warrant regulation under subtitle C. How many more reports need to be 
conducted by the EPA to show that fly ash is nonhazardous? Enough is 
enough.
  According to various environmental groups, for every ton of cement 
manufactured, about 6.5 million BTUs of energy are consumed and about 1 
ton of carbon dioxide is replaced. If we can replace that 1 ton with 
fly ash, we could save enough electricity to power an average American 
home for 24 days and reduce carbon dioxide emissions equal to a 2-month 
use of an automobile.
  What's ironic to me is that even the EPA's headquarters right down 
the street from us was built with a significant amount of fly ash mixed 
into the concrete matrix.
  The use of fly ash in concrete creates a stronger, lasting product by 
using less water. In using less water, we further reduce our 
environmental footprint.
  I ask my colleagues to join me today in supporting my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would stop EPA from 
identifying coal ash as hazardous waste and, therefore, prevent any 
regulation of that waste. The fact is that coal ash contains dangerous 
contaminants, such as mercury, cadmium, and arsenic, and we know those 
can be dangerous to public health. Without further guidance by EPA, 
this ash will continue to be stored onsite at many large power plants, 
where it leaches into the groundwater and into nearby streams. EPA has 
found a number of communities across the country where coal ash has 
contaminated drinking water sources poisoning people and wildlife.
  Through its public rulemaking process, it's been developing a rule. 
In fact, it has received more than 450,000 public comments. It's had 
Web-based seminars. It's done everything to get opinion on both sides 
of this issue. It's currently conducting risk and economic analyses of 
the options available.
  Suspending work on a final regulation isn't going to satisfy anybody. 
But it will ensure that you're going to continue to have the coal ash 
at risk of contaminating drinking water, you are going to create 
uncertainty for power companies that burn coal, and you are going to 
eliminate potential markets for coal ash reuse. Potential users are not 
going to buy it if they think some day it might cause liability. The 
final EPA rule would eliminate that uncertainty, allow for coal ash to 
be properly stored and used, and eliminate the risk for health and the 
environment. That's why the amendment should be defeated.
  At this point, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Waxman), the distinguished ranking member of the Energy 
and Commerce Committee.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 1\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. WAXMAN. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  I want to tell you a story. On December 22, 2008, in Kingston, 
Tennessee, a coal ash impoundment structurally failed, and they 
released 5.4 million cubic yards of toxic sludge. This sludge blanketed 
the Emory River and 300 acres of surrounding land, creating a Superfund 
site that could cost up to $825 million to remediate. If this coal ash 
had been stored safely, this tragedy would never have happened. The 
wastes are dangerous. What EPA has tried to do is to make sure that the 
hazardous waste is disposed of safely to protect the health of 
communities.
  And I find it somewhat amazing to hear the author of this amendment 
say that EPA is acting on an ideological agenda. How ideological do you 
have to be to act when you have an example of a terrible amount of coal 
ash poisoning areas and threatening drinking water? Is that ideological 
when they want to make sure that it's safeguarded and disposed of in a 
proper way? That's not ideological. That's the kind of thing we want 
EPA to do. So I would urge opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from West 
Virginia will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 545 Offered by Mr. Pompeo

  Mr. POMPEO. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to carry out any of the activities described in 
     section 6A of the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2055a).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 17, 
2011, the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Pompeo) and a Member opposed each 
will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kansas.
  Mr. POMPEO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  This amendment is actually pretty straightforward. It's pretty 
simple. The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 called for 
the creation of a public consumer information database. And last year, 
the agency adopted a database rule that fails to uphold the statute. 
The statute required that the agency not allow materially inaccurate 
information to be on the publicly available database, and yet the rule, 
as promulgated, actually requires the agency to post materially 
inaccurate information. Indeed, it requires the agency to post that 
material and accurate information within 10 days. This will drive jobs 
overseas. It will increase the cost for manufacturers and consumers. 
The National Association of Manufacturers has announced its support for 
this amendment. The Home Appliance Manufacturers, the American Home 
Furnishings Alliance, the Consumer Specialty Products Associations all 
have recognized that this regulation is terribly onerous.
  The request of this amendment is very modest. It does not ask that 
this go away. It just asks for a delay in implementation. It asks for 
some time for the committee to review this regulation and come up with 
a regulation that makes sense and is consistent with the statute. So I 
would urge the support of this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 10 
minutes.
  Mr. WAXMAN. I yield myself 2 minutes.
  This amendment would deny the Consumer Product Safety Commission the 
implementation of a searchable public consumer safety information 
database. Now this database was part of a bill that passed this House 
by 424-1. We required a database, and CPSC is ready to release this 
database. It's based on similar successful databases run at the present 
time by the Food and Drug Administration and the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration. It would allow consumers to report harms 
associated with consumer products and then to research risks associated 
with these particular products.
  This is exactly what the American people want. They want information.

[[Page 2610]]

They have a right to know. And, in fact, every opinion poll indicates 
this. This amendment is a ``keep the consumers in the dark'' amendment. 
Parents want to know if a toy is dangerous. This amendment would take 
away their right to go to a database that would give them this 
information.
  Now the claims against the database are pretty shocking. The 
manufacturers say, Well, this is going to be a problem because they're 
going to put things on the database that are trade secrets or 
inaccurate.

                              {time}  0000

  This is simply not the case. There is a safeguard. In fact, there are 
safeguards after safeguards to protect manufacturers.
  The statute provides more procedural safeguards than any other public 
database at a Federal agency. Anonymous complaints are not allowed, 
only safety-related information will be included. Businesses get to see 
every report of harm before it is placed in the database. They have an 
opportunity to correct inaccurate information and to provide their own 
comments.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POMPEO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Missouri (Mrs. Emerson).
  Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. 
Having voted for the NHTSA Act, I want to say that the intent of this 
database was to provide consumers with information on dangerous 
products. Some people have compared the database to the one operated by 
the National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration. However, the 
two are very different because NHTSA's database requires much more 
information about the actual product and is therefore much more 
reliable.
  From a government perspective, we should be concerned that there will 
be inaccurate information on a ``.gov'' Web site. And at the end of the 
day, the most important factor is this: If the database isn't accurate 
or reliable, it is going to be totally useless for consumers looking to 
avoid unreliable or dangerous products. It has already cost $29 
million. And I say, if you're going to set up a database, do it right.
  We, as a Congress, have a duty to fund things that are in the best 
interests of the American people, and the CPSC database is not. It 
should not go live next month with inaccurate information.
  I strongly support this amendment.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the ranking 
member of the subcommittee that has jurisdiction over this issue, the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Butterfield).
  Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. 
As part of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, the Consumer 
Product Safety Commission was charged with creating a publicly 
available, searchable database for complaints regarding consumer 
products. The amendment offered by the gentleman aims to bar the 
Commission from moving forward with this database.
  The Food and Drug Administration and the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration both have publicly available databases for 
consumers to report harms or potential safety problems about cars and 
medical products. Those databases don't provide any due process to 
manufacturers to contest those claims. However, this database provides 
exhaustive due process, including allowing manufacturers to refute 
``materially inaccurate'' claims and, if found to be inaccurate, have 
the complaint removed. The Commission database also allows 
manufacturers to issue a response and have those responses appear along 
with the consumer complaint.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment.
  Mr. POMPEO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to my colleague from 
Texas (Mr. Barton).
  Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would like to put in the Record 
a letter dated November 23, 2010, on this issue that I sent to the 
chairman of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Honorable 
Inez Tenenbaum.
  I rise in strong support of the gentleman from Kansas' amendment. He 
is exactly right on this, and we should support him.

                                         House of Representatives,


                             Committee on Energy and Commerce,

                                Washington, DC, November 23, 2010.
     Hon. Inez Tenenbaum,
     Chairman, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Bethesda, 
         MD.
       Dear Chairman Tenenbaum: I am pleased the Commission 
     delayed consideration of a proposed final rule on 
     implementing the Publicly Available Consumer Product Safety 
     Information Database. Implementing this database properly is 
     very important and I write to clarify the intent of Congress 
     when we passed the relevant provisions of the Consumer 
     Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-314). 
     Several provisions of the staff-proposed final rule run 
     contrary to the intent of Congress and the clear and 
     unambiguous language of the Act.
       By way of background, the House-passed version (H.R. 4040) 
     of the database provision reported by the Energy and Commerce 
     Committee by a 51-0 vote did not authorize implementation of 
     a database remotely similar to the one set forth in either 
     the Public Law or the proposed final rule. We had bipartisan 
     agreement to evaluate the efficacy of, and only then improve, 
     the Commission's legacy Injury Information Clearinghouse 
     database based on this evaluation. We provided first for an 
     evaluation of the Commission's current injury databases. 
     Following this evaluation, the bill directed the Commission 
     to submit a plan to Congress on the best way to maintain the 
     publicly available information in a searchable Internet 
     database. The bill also directed the Commission to provide 
     its views on whether the database should include additional 
     information, such as consumer complaints. The bill thus 
     provided for evaluation and another opportunity for Congress 
     to consider the best way of addressing the database. We 
     clearly could have gone further and drafted the bill to 
     require that the database include such information, but we 
     rejected that approach. In fact, the then Committee Chairman 
     and I both opposed--and the Committee rejected--amendments 
     during Committee consideration that would have mandated 
     specific reporting requirements. We shared serious concerns 
     that innocent companies should not suffer reputational harm 
     from slanderous or inaccurate information in the publicly 
     accessible database before the Commission verifies the 
     accuracy of the information. Due process is important and we 
     did not believe the amendment afforded adequate protection to 
     those who could suffer harm from the disclosure of slanderous 
     or inaccurate information.
       Similarly, after the Senate passed its bill, the conferees 
     reached a compromise between narrow House and the broader 
     Senate database provisions to specifically balance the 
     interests of consumers and companies. The approach we agreed 
     upon carefully balanced the objectives of making reports of 
     harm available to the public, ensuring the accuracy of the 
     information, and preventing the disclosure of confidential 
     information. The Commission staff proposal does not properly 
     balance these interests and therefore does not comport with 
     the intent of Congress. The proposal provides that the 
     Commission would submit information where a specific product 
     and manufacturer is identified to that manufacturer for 
     review of potentially confidential information and to 
     ascertain the material accuracy of the information. If a 
     company provides evidence proving that either a breach of 
     trade secrets would result from disclosure of the information 
     or that the information is materially inaccurate, the 
     Commission staff would review the evidence. According to the 
     staff proposal, if the Commission cannot complete its review 
     within 10 days, it would publish the information and remove 
     it at a later date if warranted at the conclusion of its 
     investigation. This process would provide little or no 
     protection for confidential information and will encourage 
     the publication of inaccurate and misleading information. 
     Once the information is public, competitors can learn trade 
     secrets and media can disseminate materially inaccurate 
     information with little hope that the error could be 
     rectified in the future. Congress did not intend such a 
     result, and we went to great lengths to provide reasonable 
     protection to manufacturers from the harm that such 
     publication could entail. The Commission must follow the 
     intent of Congress and allow such information to be withheld 
     pending the completion of its investigation into 
     confidentiality and accuracy.
       I am also troubled by the proposed final rule's expansion 
     of the list of entities that may submit reports of harm to 
     the database beyond those specifically enumerated in the law. 
     Congress included an exhaustive and exclusive list of those 
     who may submit reports for the database in section 
     6A(b)(1)(A) of the Act. Specifically, that section provides 
     that the database shall include ``Reports of harm relating to 
     the use of consumer products, and other products or 
     substances regulated by the Commission, that are received by 
     the Commission from (i) consumers; (ii) local, State, or 
     Federal government agencies; (iii) health care professionals; 
     (iv) child service providers; and (v) public safety 
     entities.''
       In its first draft, the Commission staff sought to create a 
     new category of ``others''

[[Page 2611]]

     not contemplated by Congress, which included but was not 
     limited to attorneys, professional engineers, investigators, 
     non-government organizations (NGOs), consumer advocates, 
     consumer advocacy organizations, and trade associations. In 
     its most recent draft, the staff accepts that Congress 
     enacted an exhaustive and exclusive list of reporters and 
     removed the category of ``others.'' However, the proposal now 
     simply redefines the term ``consumers'' to include attorneys, 
     investigators, professional engineers, agents of a user of a 
     consumer product, and observers of the consumer products 
     being used. Congress did not anticipate that the Commission 
     would propose a definition of ``consumer'' that so radically 
     departs from the common definition of consumer. If Congress 
     had intended to expand the universe of reporters to include 
     all of the entities identified in the most recent proposal, 
     we would have made it explicit in the Act.
       Finally, the proposal also expands the definition of 
     ``public safety entity'' to extend beyond federal, state and 
     local law enforcement entities, police, fire, ambulance, 
     emergency medical services, and other public safety officials 
     to now include consumer advocates, NGOs, consumer advocacy 
     organizations and trade associations. Congress did not intend 
     to include these additional entities as is clear by the plain 
     meaning of the text. Accordingly, to comport with 
     Congressional intent, the Commission must strike the expanded 
     definitions of ``consumers'' and ``public safety entity'' 
     before it finalizes the rule.
       Thank you for the opportunity to clarify the intent of 
     Congress in these matters. I look forward to working with you 
     and the Commission on implementation of the CPSIA.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Joe Barton,
                                                   Ranking Member.

  Mr. WAXMAN. May I inquire of the Chair how much time each side has 
left?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 7 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Kansas has 7\3/4\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. POMPEO. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) who authored this particular provision in 
the consumer product safety legislation.
  Mr. MARKEY. I thank the gentleman from California.
  This language is going to destroy the early warning system that has 
been put in place in order to give parents the information they need in 
order to protect their children. If this amendment passes, it will 
grant industry's wish to once again make the government its secret 
partner in crime by keeping reports of serious injury or even death 
hidden from public view.
  In 2000 and again in 2003, the Consumer Product Safety Commission 
documented cases of children suffering intestinal injuries after 
swallowing small but powerful magnets that had fallen out of toys. The 
public didn't know, and the CPSC did nothing. By mid-2005, after more 
reports of safety concerns associated with the magnets and two reports 
of serious, life-threatening injuries, the public still didn't know, 
and the CPSC still did nothing.
  On Thanksgiving Day 2005, 22-month-old Kenny Sweet of Redmond, 
Washington, died after swallowing magnets that had fallen out of 
Magnetix toys. It was only after Kenny's death and an additional four 
hospitalizations that the CPSC finally gave the public an inkling of 
what was going on. But it actually took until April of 2007--after 7 
years of reports of risks, numerous serious injuries and a death--
before a full recall of all the products was undertaken. And that is 
not the only example of deaths and injuries that could have been 
avoided had parents known the risks to their children.
  In all of these cases, we heard the same story. There simply aren't 
enough resources for the CPSC to quickly and fully investigate every 
complaint. In 2005, the CPSC investigated only 1 percent.
  This is a ``no'' vote. Otherwise, we are going to see that choking 
hazards and cribs that kill are once again hidden from public view.
  Mr. POMPEO. Mr. Chairman, I urge regulatory sensibility in the 
support of this amendment, and with that, I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, in my last 30 seconds, let me just say this 
is an issue of the public's right to know. Let this database be 
available to them so they don't go buy a toy that they could have 
checked out on a Web site and found out that it was poisonous.
  I urge the defeat of this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Pompeo).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. POMPEO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas will 
be postponed.


            Amendment No. 515 Offered by Mr. Bishop of Utah

  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used for the National Landscape Conservation System.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Utah and a Member opposed each will control 3 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, the NLCS, which is a redundant 
administrative system, was codified by legislation. In the 110th 
session of Congress, the House passed an amended bill which went over 
to the Senate and died. In the 111th session, the Senate picked up that 
bill, stripped all the House amendments off and put it into the omnibus 
lands bill where, without any hearing or debate, it was hidden in the 
bowels and sent over to us where, once again, we had no hearings, 
limited debate, none of which was on this particular system.
  This redundant system, since I have introduced a resolution to try 
and streamline the Department of the Interior by streamlining those 
functions, I have heard some of the most amazing accusations of what 
would happen if we were to indeed do that, everything from having the 
sun come up in the west to the immediate beginning of the Mayan 
calendar.
  Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Chair, I rise in the strongest possible opposition 
to the Bishop amendment. As is the case with many of the cuts in this 
bill, and with many of the amendments offered, the goal seems to be to 
cut just for the sake of cutting. COPS funding? Cut it. Title Ten 
services for low-income women? Cut it. Head Start? Cut it. The list 
goes on and on.
  I support efforts to reduce the deficit, and in that effort I have 
voted for some of the amendments offered this week. But the Bishop 
amendment goes too far, and in fact will have a devastating impact on 
Southern Nevada and many other communities across the nation that will 
cost us far more in the long run.
  As an example, defunding the entire National Landscape Conservation 
System will require shutting down the Red Rock Canyon National 
Conservation Area, the stunningly beautiful natural wonder just outside 
of Las Vegas. More than one million local families and tourists visit 
this unique national treasure each year, taking advantage of the 13-
mile scenic drive, visitor center, hiking trails, rock climbing, 
horseback riding, mountain biking and other recreational activities, 
and bringing valuable tourist revenue to our community as we work to 
recover from the economic downturn. Funding from the National Landscape 
Conservation System allows BLM to maintain the roads, trails and 
visitor center that make Red Rock accessible and that enable people of 
all ages and abilities to enjoy its beauty year-round. Passage of this 
amendment would eliminate this essential funding and force the shutdown 
of this jewel in the Nevada desert.
  I strongly encourage the defeat of this short-sighted amendment.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. With the time that we are at right now and with 
the further indication that during this session our committee will 
definitely review this particular administrative system for further 
investigation, I would ask, with permission of the Chair, to withdraw 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.

                              {time}  0010


                Amendment No. 200 Offered by Mr. Burgess

  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

[[Page 2612]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. ___. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to pay the salary of any officer or employee of the 
     Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight in 
     the Department of Health and Human Services.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) and a Member opposed each 
will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. BURGESS. This amendment would allow that no funding made 
available in this continuing resolution is to be used to pay for the 
salary of any officer or employee at the Center for Consumer 
Information and Insurance Oversight within the Department of Health and 
Human Services.
  The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act never mentions, never 
authorizes, never appropriates money to the Center for Consumer 
Information and Insurance Oversight, formerly known as the Office of 
Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight. So, without congressional 
authorization, OCIIO, or now CCIIO, proceeded to hire staff, estimated 
to be 200 people by the end of last year. They have rented office space 
in Bethesda.
  Tasked with implementing some of the largest and most expensive 
sections of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act by the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services, this agency began issuing 
regulations, including those related to State exchanges, medical loss 
ratio, grandfathered plans, and the granting of waivers to businesses 
on meeting the requirements of the Affordable Care Act.
  Currently, this agency has granted 915 waivers accounting for 2.5 
million Americans representing about 1 percent of Americans who have 
private health insurance.
  This agency's operation is outside any definitive boundaries, and 
eventually drew some criticism, forcing them to be brought back under 
the jurisdiction of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 
effectively making CMS the most powerful health care agency in the 
universe with jurisdiction over Medicare, Medicaid, the State 
children's health plan, and now private insurance. This center has been 
allowed, without congressional authorization, without congressional 
oversight, to make the decisions that will affect all sectors of the 
American population.
  Without any due diligence or any congressional oversight, no agency 
or center should be able to obtain funding, carry out their own agenda, 
implement policy, write regulation, and remain largely unchecked. 
Before any further funding is allowed to be provided by this body, we 
need to know where the previous funds came from, how the money was 
spent and fully review their operations.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Connecticut is recognized for 
3 minutes.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
  Before we passed the Affordable Care Act, countless Americans would 
buy coverage they thought was comprehensive only to realize that it had 
huge gaps once they actually got sick. Even when the plans look similar 
from the outside, with comparable deductibles, copays, and so-called 
out-of-pocket limits, they can result in drastically different levels 
of out-of-pocket medical expenses, which is probably why more than 50 
percent of bankruptcies in this country are because of medical debt.
  The Affordable Care Act created the Office of Consumer Information 
and Insurance Oversight to provide better information to consumers, to 
hold insurers accountable at the Federal level, and help States with 
oversight responsibility. It requires insurance to provide clear 
information to consumers on what is really in their policy, such as 
standard definitions of medical and insurance terms, because 
hospitalization should mean hospitalization. It requires insurance to 
disclose data on claims payment policies and practices, claims denial 
rates, medical loss ratio, and other information so that consumers can 
make informed choices and so regulators can make sure the rules are 
followed.
  It's also responsible for confirming that the insurance companies get 
approval to raise rates by more than medical inflation. In short, it 
dramatically increases transparency and accountability in the health 
insurance market.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Why wouldn't we want consumers to know what they are buying so that 
they don't go broke, that they get the health care that they need when 
they are sick?
  Quite frankly, what this does is to help keep the big insurers 
honest, and that's probably why the majority has put the desires of the 
insurance companies and the interests of the insurance companies before 
the well-being of the American public.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, what the gentlelady asserts may or may not 
be true. The fact is we don't know. We never authorized this agency. In 
a 2,700 page bill, passed in the dead of night on March 23, no 
authorization for this agency existed, but curiously enough, the head 
of this agency was actually hired a year ago last Wednesday. The 
administration knew what they were doing, they bowled right ahead and 
did it, but they didn't want Congress to know. The authorization 
language was left out of the bill, and then we forward funded it with 
direct appropriation. That is why this amendment is necessary. Pull 
that funding out. Keep those foot soldiers under wraps because in CMS, 
they are under direct control of a man who has never been confirmed by 
the United States Senate.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield the balance of my time to Mr. Pallone of New 
Jersey.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 1 minute.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I respect Dr. Burgess a great deal, but I 
have no idea why he would be opposed to having an agency that is 
essentially putting a check on the insurance companies. The problem is 
that the insurance companies keep raising rates, they don't show the 
consumer what the real benefits that they're receiving are, and what we 
need is more transparency and some way to review these insurance 
premium rates so that they don't get out of hand.
  The fact of the matter is that this agency, working with States, has 
already had great success. In Connecticut, regulators recently rejected 
a proposed 20 percent rate increase by Anthem Blue Cross and Blue 
Shield. In Maine, the State superintendent rejected WellPoint's Empire 
Blue Cross request to raise rates by 23 percent. Colorado, also, and in 
California, the review prompted Anthem Blue Cross to withdraw its 
request for a 39 percent premium increase.
  Why are you objecting to us trying to put a check on these insurance 
companies that keep raising their rates at outrageous levels? That's 
what this is all about. I oppose this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will 
be postponed.


                Amendment No. 482 Offered by Mr. Heller

  Mr. HELLER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, amendment 
No. 482.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:


[[Page 2613]]

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to designate monuments under the Act of June 8, 1906, 
     (commonly known as the ``Antiquities Act of 1906''; 16 U.S.C. 
     431, et seq.).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Heller) and a Member opposed each 
will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nevada.
  Mr. HELLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment with my 
friend from Idaho (Mr. Labrador) to prohibit funds from being used to 
designate national monuments under the Antiquities Act. Roughly 85 
percent of Nevada is federally controlled.

                              {time}  0020

  So I am sensitive to any actions that could close access to public 
lands. New national monuments would limit access, threaten grazing 
rights, end mineral exploration of mining, and even impact private 
property. And this is the last thing we need in this dire economy.
  A transparent public process that includes input from local 
officials, communities, and stakeholders for any new Federal land 
designation is in the best interest of the residents of our public 
lands communities. That is why I support efforts to require any 
Antiquities Act actions to have congressional approval. Government that 
works in the best interest of the people ensures that all stakeholders 
have a seat at the table.
  Examples, such as the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument, 
which in the waning days of the Clinton administration literally 
obliterated massive economic development with a stroke of a pen, are 
why I am standing here today. I don't want this to happen in Nevada or 
anywhere else.
  I urge my colleagues to join us to protect communities from the heavy 
hand of the Federal Government and support our amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. BISHOP of Utah). The gentleman from Virginia is 
recognized for 3 minutes.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, this is a bad amendment. Presidents of both 
parties have used this act to increase protection to lands and waters 
that are already U.S. Government controlled. The act has no impact on 
private lands. It's a law that was passed by a Republican-led Congress 
and signed by a Republican President, Theodore Roosevelt.
  Since then, 15 U.S. Presidents have declared 131 national monuments 
under the act--eight Republican Presidents, seven Democratic 
Presidents.
  It must be remembered that the lands withdrawn are Federal lands 
owned by all Americans--not just the residents of certain States or 
localities in which they happen to be located. The Nation, not just a 
single State, has a vital interest in the future of these lands and 
their unique qualities.
  At this point, Mr. Chairman, I would ask how much time I have 
remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 2 minutes.
  Mr. MORAN. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Farr).
  Mr. FARR. Thank you for yielding.
  This is a bad amendment, and I urge all of my friends to carefully 
consider it.
  Mr. Heller may have an issue in Nevada, and he says he wants to have 
legislation to require Congress to make these designations, but that's 
not what's here today. He's wiping out the money to give the President 
the ability to make these monuments.
  Look it. We just made one in California on the entire coast of 
California for all the rocks and islands and is probably the largest 
monument in the United States. It was overwhelmingly endorsed by all of 
the communities along the coast. Let local governments be involved in 
these things so they can petition the President.
  More Republican Presidents have used this than Democratic Presidents. 
It affects all of your States. The Grand Canyon was originally a 
monument before Congress made it a national park.
  Taking away this tool in the tool box would just leave these lands 
fallow. They're BLM lands. They're already owned by the Federal 
Government. They'd have no use. You can't get into the other activities 
that the others have.
  This is a great tool. Don't throw it away.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I would yield the remaining 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
  Mr. MARKEY. Thank you.
  Monument designations do not take non-Federal land. The Antiquities 
Act only allows monument designations on land the Federal Government 
already owns.
  There is nothing improper about these designations. This authority 
has been upheld by every court which has reviewed it since 1906.
  Monument designations do not lock up resources. Monument designations 
under the Antiquities Act grandfather valid, existing rights so any 
mining or other claim existing before the designation can still move 
forward.
  If Members object to the Antiquities Act of 1906, they should file 
legislation amending the act and then come on over to the Natural 
Resources Committee. Doc Hastings and I will be sitting there waiting 
for you to testify to make your case to amend the Antiquities Act.
  This amendment is based on an extreme ideology that the Federal 
Government should divest itself of the stunning national treasures 
managed by the Department of Interior and enjoyed by millions each 
year.
  Vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Nevada has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. HELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Labrador).
  Mr. LABRADOR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today with my friend, Mr. Heller, 
to join in this great amendment.
  Last year an internal document was leaked from the Department of 
Interior. This document described the administration plans to lock up 
more than 140 million acres of public lands and designate 14 new 
national monuments.
  It also proposed using its land management authority to sidestep 
prohibitions on monument designations. When the secret plan was brought 
to light, the administration backtracked and quickly claimed it had no 
plans to lock up millions of acres of public lands.
  The administration essentially wanted us to forget about how 
President Clinton used his authority in the dark of the night to lock 
up millions of acres of land. I can't say for sure that the 
administration will follow through with that commitment, but I already 
know that they have betrayed us, and they have betrayed our trust.
  Once again, they acted to restrict public land use when Secretary 
Salazar rolled out a new plan, cooked up in secret, to create a new 
category of off-limit lands called ``Wild Lands.''
  The actions of this administration have proven to me that it cannot 
be trusted to possess the authority to designate monuments without 
congressional oversight, which is why I have joined my friend, 
Congressman Heller, in offering this amendment. I urge my colleagues to 
support this amendment.
  Mr. HELLER. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Heller).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada will 
be postponed.


                Amendment No. 174 Offered by Mr. Heller

  Mr. HELLER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, after the short title, insert the 
     following new section:

[[Page 2614]]

       Sec. 4002. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used for the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Heller) and a Member opposed each 
will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nevada.
  Mr. HELLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  Yucca Mountain as a storage location for the Nation's nuclear waste 
is dead. Even the administration understands that transporting the 
nuclear waste to a State with no nuclear activity jeopardizes the 
security of our Nation and is a bad investment of precious taxpayer 
dollars.
  Unfortunately, this bill not only tries to keep the Yucca Mountain 
project in regulatory limbo, it seeks to block information regarding 
viable alternatives to Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste dump.
  Yucca Mountain is in my district, and our State has been dealing with 
this boondoggle project for literally decades. According to the 
Government Accountability Office, over the past 20 years the proposed 
site has suffered from gross mismanagement, faulty science and 
research, contract mismanagement, and, most alarmingly, questions about 
safety and design of the site and its impacts on its surrounding 
environment and people.
  I am a strong supporter of the need to responsibly develop all of our 
Nation's energy resources, including nuclear energy. However, the key 
to my position is the need to be responsible, and continued investment 
in the storage of nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain does not meet this 
litmus test.
  I continue to be disappointed at the House's insistence of reviving 
the Yucca Mountain boondoggle. Most recent estimates place the cost of 
the Yucca Mountain facility at nearly $100 billion.

                              {time}  0030

  Not surprisingly, this estimate seems to increase with each passing 
year.
  Given our current economic climate and our serious debt problems, our 
Nation cannot afford to continue with this poorly managed project. 
Congress needs to have a serious discussion about studying reasonable 
alternatives to Yucca Mountain. If you're concerned about the safety of 
American citizens and the wise stewardship of tax dollars, then join 
with me to keep this project out of limbo, acknowledge reality, and 
move forward on a responsible solution to our Nation's nuclear waste 
storage issue.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's amendment would 
forbid funds for Yucca Mountain, but its most damaging effect is to 
stop the Nuclear Regulatory Commission from moving ahead with the Yucca 
Mountain license, application and review process.
  Mr. Chairman, the House has overwhelmingly voted multiple times over 
the last several years to reject the administration's closure of Yucca. 
The gentleman's amendment would do nothing but support the 
administration's political manipulations and it will waste over $12 
billion of ratepayers' money.
  At this point, Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 15 seconds to my 
ranking member, Mr. Pastor.
  Mr. PASTOR of Arizona. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  I oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to join me.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 45 seconds to 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton).
  Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to my 
good friend, Mr. Heller's, amendment. U.S. taxpayers and electric 
ratepayers have spent billions of dollars on this project. It is my 
assumption and my opinion that the Obama administration has acted 
without authority to close it down. They've certainly acted outside the 
confines of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.
  I support the opposition of my good friend from New Jersey and would 
urge a strong ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 45 seconds to the gentleman 
from Washington (Mr. Hastings).
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I understand why my good friend from Nevada is offering this; he's 
representing what he thinks is right for his constituents, and I 
commend him for that. But the fact of the matter is this is the law of 
the country, this is the repository, period; yet the Department of 
Energy, in my view, has been operating outside the law for the last 
year.
  Ratepayers have already spent $10 billion on this. If we terminate 
this site, we will have other liabilities--in fact, there are already 
contractual liabilities of $2 billion that have been let already--plus 
the expense, if we have to find another repository, will cost taxpayers 
further billions of dollars.
  So I understand why the gentleman is doing this, I think he is 
incorrect, and I urge that Members vote against his amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey has 1 minute 
remaining.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Altmire).
  Mr. ALTMIRE. I thank the gentleman.
  My good friend from Nevada does a wonderful job of representing his 
district and his State. I believe this, however, is a misguided 
amendment, respectfully.
  Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to Mr. Heller's amendment to 
divert federal funding from the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste 
Repository.
  Expanding America's nuclear energy industry is vital to strengthening 
our energy independence and meeting the growing demand of electricity 
across the country.
  While I understand the intent behind the Congressman's amendment, and 
I respect Mr. Heller's defense of his district's interests, I do think 
it is misguided.
  Despite your views on the nuclear repository at Yucca Mountain, it is 
the law of the land and has been congressionally approved. It would be 
a mistake to zero out the funding that has been authorized and 
allocated by Congress for this project.
  The Department of Energy is currently litigating Yucca Mountain's 
license application. The funding in this bill is reserved to answer 
questions about the merits of the project and will help both sides--
those who support the repository as well as those who oppose--make 
their case.
  I look forward to working with the gentleman to advance our mutual 
interest of advancing new and innovative domestic energy production and 
research and development on advanced energy technologies.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentleman yield?
  I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I also rise in opposition to this 
amendment. The fact is there is an appeal taking place before the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A number of States have filed suit, 
those suits are going to be in court this spring. This is not an issue 
we should be deciding tonight. I am strongly opposed to the amendment.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to vote against Mr. 
Heller's amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DICKS. I'm just going to take a minute here.
  I want to say to my colleagues here, I completely agree with my 
friend from Washington State, Mr. Hastings, the chairman of the Natural 
Resources Committee, that this violates the law of the land. There is 
no scientific basis

[[Page 2615]]

for what is happening here. We have submarines and nuclear power 
carriers that are offloading waste in Burlington, Washington that go to 
Idaho that are supposed to go to Yucca Mountain. We made a commitment 
to the people of Idaho that we would move that waste out of here in the 
2025 time frame.
  Now this project is being stopped without Congress--I was here when 
we passed the law, and this is being stopped without Congress changing 
the law. I think it's a travesty, and we're wasting billions of 
dollars. We should go ahead and finish this project.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Heller).
  The amendment was rejected.


                 Amendment No. 563 Offered by Mrs. Noem

  Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The Clerk will 
designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  No funds made available by this Act may be used 
     to modify the national primary ambient air quality standard 
     or the national secondary ambient air quality standard 
     applicable to coarse particulate matter under section 109 of 
     the Clean Air Act.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Mrs. Noem) and a Member 
opposed each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from South Dakota.
  Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment because I'm concerned 
about an EPA rule on the National Primary or Secondary Ambient Air 
Quality Standards that would make the standard for the amount of coarse 
particulate matter in the air more stringent.
  Last summer, the EPA laid the groundwork to regulate dust at an 
unprecedented level. We must stop the EPA from any regulation of farm 
dust.
  Anyone who has driven a combine through a field or a pickup down a 
gravel road knows that dust is a part of rural living. Potentially 
fining farmers and livestock producers who practice good management 
with new dust regulations would be excessive and extremely detrimental 
to our Nation's vital agriculture industry.
  Mr. Chairman, it's hard to think of something more emblematic of 
Washington's regulatory overreach than the potential punishment of 
farmers and livestock producers for kicking up a little dust. Expanding 
the coarse particulate matter standard on dust would be a burdensome 
regulation for farmers and ranchers. My amendment would prohibit the 
EPA from using any of the funds made available under this act to modify 
the standard for coarse particulate matter under the Clean Air Act. 
There is enough uncertainty in farming in rural America. We do not need 
to add to that uncertainty with the threat of more strict EPA 
regulations on farm dust.
  Farmers are certainly looking for certainty about the future. 
Burdening them with greater regulations on dust is excessive and 
unreasonable. For this reason, my amendment is supported by the 
American Farm Bureau and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association. I 
urge my colleagues to support the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, the Noem amendment would prevent the EPA 
from updating air pollution standards for dangerous soot pollution. The 
Clean Air Act requires that EPA revise the limits on this type of 
harmful pollution when new science tells us it's necessary to protect 
human health. EPA hasn't changed this standard since 1987. The 
amendment would tell EPA though--it would require EPA--to ignore the 
science. If new science has emerged in the last 24 years that shows 
that soot pollution is more dangerous than we knew 24 years ago, EPA 
would have to ignore any new scientific findings.
  This amendment applies to one dangerous pollutant, coarse materials. 
They're so small that they get past the respiratory system's natural 
defenses and they lodge in our lungs. Scientific studies have linked 
these particles to a variety of serious health problems, including 
increased respiratory symptoms in children and premature death in 
people with heart and lung disease.
  Why is the majority party so afraid of science? I don't know as much 
about particulate matter as the scientists at EPA, but I don't really 
think you do either. It seems to me we ought to defer to the scientists 
and respect the public's health.
  EPA is charged with protecting the public health. They're doing a 
pretty good job and we ought to let them do it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Crawford).

                              {time}  0040

  Mr. CRAWFORD. Like many of my colleagues, I represent a largely rural 
district. Agriculture is the number one industry in the First District 
of Arkansas. Farmers there--and across the country, I might add--are 
facing tough economic challenges like many other businesses today.
  Regardless of the production they are engaged in--poultry, cattle, 
cotton, rice, soybeans, whatever--the chief complaint of farmers in my 
district is the continued pressure placed on them by the onerous 
regulatory burdens of the Environmental Protection Agency. Now under 
the auspices of ``clean air,'' the EPA wants to regulate dust.
  American farmers produce the safest, cheapest, and most abundant food 
supply on the planet. There are over 300 million mouths to feed in our 
country, and less than a million farmers engaged in the process of 
meeting that demand. Not to mention, global demand is growing 
exponentially where by the year 2050 there will be a total population 
of over 9 billion people.
  Folks, for centuries, America has led the way in agricultural 
production, and we will continue to be the leading producers of 
commodities so long as farmers aren't being stifled by crippling 
regulations and EPA overreach. Government should be aiding our efforts 
to lead the way in agricultural production, not hindering them. The 
regulatory regime must come to realize that our food is grown in the 
dirt and that, in the process of the production of that food, farmers 
are going to stir up a little dust.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. MORAN. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman 
from Idaho (Mr. Simpson).
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Idaho is recognized for 15 
seconds.
  Mr. SIMPSON. How much?
  The Acting CHAIR. Thirteen seconds.
  Mr. SIMPSON. This is a dang good amendment, and it should pass.
  The EPA continually claims that they want certainty, but what they 
are creating is uncertainty. I can tell you that every rancher and 
every farmer in Idaho and across this Nation is concerned about what 
the EPA is trying to do with dust regulations and the impact it is 
going to have on food production.
  Pass this amendment regardless of what they say.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remaining 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
very distinguished ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman).
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, you would think that EPA is about to 
regulate these fine particulate matter for the very first time, but 
that's not accurate.
  PM10 is already regulated because EPA had to set a standard to 
protect

[[Page 2616]]

the public health. These small particulates can get into your lungs, 
and they can cause increased respiratory symptoms in children, and can 
cause premature death in people with heart and lung disease, so EPA 
sets a standard to protect the public health.
  What this amendment would do would be to stop EPA from setting a 
standard that might be tighter if the science dictates it.
  Once they set a standard, EPA does not regulate. EPA leaves it to the 
States to decide how they will meet that standard. EPA is already 
talking to the stakeholders in the agricultural communities.
  In the past, the vast majority of States has not required farms to 
take any action that would require reductions of this pollution. 
Instead, States have typically reduced particles from industrial 
processes. California and Arizona are addressing agricultural pollution 
by incorporating USDA-approved conservation measures in some areas.
  EPA does not target monitoring in rural areas. They are reaching out 
to their stakeholders. EPA should not be stopped by this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from South Dakota (Mrs. Noem).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from South 
Dakota will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 430 Offered by Mr. Pitts

  Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. ___.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to pay the salary of any officer or employee of the 
     Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of 
     Labor, or the Department of the Treasury who takes any action 
     to specify or define, through regulations, guidelines, or 
     otherwise, essential benefits under section 1302 of the 
     Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18022).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts) and a Member opposed 
each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, this is a simple, straightforward amendment. 
This amendment prevents funds from being used by the Department of 
Health and Human Services to implement rules regarding ObamaCare's 
essential benefits package.
  As if ObamaCare's mandate that everyone must purchase health 
insurance wasn't enough, the law went one step further. The Federal 
Government will now tell every single American and business what their 
health plans must cover. To make matters worse, ObamaCare grants this 
unprecedented power to a single person. ObamaCare gives this power to 
the Secretary of Health and Human Services to determine which benefits 
are essential for patients, affecting every man, woman and child in 
America--not to mention that, the more benefits that HHS determines to 
be essential, the higher the premiums will be for coverage, thus 
increasing the overall cost for small businesses and families across 
America.
  Behind me is a chart of all the new powers granted to the Secretary 
under ObamaCare. It was meant to be printed on a 5-foot-by-10-foot 
chart. Even at this size it's difficult to read, but if you have a 
magnifying glass, you can actually read this.
  ObamaCare has nearly 2,000 of the Secretary's shell statements. The 
new powers of the Secretary are symptomatic of the vast expansion of 
Federal control that in many cases usurps State authority and limits 
private sector autonomy, innovations and its ability to function.
  This is bureaucracy at its finest, and it is most destructive. The 
ability to define minimum benefits is just one of many of the new 
powers, but it is one of the pivotal ones, and it is precisely why we 
have pointed out that this is a government takeover of the health 
industry. I believe patients are capable of deciding which health 
insurance plans best fit their needs, not a government bureaucrat.
  For example, the Federal Government shouldn't tell Mormons in Utah 
that they need to buy coverage for alcohol counseling. Yet Secretary 
Sebelius is now in a position to do just that--and there are many other 
ridiculous examples like this.
  Former HHS Secretary Leavitt's writing today in the Washington Post 
perfectly describes the outcome of ObamaCare. He wrote: It puts more 
power than is prudent into the hands of one person, and it is not an 
answer to our national health care crisis.
  There is too much power in one office.
  I urge the House to adopt my amendment and to stop the Federal 
takeover of personal health care decisions.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Connecticut is recognized for 
3 minutes.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I must say that I think I'm in the movie ``Groundhog 
Day.'' How many times do we have to vote to defund the Affordable Care 
Act in one day?
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment will stop the implementation of 
essential health benefits. These rules will ensure that a minimum level 
of quality health coverage will be covered by plans available on the 
exchanges. We are talking about benefits related to things like 
hospitalization, emergency services, maternity care, newborn care, 
mental health care. This ensures that every plan on the exchange meets 
minimum standards. It protects individuals and small businesses. It 
allows them to pick out their plans with the confidence that they will 
be able to get the adequate kinds of coverage that they need.
  Why does the majority want to stand between consumers and the 
information they need?
  I urge my colleagues to please oppose this amendment.
  I yield my remaining time to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Pallone).
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 1\3/4\ minutes.
  Mr. PALLONE. The problem for American consumers is that the insurance 
company gouges them with high premiums and gives them lousy benefits. 
So all we've been trying to do with health care reform is make it 
possible for a consumer to get an affordable policy and to have a 
decent benefits package.
  I, for the life of me, don't understand why the Republicans don't 
want that to happen. Why do they want the consumer not to be able to 
get affordable insurance or to be able to get decent benefits?

                              {time}  0050

  People are amazed because they expect that their insurance policy is 
going to provide physician care, hospital care, emergency care, 
prescription drugs, and oftentimes it doesn't even provide all these 
things. So there should be an essential benefit package.
  If you're a big corporation, you can go out and get a nice benefit 
package for employees, and you can get an affordable policy. But if 
you're a small business or you're an individual, you can't do it. So 
all we're doing is trying to level the playing field so that the little 
guy can get the good benefit package and get the affordable insurance 
just like the big corporation.
  Again, I don't understand why our Republican friends would not want 
that to happen. And it's just practical. It's just a practical solution 
here.
  If you pass this amendment, then we're going to go back to the same 
thing again where that average American can't get the good policy and 
can't get affordable insurance. It's not fair. It's an issue of 
fairness. So oppose this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).

[[Page 2617]]

  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 241 Offered by Mr. Carney

  Mr. CARNEY. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used for the Oil and Gas Research and Development Program 
     of the Department of Energy.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Carney) and a Member opposed 
each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Delaware.
  Mr. CARNEY. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is simple and straightforward. 
It would eliminate funding for the $50 million oil and gas research and 
development program funded through the Department of Energy's fossil 
energy R&D account.
  This cut, which the President also proposed in his FY12 budget, would 
save the taxpayers money and end an unnecessary subsidy to the oil and 
gas industry.
  I am proposing elimination of this R&D program because the research 
is being done and should be done by the industry itself.
  Don't just take my word for it. The industry itself is doing the job 
and says so. There is an ad in today's edition of The Hill newspaper on 
the back which says, in part, this is placed here by the people of 
America's oil and natural gas industry; that oil and natural gas 
companies are leading innovators investing hundreds of billions of 
dollars in innovative technology and capital projects over the past 
decade.
  We should be using our scarce Federal dollars on clean energy 
innovation that we need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, create 
jobs, and to stay competitive globally.
  This continuing resolution would cut over $2 billion in renewable 
energy research and development. At a time when we are looking to cut 
unnecessary spending, the oil and gas R&D program should be on the 
chopping block as well.
  The oil and gas industry has ample resources to develop these 
technologies without this Federal subsidy. A recent GAO report found 
that the industry spends over $2 billion of its own money annually on 
R&D.
  This $50 million cut to an R&D program for the oil and gas industry 
is the right way to cut spending, and I urge my colleagues to join me 
in supporting the amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, the amendment uses a heavy-handed 
approach in order to shut down important programs at the Department of 
Energy.
  Fossil energy sources supply more than 80 percent of our Nation's 
total energy. Using these resources more efficiently and more cleanly 
and developing technologies that can access new domestic sources are 
extremely important when so much of our energy depends on fossil fuels.
  This amendment would stop programs that do just that. For example, it 
would prevent work like the development of ultra-clean fuels.
  There may be some areas of research in which the private sector does 
not need help, but there are other areas of research which are too 
risky for industry to take on.
  I oppose the amendment.
  I am pleased to yield to my ranking, Mr. Pastor, for any comments he 
may wish to make.
  Mr. PASTOR of Arizona. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I also rise to oppose the amendment.
  The amendment prohibits funds from being used for oil and gas 
research. Without this amendment, the Department of Energy would spend 
$38 million during the year. As my chairman points out, fossil fuel 
sources are and will continue to be a large part of our energy mix.
  Given the importance of research and development in this area, it is 
necessary to improve the efficiency in the environmental cost of fossil 
fuels. Further, stopping programs mid year, which this would do, 
results in costs associated with terminating ongoing work.
  I am committed to working with the gentleman to review the balance of 
funding as we move forward, but I cannot support the amendment at this 
time.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Delaware is recognized for 1 
minute.
  Mr. CARNEY. Mr. Chairman, my point is that the industry itself is 
doing this research and development and should do it without a Federal 
subsidy. I mentioned the full-page ad in today's edition of The Hill 
newspaper, which says that they are doing this.
  We shouldn't be subsidizing an industry that's mature and profitable. 
We need to be spending money on renewable energy sources so that we can 
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Instead, in this continuing 
resolution, we're cutting $2 billion out of research and development 
for new energy sources.
  I don't object to research and development going on for traditional 
oil and gas industry, but the industry itself ought to be doing that 
research.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Carney).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. CARNEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Delaware 
will be postponed.


               Amendment No. 164 Offered by Mr. Mulvaney

  Mr. MULVANEY. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. (a) None of the funds made available by this Act 
     for any account may be used in excess of the amount available 
     for such account during fiscal year 2006.
       (b) Subsection (a) shall not apply to funds made 
     available--
       (1) by division A;
       (2) by section 1101(a)(3) and title VI of division B;
       (3) by section 1101(a)(6) (with respect to division E of 
     Public Law 111-117) and title X of division B; or
       (4) for Israel, by section 1101(a)(6) (with respect to 
     division F of Public Law 111-117) and title XI of division B.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney) and a Member 
opposed each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.
  Mr. MULVANEY. I want to briefly begin by thanking the Appropriations 
Committee. I understand the nature of what has been happening here, the 
size of the taxpayer savings that we have seen over the last 3 days.
  But I rise because the debt and the deficit problem facing our Nation 
are greater than I think most people in this room understand, and 
certainly most people back home understand. The circumstances demand 
that we go just a little bit further than we have and that's what this 
amendment does. It goes just a little bit further.
  It takes non-defense discretionary spending back to 2006 levels 
instead of 2008. That represents an additional 3 percent savings, which 
on the one hand doesn't sound like that much, but on the other hand 
actually saves $134 billion of the $900 billion worth of deficits

[[Page 2618]]

that we will incur between tomorrow and the rest of this year.
  Folks have asked me why I have done this, why I have waited 3 years 
to do it, why we are here at 1 o'clock in the morning to hear this 
amendment. I am doing it because I feel that most of the folks don't 
grasp the size of the difficulty. I know that most of the folks in my 
district don't grasp it yet. And I have been struggling with how to 
explain to people exactly what a $1,600 billion deficit means and a 
$14,000 billion debt.
  This chart, I think, does it better than anything else. This chart is 
something that we put together using Congressional Budget Office 
numbers from the base line. This number, very simply, ladies and 
gentlemen, shows when we will use 100 percent of our revenues, 100 
percent of our revenues, to pay our debt.
  And that number, using the CBO estimates, is in 2055. This is the 
equivalent of going back to your family and saying everything that we 
make will go to pay down the minimum payment on our credit card. And 
this number is probably too late. The CBO estimates on interest are 
much lower than we are actually experiencing in the market these days.
  The scary part is that if we don't do anything, if we continue 
business as usual, this will happen. This will happen unless we make 
dramatic changes to the way that we do business around here.
  I heard the gentleman from Virginia earlier today, Mr. Moran, mention 
that he thought that H.R. 1 represented an economic death spiral. This, 
ladies and gentlemen, is an economic death spiral. There is no coming 
back from a situation where you use all of your money just to pay your 
debt.
  We can and will begin work on this this year in the budget. We can 
and will continue work on this as we go through the debt ceiling 
debate. And we can and should keep this in mind with everything that we 
do. But in my humble opinion, we can start tonight by approving this 
amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  0100

  Mr. DICKS. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 3 minutes.
  Mr. DICKS. To make cuts back to the 2006 level for defense, homeland 
security, and veterans affairs would do enormous damage to the country. 
I mean we would be talking about $65, $70 billion in defense, homeland 
security. And VA would be very substantial as well. I just think of the 
VA health care benefits that were increased by our Members of Congress 
working on a bipartisan basis, our former colleague Chet Edwards. We 
increased health care to take care of the problems associated with the 
veterans coming back and needing post-traumatic disorder, traumatic 
brain injury, needing all kinds of help.
  We have thousands of veterans today who are homeless. So taking these 
levels back to 2006, in my judgment, would do devastation to this part 
of the budget. So I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I reserve 
my time.
  Mr. MULVANEY. With all due respect to the ranking member, I was not 
clear. This amendment does not take defense, homeland security, or VA 
back to 2006 levels. Only non-defense, non-security discretionary 
spending.
  Mr. DICKS. I would yield to the gentleman just to say we had a 
different description of your amendment. I regret that there were 
inaccuracies.
  But even for the rest of the government, I think the amendment going 
back to 2006 is too severe. And as the chairman would say, it is an 
across-the-board cut, give all the authority to OMB. I am with Hal 
Rogers, it's not a good idea. Let's defeat the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South 
Carolina will be postponed.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments printed in the Congressional Record 
on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 377 by Mr. Flake of Arizona.
  Amendment No. 166 by Mr. Guinta of New Hampshire.
  Amendment No. 495 by Mr. Hall of Texas.
  Amendment No. 141 by Ms. Lee of California.
  Amendment No. 109 by Mr. Griffith of Virginia.
  Amendment No. 548 by Mr. Jones of North Carolina.
  Amendment No. 47 by Mr. Luetkemeyer of Missouri.
  Amendment No. 149 by Mr. Luetkemeyer of Missouri.
  Amendment No. 569 by Mr. Issa of California.
  Amendment No. 94 by Mr. Sullivan of Oklahoma.
  Amendment No. 216 by Mr. McKinley of West Virginia.
  Amendment No. 217 by Mr. McKinley of West Virginia.
  Amendment No. 545 by Mr. Pompeo of Kansas.
  Amendment No. 200 by Mr. Burgess of Texas.
  Amendment No. 482 by Mr. Heller of Nevada.
  Amendment No. 563 by Mrs. Noem of South Dakota.
  Amendment No. 430 by Mr. Pitts of Pennsylvania.
  Amendment No. 241 by Mr. Carney of Delaware.
  Amendment No. 164 by Mr. Mulvaney of South Carolina.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                 Amendment No. 377 Offered by Mr. Flake

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Flake) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 261, 
noes 158, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 125]

                               AYES--261

     Adams
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amash
     Andrews
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Cardoza
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Clay
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cohen
     Cole
     Conaway
     Connolly (VA)
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Deutch
     Doggett
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellison
     Ellmers
     Eshoo
     Farenthold
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayworth
     Heinrich
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Larson (CT)
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Long
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack

[[Page 2619]]


     Maloney
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neugebauer
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Olver
     Palazzo
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Reyes
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sherman
     Simpson
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Waters
     Webster
     Weiner
     Welch
     West
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--158

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Austria
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (NH)
     Berg
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bonner
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Bucshon
     Butterfield
     Camp
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Costello
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Cummings
     Davis (IL)
     DeGette
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Emerson
     Engel
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gardner
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gonzalez
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Harper
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huelskamp
     Hultgren
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Manzullo
     Markey
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Miller (NC)
     Moore
     Moran
     Neal
     Noem
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Platts
     Price (NC)
     Rangel
     Rehberg
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Schakowsky
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sewell
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Sires
     Smith (NE)
     Stivers
     Sutton
     Terry
     Thompson (MS)
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watt
     Waxman
     Whitfield

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Giffords
     Harman
     Herrera Beutler
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Meeks
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Shuster
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). One minute remains on this vote.

                              {time}  0127

  Messrs. CICILLINE, FINCHER, FARR, REHBERG, and JOHNSON of Ohio 
changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. LEVIN, McDERMOTT, HIGGINS, FRANK of Massachusetts, ALTMIRE, 
HUIZENGA of Michigan, BERMAN, TIERNEY, COURTNEY, HARRIS, SERRANO, 
RAHALL, LARSON of Connecticut, GUTHRIE, HASTINGS of Florida, DEUTCH, 
MURPHY of Connecticut, LEWIS of Georgia, Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California, 
Ms. WATERS, Ms. MATSUI, Ms. DeLAURO, and Ms. VELAZQUEZ changed their 
vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Amendment No. 166 Offered by Mr. Guinta

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New 
Hampshire (Mr. Guinta) on which further proceedings were postponed and 
on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 210, 
noes 210, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 126]

                               AYES--210

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--210

     Ackerman
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hultgren
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)

[[Page 2620]]


     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walsh (IL)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Whitfield
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Giffords
     Harman
     Herrera Beutler
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Meeks
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Shuster
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)

                              {time}  0131

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment No. 495 Offered by Mr. Hall

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Hall) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 233, 
noes 187, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 127]

                               AYES--233

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Rahall
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--187

     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bilbray
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bono Mack
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayworth
     Heinrich
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Giffords
     Gingrey (GA)
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Meeks
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Shuster
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0135

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                  Amendment No. 141 Offered by Ms. Lee

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lee) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 76, 
noes 344, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 128]

                                AYES--76

     Amash
     Baldwin
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Blumenauer
     Braley (IA)
     Campbell
     Capuano
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Cummings
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     Doggett
     Duncan (TN)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Eshoo
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hastings (FL)
     Holt
     Honda
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kucinich
     Lee (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Maloney
     Markey
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Olver
     Pallone
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rohrabacher

[[Page 2621]]


     Royce
     Rush
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Schakowsky
     Serrano
     Slaughter
     Speier
     Tierney
     Towns
     Velazquez
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Woolsey

                               NOES--344

     Ackerman
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (FL)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Clarke (MI)
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Connolly (VA)
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (KY)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Engel
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Hoyer
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Israel
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Long
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neal
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Reyes
     Ribble
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schiff
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Simpson
     Sires
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Giffords
     Harman
     Harper
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Meeks
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Shuster
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0138

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


         Amendment No. 109 Offered by Mr. Griffith of Virginia

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Griffith) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 235, 
noes 185, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 129]

                               AYES--235

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Holden
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Rahall
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--185

     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayworth
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)

[[Page 2622]]


     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Webster
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     Larson (CT)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Meeks
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Shuster
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0141

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 129 I was 
unfortunately detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''


                 Amendment No. 548 Offered by Mr. Jones

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from North 
Carolina (Mr. Jones) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 259, 
noes 159, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 130]

                               AYES--259

     Adams
     Akin
     Altmire
     Amash
     Andrews
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Baldwin
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Boren
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (FL)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carter
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Clay
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Holden
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Israel
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Keating
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Myrick
     Neal
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Simpson
     Sires
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--159

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Baca
     Bachus
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bilbray
     Bishop (GA)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Brooks
     Capps
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Cooper
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeGette
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Flores
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Grijalva
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kucinich
     Lance
     Landry
     Larsen (WA)
     Lee (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Mack
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Nunnelee
     Olver
     Palazzo
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tonko
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wittman
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Conyers
     Culberson
     DeLauro
     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Meeks
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Shuster
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0144

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


              Amendment No. 47 Offered by Mr. Luetkemeyer

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Missouri 
(Mr. Luetkemeyer) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 245, 
noes 176, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 131]

                               AYES--245

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Austria

[[Page 2623]]


     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Berkley
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carnahan
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Costello
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--176

     Ackerman
     Amash
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Noem
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Pingree (ME)
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rothman (NJ)
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Meeks
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Roybal-Allard
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0147

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


              Amendment No. 149 Offered by Mr. Luetkemeyer

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Missouri 
(Mr. Luetkemeyer) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 244, 
noes 179, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 132]

                               AYES--244

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Costello
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Rahall
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--179

     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bilbray
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney

[[Page 2624]]


     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining on 
this vote.

                              {time}  0150

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment No. 569 Offered by Mr. Issa

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Issa) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 191, 
noes 230, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 133]

                               AYES--191

     Adams
     Akin
     Alexander
     Amash
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Guinta
     Hall
     Hanna
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline
     Lamborn
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--230

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brooks
     Brown (FL)
     Burgess
     Butterfield
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Forbes
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Harper
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schilling
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Webster
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     Labrador
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Platts
     Quayle
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining on 
this vote.

                              {time}  0153

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. PLATTS. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 133, I was unavoidably 
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''


                Amendment No. 94 Offered by Mr. Sullivan

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma 
(Mr. Sullivan) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

[[Page 2625]]




                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 285, 
noes 136, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 134]

                               AYES--285

     Ackerman
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Clarke (MI)
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cohen
     Cole
     Conaway
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Engel
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Inslee
     Issa
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Keating
     Kelly
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kissell
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Neugebauer
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Olver
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Reyes
     Ribble
     Richardson
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     Welch
     West
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--136

     Amash
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Berg
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Camp
     Capps
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Costello
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Donnelly (IN)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emerson
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fortenberry
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gardner
     Gerlach
     Gonzalez
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hartzler
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huelskamp
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Latham
     Lee (CA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Luetkemeyer
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Matsui
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Napolitano
     Noem
     Pallone
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Rehberg
     Richmond
     Roby
     Rogers (KY)
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Schakowsky
     Schilling
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Shimkus
     Sires
     Smith (NE)
     Stivers
     Sutton
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Whitfield
     Wu

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     Latta
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Rangel
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining on 
this vote.

                              {time}  0156

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


               Amendment No. 216 Offered by Mr. McKinley

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from West 
Virginia (Mr. McKinley) on which further proceedings were postponed and 
on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 240, 
noes 182, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 135]

                               AYES--240

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Costa
     Costello
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Holden
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Olver
     Palazzo
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Rahall
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland

[[Page 2626]]


     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--182

     Ackerman
     Amash
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Forbes
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Stark
     Sullivan
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining on 
this vote.

                              {time}  0200

  Mr. CARSON of Indiana changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


               Amendment No. 217 offered by Mr. McKinley

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from West 
Virginia (Mr. McKinley) on which further proceedings were postponed and 
on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 239, 
noes 183, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 136]

                               AYES--239

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Costa
     Costello
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleming
     Flores
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Holden
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Rahall
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Walz (MN)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--183

     Ackerman
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayworth
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Sires
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0203

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Amendment No. 545 Offered by Mr. Pompeo

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas 
(Mr. Pompeo)

[[Page 2627]]

on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 234, 
noes 187, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 137]

                               AYES--234

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Cardoza
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kelly
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--187

     Ackerman
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Posey
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Costa
     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     King (IA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0206

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Amendment No. 200 Offered by Mr. Burgess

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Burgess) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 239, 
noes 182, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 138]

                               AYES--239

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Costa
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions

[[Page 2628]]


     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--182

     Ackerman
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     King (IA)
     Marchant
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0209

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Amendment No. 482 Offered by Mr. Heller

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada 
(Mr. Heller) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 209, 
noes 213, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 139]

                               AYES--209

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachus
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Hall
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hunter
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Kucinich
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--213

     Ackerman
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Baldwin
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayworth
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hultgren
     Hurt
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Noem
     Olver
     Owens
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Webster
     Weiner
     Welch
     West
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Pallone
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0212

  So the amendment was rejected.

[[Page 2629]]

  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment No. 563 Offered by Mrs. Noem

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from South 
Dakota (Mrs. Noem) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 255, 
noes 168, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 140]

                               AYES--255

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Cardoza
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Costa
     Costello
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Walz (MN)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--168

     Ackerman
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0215

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment No. 430 Offered by Mr. Pitts

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts) on which further proceedings were postponed 
and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 239, 
noes 183, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 141]

                               AYES--239

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reed

[[Page 2630]]


     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--183

     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     Marchant
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0218

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Amendment No. 241 Offered by Mr. Carney

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Delaware 
(Mr. Carney) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 121, 
noes 300, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 142]

                               AYES--121

     Ackerman
     Amash
     Andrews
     Baldwin
     Bartlett
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Campbell
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Castor (FL)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Crowley
     Davis (CA)
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Doggett
     Dold
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Farr
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Goodlatte
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Higgins
     Hirono
     Honda
     Hurt
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Keating
     Kind
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McClintock
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Moran
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Roybal-Allard
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott, David
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Speier
     Sutton
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--300

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (FL)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Clarke (MI)
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Connolly (VA)
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeGette
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farenthold
     Fattah
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Herrera Beutler
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Holden
     Holt
     Hoyer
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kildee
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Long
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Reyes
     Ribble
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schwartz
     Scott (SC)
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Walz (MN)
     Watt
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Wu
     Yoder
     Young (AK)

[[Page 2631]]



                             NOT VOTING--12

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Myrick
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)
     Young (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0221

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  (By unanimous consent, Mr. Cantor was allowed to speak out of order.)


                          Legislative Program

  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Chairman, I would say to the Members we have got one 
more amendment in this series of votes, after which we are looking at a 
debate time of about 1 hour. So I would advise the Members that it 
would probably be best to stay close to the Chamber, because we would 
expect the final series of votes on this bill and for the day to be 
within 1 hour.


               Amendment No. 164 Offered by Mr. Mulvaney

  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, 2-minute voting will resume.
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney) on which further proceedings were postponed and 
on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 93, 
noes 328, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 143]

                                AYES--93

     Akin
     Amash
     Bachmann
     Bartlett
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Bono Mack
     Brady (TX)
     Broun (GA)
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Campbell
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Denham
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Goodlatte
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Harris
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hurt
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Landry
     Luetkemeyer
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     Miller (FL)
     Mulvaney
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Pearce
     Pence
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sessions
     Smith (NE)
     Southerland
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Walberg
     Walsh (IL)
     Wilson (SC)
     Woodall
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--328

     Ackerman
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brooks
     Brown (FL)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole
     Conaway
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Gosar
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hartzler
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Kucinich
     Lance
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Long
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Marino
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Olver
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Platts
     Polis
     Posey
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schilling
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Webster
     Weiner
     West
     Westmoreland
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Stark
     Welch
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in 
this vote.

                              {time}  0225

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


               Amendment No. 255 Offered by Mr. Huelskamp

  Mr. HUELSKAMP. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Thornberry). The Clerk will designate the 
amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the 
     following new section:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used by the National Labor Relations Board to certify the 
     results of an election of a labor organization under section 
     9(c)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 
     159(c)(1)) that is not conducted by secret ballot.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Huelskamp) and a Member opposed 
each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kansas.
  Mr. HUELSKAMP. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak about the importance of 
protecting America's workers.
  My home State of Kansas is one of 22 right-to-work States in which a 
worker cannot be required to join a union as a condition of employment. 
This ensures worker freedom, and Card Check poses a direct threat to 
this freedom.
  The last Congress knew that Card Check went against the will of the 
American people, but the current administration still seems intent on 
pushing it upon American workers.
  To circumvent necessary congressional approval is to attack our 
representative form of government. If enacted through backdoor 
administrative paths and without congressional approval, Card Check 
would eliminate

[[Page 2632]]

the use of a secret ballot for union elections.
  Mr. Chairman, we have to preserve the use of a secret ballot. It is a 
fundamental institution of democracy. If the private ballot is 
eliminated, it opens up a window of opportunity for labor unions to 
strong-arm workers who are in the unions. Just this week in Wisconsin, 
we have seen the tactics unions are willing to use when they don't get 
their way; and we know the administration is encouraging this type of 
behavior across the country.
  After speaking with colleagues, I feel another vehicle would be 
better for this issue, but I could not pass up the opportunity to 
address this matter on the floor. So I will withdraw this amendment 
today, and will look forward to working with my colleagues in the 
coming days to preserve the rights of American workers.
  I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.


             Amendment No. 273 Offered by Mr. King of Iowa

  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the 
     following new section:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to administer the wage-rate requirements of 
     subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, United States Code, 
     with respect to any project or program funded by this Act.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 17, 
2011, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) and a Member opposed each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Iowa.

                              {time}  0230

  Mr. KING of Iowa. I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment that is before the House this evening is 
an amendment that shuts off the funding within this continuing 
resolution to what we know as the Davis-Bacon Act.
  The Davis-Bacon Act is an old and archaic act that was generated 
during the Depression era, the early years of the Depression era, in 
about 1931. It was designed to keep the African American workers out of 
the trade unions in New York. That's the source of it. I have dealt 
underneath this law for my working life as a construction contractor, 
so my hands-on experience with Davis-Bacon, I believe, is as strong as 
anyone's in this Chamber.
  The costs that are added to our construction projects are what we 
should be thinking about here in this 112th Congress, in this Congress 
of austerity, on this night that we've had of cutting spending and 
cutting spending, and it's this:
  According to Heritage Study, the extra wages that are paid out 
unnecessarily total $10.9 billion. I have done this study within my own 
construction company, and have looked at the difference in the cost of 
the Davis-Bacon Federal wage scale. They will call it ``prevailing 
wage.'' I will tell you we know it's union scale, mandated by Federal 
law, and there is no reason for us to adhere to a union scale mandated 
by Federal law. My numbers show this:
  It increases the cost of a project between 8 and 35 percent depending 
on how much is materials and how much is labor. Other data out there 
show an increase of 9 to 37 percent. Our numbers match well. The costs 
of compliance for contractors are over $190 million a year, and it 
distorts the relationship between management and labor. We are, Mr. 
Chairman, in an era where our question becomes this:
  Do we want to create jobs or do we want to cost jobs? Do we want to 
build 4 miles of road under Davis-Bacon or do we want to build five? Do 
we want to build four schools or do we want to build five? Do we want 
to have an inflation of wages by an average of 22 percent, which is 
according to some of the wage and hour studies? Do we want to see the 
price go up? Do we want to see a construction industry that reduces 
workers by as much as 25,000 a year in minority workers?
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Connecticut is recognized for 
20 minutes.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment prohibits the use of funds to administer 
the wage rate requirements under Davis-Bacon. It is yet another 
illustration of how the majority is making this continuing resolution a 
Trojan Horse, filled with ideology that irreparably harms working 
families.
  The Davis-Bacon Act ensures that workers on federally funded 
government contracts are paid no less than the wages paid for similar 
work in a community. A simple concept. Former President Bush understood 
this concept when he reinstated the Davis-Bacon rules for 
reconstruction contracts in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
  Despite the majority's argument, the Davis-Bacon Act has no effect on 
total costs of construction. Study after study reveals that higher 
productivity makes up for any additional labor cost, essentially 
eliminating any cost savings if the law were repealed. If this 
amendment is enacted into law, we will be cheating workers of a fair 
wage with no cost savings to show for it.
  This amendment is nothing more than an attempt to accelerate a race 
to the bottom. It is that way of doing business which tells workers in 
this country ``you do not matter; your right to a decent wage does not 
matter; your dreams and your aspirations to do better and to provide 
for your family do not matter.''
  All that counts is the power to extract the cheapest possible cost, 
the lowest labor cost, in return for the highest possible profit. This 
does not reflect our values as a Nation and certainly not the values 
that created America's middle class.
  Today, as we face 9 percent unemployment, wages falling, the number 
of families in poverty growing and increasing costs for just about 
everything, gutting the law that ensures a decent job and a fair wage 
for workers is the wrong direction. It is the very future of the middle 
class that is in jeopardy if we pass amendments like the King amendment 
and, with it, the idea that a society can act with a shared sense of 
purpose and with a responsibility to each other.
  Vote against this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. I yield myself 30 seconds.
  It's a little bit amazing to me that the gentlelady can get so 
focused on this. I'm the one that should be focused on it in that way 
and animated. The taxpayers should be animated by this.
  They should understand that, when the Federal Government sets union 
scale and drives the price up and the taxpayers can't afford it, it's 
not about a race to the bottom. The quality of work for my workers was 
always there. We take care of our people 12 months out of the year with 
a benefits package. We're not hiring them out of a union hall for a 
day, but you make us pay the price as if we were. We uphold our 
workers. We take care of them. We have the quality there. It's a matter 
of fact and it's proven, Mr. Chairman.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. 
Hirono).
  Ms. HIRONO. I rise to speak against this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, the Davis-Bacon Act requires that workers on federally 
funded construction projects be paid no less than the wages paid in the 
community for similar work. It sounds fair. The Davis-Bacon Act 
prevents the Federal Government, a large influential construction 
owner, from using precious tax dollars to undercut local wage standards 
through its investments in construction work.
  Those against Davis-Bacon say it drives up costs. Not so. Why don't 
we deal with facts for a change?
  Davis-Bacon has no effect on total costs of construction. Study after

[[Page 2633]]

study reveals productivity makes up for any additional labor cost, 
essentially eliminating any cost savings if the law is repealed. In 
other words, projects using highly skilled workers often cost less than 
those using low-wage, low-skilled workers.
  Opponents who claim the government could save billions by eliminating 
Davis-Bacon protections ignore productivity, safety and the act's 
economic development benefits, which contribute to the real cost 
effectiveness of Davis-Bacon.
  In addition, the Davis-Bacon minimum wage must reflect the rate of 
contribution to retirement, health insurance, apprenticeship training, 
and disability insurance. By including fringe benefits and wage 
calculations, Davis-Bacon delivers health care and pensions for workers 
on these projects.
  Without prevailing wages, investments in training fall; work related 
injuries increase; pension coverage drops; fewer workers have health 
care insurance; wages stagnate and even drop over time; and total 
construction costs are still unchanged.
  In fact, the real economic significance of Davis-Bacon wage 
requirements for federally assisted construction projects is that it 
maintains community standards by preventing bottom-feeding contractors 
from driving down construction workers' wages and working conditions.
  I urge my colleagues to vote down this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the King amendment.
  This amendment would strip away Davis-Bacon wage protections in 
Hawaii and nationwide.
  Enacted in 1931, the Davis-Bacon Act ensures that workers on federal 
construction contracts receive at least the prevailing wage for 
construction jobs. The Davis-Bacon Act ensures projects are built by 
skilled and experienced workers who know what they're doing. Prevailing 
wages and higher-skilled work result in greater productivity and lower 
cost.
  In industries without Davis-Bacon protections, we have seen 
unscrupulous contractors engage in a ``race to the bottom,'' trying to 
undercut each other to perform shoddy work, with less-skilled workers, 
at sub-par wages. These projects often end up costing more in the long 
run due to repairs, revisions, and delays.
  Some claim that Davis-Bacon costs the Federal Government more. On the 
contrary, studies show that higher-wage workers are more productive, 
saving hundreds of millions of dollars in the long run.
  Construction workers who build highways, homes, or buildings should 
be able to earn enough to feed their families, put a roof over their 
heads, and send their kids to college. Beyond just helping workers and 
their families, prevailing wages improve local economies. Workers spend 
their income in local businesses and pay local taxes. Workers 
participate in building trades training programs and health care 
programs and are not dependent on benefits from other social programs. 
One study found that local prevailing wage law generated 2.4 times the 
economic benefit of the cost of the construction project.
  Sadly, this amendment is another example of this bill's consistent 
attacks on American workers, including the construction workers, 
teachers, nurses, police officers, and firefighters who are committed 
to build, educate, heal, and protect communities in Hawaii and 
throughout our country. Rather than focus on providing good jobs with 
fair pay, the Republicans are more interested in increasing corporate 
profits on the backs of American workers.
  I strongly support Davis-Bacon protections and oppose this misguided 
amendment. I urge my colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. I yield myself 15 seconds to announce to the Chair 
that I have just been called a ``bottom-feeder''--a bottom-feeder for 
providing 12-months-out-of-the-year work, health care benefits and 
retirement benefits for my employees.
  I take it as an insult, but I am not going to ask to take the lady's 
words down.
  Mr. Chairman, I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia 
(Mr. Broun).
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. It has been said by many that, when one goes to 
heaven or hell, you have to fly through the Atlanta Airport.
  Just yesterday, I was talking to a contractor who is involved in 
doing the expansion of the Atlanta Airport, of the Hartsfield-Jackson 
Airport. We were talking about his business and what was going on, and 
he was complaining to me about the construction costs and the increase 
that is mandated by Davis-Bacon.
  The previous speaker said that it doesn't raise the costs, but that's 
totally false.
  In fact, this contractor told me just yesterday that the increased 
cost to the people of Atlanta, Georgia, and to the State of Georgia is 
40 percent above what it would be if we did not have Davis-Bacon just 
leering over their heads like a dagger, causing them to have to pay a 
higher amount of money.
  While we are here in tough economic times, we need to look at what 
the Federal Government is doing to try to increase the costs for our 
children and our grandchildren so that they have to pay it in the 
future. Davis-Bacon is one of those laws, antiquated laws, that does 
cost today's taxpayers a tremendous amount of money, but it's going to 
cost our children and our grandchildren their future.
  The reason it does that is we're spending money we don't have. Davis-
Bacon is a culprit in causing the debt of this country, the debt of 
Atlanta, Georgia, and the debt of the State of Georgia to go higher.
  It is time to put Davis-Bacon to rest. It has outlived its 
usefulness, and we have to vote to stop the spending. Vote ``yes'' on 
this amendment.

                              {time}  0240

  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
LaTourette).
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the gentlelady for yielding.
  I tell this story every time we talk about Davis-Bacon.
  Davis and Bacon were Republicans, and what was occurring was that you 
had out-of-town workers coming into New York City to build a hospital, 
undercutting the local labor market at a time when a lot of people were 
out of work. That's what Davis-Bacon is.
  Quite frankly, the last test we had on Davis-Bacon was during the 
hurricanes down in the gulf coast when President Bush suspended it for 
a period of time. We made the case to him that you weren't saving any 
money. Not only weren't you saving any money, but you were having 
workers come in because there weren't the anti-kickback provisions, so 
the payrolls didn't have to be submitted; and you had a lot of illegal 
workers coming down who still live in Louisiana, undercutting the local 
labor market.
  So I get that we don't like unions on this side of the aisle. But 
I've got to tell you, if you look at the labor rates for operating 
backhoes and everything else in the gentleman's, the author of the 
amendment, a carpenter makes $14.45 under Davis-Bacon, and a backhoe 
operator makes $14.53.
  Quite frankly, Mr. Chairman, I don't want somebody who's operating a 
backhoe near my house making less than that.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Bartlett).
  Mr. BARTLETT. I don't think that anybody would object to paying 
workers on these projects a real prevailing wage. The problem is that 
what's called a ``prevailing wage'' is not the prevailing wage.
  I have a friend who does a lot of ornamental ironwork. A lot of these 
buildings around here he has done. He lives out in Hagerstown. The 
contracts that he has to put that in require him to pay prevailing wage 
when he puts it in down here. The same people that install it down here 
do the work of preparing it out there. This is a good job in 
Hagerstown, and that's only--what?--about 70 miles from here. When he 
comes down here to put it in down here, he has to double their pay for 
the time he's down here.
  It's just not prevailing wage, and that's why it's wrong.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Ellison).
  Mr. ELLISON. I thank the gentlelady for the time.
  Mr. Chairman, when I look at this amendment by Representative King, 
it's the closest thing to a jobs bill that

[[Page 2634]]

I've seen since January started--and it's disappointing. The reality is 
that I wish we weren't debating this at nearly 3 o'clock in the 
morning, because I would love the American people to see that this is 
what substitutes for a jobs bill in this day and age.
  The fact is that this is what the very fight is all about. Do we want 
to build a robust middle class or do we want to pay people the least we 
possibly can pay them to keep them desperate and drive wages down to 
nothing so that we have a very small group of really wealthy people and 
a vast group of really desperate people who would do anything to work 
and who could have their unions busted because you've got people who've 
got to do what they've got to do and cross that line?
  This is at the heart of what it's all about.
  This is the fight.
  Shall we have a middle class and pay people decent wages or shall we 
continue on this drive to separate and increase wage inequality in this 
country so that the richest have so much and so that the rest of us 
just don't have much at all?
  Davis-Bacon is good legislation because it strengthens our middle 
class so that people can actually have a decent quality of life, send 
their kids to school, be able to send them to college, and have decent 
retirements. It's about making a strong middle class based on a decent, 
livable wage.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Stutzman).
  Mr. STUTZMAN. I thank the gentleman from Iowa for bringing this 
amendment forward.
  Mr. Chairman, I just want to share with you a little story that we 
experienced over the past couple of years with Davis-Bacon. I think 
that the people we often forget about here when we get into these 
debates are the taxpayers, themselves. The taxpayers are the ones who 
have to foot the bill for the wages that Davis-Bacon drives up.
  After the stimulus bill was passed a couple of years ago, even though 
I opposed the idea of what the stimulus bill was going to do, we in our 
community had been taking the initiative to put in sewer systems around 
our lakes and our rivers to protect our soil and our resources. After a 
couple of projects that had already been bid out without Davis-Bacon 
wages, the company contacted our office and said, Hey, we would like to 
apply for stimulus dollars to help drive our costs down on these 
particular projects.
  Well, after doing some research, because they did not bid the 
projects with Davis-Bacon wages, they were ineligible, and therefore 
were going to be paying higher rates. They were also going to be paying 
the contractors, themselves, at a lower wage because they were not 
eligible for the stimulus money, money which would have put 
infrastructure into our communities, allowing for the building of long-
term assets in our communities. Instead, they were ineligible because 
they had not bid Davis-Bacon wages.
  I think it's very important that we remember the taxpayers, who have 
to fund these projects because of the higher costs, and I think it's 
important that we also remember that each community individually 
recognizes that their labor costs are different and that they shouldn't 
always be required to deal with Federal standards.
  I appreciate the gentleman from Iowa for bringing his amendment 
forward, and I ask that you support it.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Connecticut has 13\1/2\ 
minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Iowa has 12\1/4\ minutes 
remaining if they choose to use it all.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
McDermott).
  Mr. McDERMOTT. The gentleman from Minnesota really made the point. 
Here we are at a quarter to 3 in the morning, going after the working 
people of this country.
  In 1932, we didn't have unemployment insurance.
  Now, I'm sure your next amendment will be ``no money should be spent 
for unemployment insurance in this country'' because that creates that 
moral hazard where people sit at home and wait for that check to come 
in, right? They won't go down and look for work. We also had no 
workers' comp in this country before 1910. If a guy got hurt, they 
threw him out in the street and got somebody new. We didn't care.
  If that's the kind of country you want to go back to, I suppose the 
next bill you bring out here will be ``let's repeal the minimum wage.'' 
Why the heck do we have minimum wage? Do you know what the prevailing 
wage in this city was when this building was built? It was built by 
slaves. Now, is that where you want to go? What are you after?
  The Government of the United States should set a standard of what we 
want for the working people in this country.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair would remind all Members to direct their 
comments to the Chair, not to others in the second person.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. I yield myself 2 minutes.
  I want to point out to the body also, Mr. Chairman, that I have lived 
under the Davis-Bacon wage scale for years. I've met payroll for 28\1/
2\ years--over 1,400 consecutive weeks. I've worked for a wage 
underneath Davis-Bacon wage scales, and I've worked in merit shop 
operations. I've worked in shops in the wintertime and on construction 
projects in the field before it froze up, from the spring to fall. I've 
been on all sides of this. I've been a laborer on the pipeline. I've 
been a heavy equipment operator. I've been an owner and I've managed 
people, and I've watched what Davis-Bacon has done at every single 
level along the way.
  It distorts the relationship between management and labor. It takes 
away from the individuals the ability or the willingness to contribute 
to the decision-making process.

                              {time}  0250

  When the government comes in and says, ``on one side of the road, 
you're going to pay your laborers $14 an hour, but on the other side of 
the road you're going to pay them $21 an hour, and if they climb in the 
seat of a motor grader it's going to be $35 an hour, but if it happens 
to be a finish machine then it's going to be $40 an hour,'' you watch 
your crews jockeying for the highest paying job there is.
  What happens if you sit back at a bird's-eye view?
  They will be scrambling over to climb onto the machine that's the 
least useful but that pays the most money. Then if you go away for a 
few days, you'll come back and find out they've rolled all the clods, 
that your wage price has gone up and that you're no longer competitive, 
and you'll have to go back on the job and essentially get out--this is 
figuratively speaking--the whip and make sure you crack it so you get 
people pushing as hard as possible.
  It raises the tension, and it takes away a lot of the pleasure of 
taking pride in your work because now management is pitted against 
labor, and labor is pitted against labor in jockeying for the highest 
paying jobs.
  This is no way to run a business. It's no way to run a company. It's 
no way to run a country to think that we here in this Congress should 
be one of the ones deciding what someone should get paid, or at least 
writing the rules for it, knowing that it's not prevailing wage but 
that it's union scale, and it takes 2\1/2\ years to get a ruling on 
what's prevailing wage and what isn't, and so we just don't know what 
it is for 2\1/2\ years.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa has 10\1/4\ minutes 
remaining. The gentlewoman from Connecticut has 12\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I will point out that there has been a misunderstanding here with 
regard to an agreement on the length of this amendment discussion. We'd 
agreed to take it down to 10 minutes each, but when the announcement 
was made, I think it was confusing to both sides.
  So what I'd like to do is try to wrap up my side of this in 1 minute 
and yield

[[Page 2635]]

to the gentlelady from Connecticut for as much time as she may think is 
appropriate to consume in order to close, if that would be agreeable. 
I'm going to move ahead with my part by picking up where I left off.
  Mr. Chairman, the inefficiencies that are created by Davis-Bacon are 
multiplied in the costs that are in the jobs that we do. It is an 8 to 
35 percent increase in the overall costs of our construction projects. 
We need to keep people at work. It means fewer people are working for 
more money, and it means a more distorted economy and inefficiencies 
that are built in that completely distort the cost of these wages.
  So it is important for us to know that this isn't the first debate 
before this Congress but that it is the first intense debate that has 
taken place since the Republican majority took over here in 2011. Back 
in 1995, some of the cosponsors of the original Davis-Bacon repeal, a 
similar amendment, were Boehner, Bartlett, Coble, Dreier, Goodlatte, 
Herger, McKeon, and Wolf.
  I would urge adoption of this amendment and a strong vote to cut the 
funding off to anything that would be enforcing Davis-Bacon wages under 
this CR.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  Mr. ANDREWS. Members of both parties should oppose this amendment 
because it rests on three misjudgments.
  The first misjudgment is that the wages established by this Davis-
Bacon practice are union-imposed wages. The fact of the matter is they 
are prevailing wages which are determined by a survey of the local 
marketplace.
  The second misjudgment is that it always raises the cost of a 
construction project. The fact is quite the opposite. When the 
productivity rises, the value rises; and if you have better performance 
and fewer errors and the faster completion of a project, productivity 
rises, and you get more value.
  But I think the most important misjudgment is that it is, one more 
time, the wrong issue at the wrong time. There are a lot of Americans 
awake at this hour. Thankfully, for them, they're probably not watching 
this debate, but they're awake at this hour because this has yet been 
another day and another week and another month with no paycheck, no job 
and no hope.
  What they want us to do is to work together to put them back to work. 
Yet what we have seen in the last 24 hours is a debate over whether to 
defund Planned Parenthood, a debate over whether to repeal most of the 
environmental protections that have taken 40 years to build up in this 
country, a debate over whether people have the right to know if they're 
buying safe toys, and now a debate over whether to repeal a successful 
labor-management partnership.
  It's the wrong amendment at the wrong time.
  Vote ``no.''
  Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to Amendment No. 273, 
offered by my colleague, Congressman King. 
  This amendment's intent is to defund wage law requirements as 
established by the Davis-Bacon Act.
  Davis-Bacon doesn't just help the workers who build our country 
support their families; it also makes sure that taxpayers get their 
money's worth.
  The Davis-Bacon Act fosters competition based on quality, attracting 
workers who are more productive, more experienced, and well-trained.
  The Federal Government should not be the engine driving the ``race to 
the bottom'', and Davis-Bacon helps ensure that public projects do not 
facilitate low ball bids that undercut the American worker.
  Reports show that projects constructed with Davis-Bacon wage 
provisions are more likely to be completed on time, within budget, and 
with fewer future repair costs.
  Problems arise in projects when you have unskilled workers who are 
working at the lowest of wages and do not have benefits to support 
their families. Prevailing wage laws help ensure the best condition for 
workers, and employees respond by putting their best work forward, 
benefitting the community and the taxpayer.
  Elimination of the Davis-Bacon Act--which stabilizes wages, provides 
benefits to families, and promotes competition based on quality--would 
only foster an environment of low bidding, low wages, and poorer 
quality of work.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa will be 
postponed.


               Amendment No. 567 Offered by Ms. Hayworth

  Ms. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to implement section 1899A of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1395kkk), as added by section 3403 of the Patient 
     Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Hayworth) and a Member opposed 
each will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
  Ms. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, section 3404 of the Patient Protection 
and Affordable Care Act created the Independent Payment Advisory Board, 
known by the acronym ``IPAB.'' Beginning in 2014, this 15-member board 
will be charged with cutting the growth rate of Medicare spending. IPAB 
is designed as a bureaucracy that will be looking not at how to improve 
patient care but how to hit an expenditure target.
  PPACA limits what IPAB would be able to do to restrict cost growth. 
For example, IPAB cannot recommend higher cost sharing, or otherwise 
restrict benefits or eligibility. The primary means of achieving 
expenditure targets will be to reduce payments to physicians and 
hospitals. This, in turn, will reduce access to providers--access that 
Medicare patients need to have--as the providers will find that they 
will not be able to afford to accept Medicare's reimbursement rates.
  Furthermore, Congress ceded a tremendous amount of power to the IPAB. 
If Members believe that the cuts proposed by IPAB won't work or are too 
draconian, it will take an affirmative act by future Congresses to 
overturn its recommendations. This represents an abdication of 
responsibility by Congress, whose Members are expected to make these 
decisions, not unelected, unaccountable Federal bureaucrats. Equally 
troubling, the IPAB bears more than a passing resemblance to the 
British National Institute for Clinical Excellence, which governs 
payment for the National Health Service.
  From my vantage point as an ophthalmologist, one example will 
demonstrate why a similarity between IPAB and NICE, which is the ironic 
acronym for this powerful British entity, should give all of us pause. 
Up until a couple of years ago, NICE refused to pay for treatment for a 
form of macular degeneration that led, in most cases, to legal 
blindness if the sufferer had good vision in the other eye. This is 
nearly impossible for an American to fathom that a government agency 
would compel a doctor to, in effect, calmly watch a patient go blind in 
one eye even though vision-saving treatment was available.
  If an unelected board of advisers is compelled to make decisions 
primarily on the basis of cost, then this is the kind of awful choice 
our doctors and patients may well be forced to accept; and this is one 
of many reasons the Affordable Care Act was repealed by the House last 
month. We honor the goals of this law to allow all Americans to have 
access to good care with affordable, portable health insurance; but we 
need to go about achieving those goals while preserving the choice, 
quality and innovation that Americans expect and deserve.

[[Page 2636]]



                              {time}  0300

  As we craft alternatives that will honor the best of American 
medicine, we will best serve our citizens by prohibiting any funding 
towards the implementation of the Independent Payment Advisory Board.
  I strongly urge the support of all Members for the amendment I am 
sponsoring, and I thank you.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Connecticut is recognized for 
3 minutes.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Just to make a point, it sounds from the gentlelady like 
what you want to do is raise the Medicare rates and cut benefits--but 
let me just get on with this here.
  How many times, as I said earlier, do we have to vote on the 
Affordable Care Act? This long series of ``defunding health reform'' 
amendments shows how far the House is straying from a serious 
legislative process. So far today, the House has passed no fewer than 
three separate, overlapping and duplicative amendments that prohibit 
the use of funds to carry out the Affordable Care Act.
  First, the House passed the Rehberg amendment: prohibiting the use of 
funds for this purpose by any agency funded in the Labor-HHS-Education 
appropriations bill. A few minutes later, the House passed an amendment 
by Mr. King: prohibiting the use of funds by any Federal agency for 
this purpose. A few minutes after that vote, the House passed another 
amendment by Mr. King: prohibiting funds to pay the salary of any 
Federal employee to implement or administer the Affordable Care Act.
  The majority party does not like the Affordable Care Act, and would 
like to cut off all funding for the act's implementation--now that much 
is clear--but how many times do we need to pass the same prohibition 
yesterday and today? Will three times be enough or will the House just 
keep passing more and more amendments, doing essentially the same thing 
until everyone on the majority's side has satisfied their urge to make 
clear just how opposed they are to expanding the availability of health 
care in this country?--which is what the Affordable Care Act is all 
about.
  Instead of this pointless debate, we should be working on what the 
American public wants. They want us to create jobs. They want us to get 
this economy going again. They want to make sure that they have jobs, 
that they're able to send their children to school--and yes, they would 
like to have health care benefits so that, when they get sick, they 
will be able to have the kinds of treatment that all of us in this body 
have by virtue of being Members of the Congress.
  We go to the head of the line. They can't get the same kind of care 
that we get.
  Yet, day in and day out over these last several days, we've watched 
our colleagues on the other side of the aisle do everything they can to 
deny the American public the opportunity to have the same kind of 
health care that Members of Congress have.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Hayworth).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 154 Offered by Mr. Burgess

  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the 
     following new section:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to carry out paragraph (11) of section 101 of Public 
     Law 111-226 (124 Stat. 2389).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 18, 
2011, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) and a Member opposed each 
will control 3 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Canseco).
  Mr. CANSECO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Burgess 
amendment.
  Last August, as part of a $26 billion bailout bill for States, $10 
billion was set aside to be distributed to the States for education. 
The State of Texas was set to receive $830 million as part of this 
education funding. As far as we are concerned, government spending does 
not create jobs or economic prosperity. Nonetheless, the money was 
appropriated for all States in the Union.
  Yet tucked into this legislation was an amendment that was 
deliberately and maliciously slipped into it that imposed a restriction 
on the State of the Texas, and only Texas, so that for Texas to receive 
the money would force Texas to violate its constitution. The 
restrictive amendment required that Texas guarantee that spending 
levels for elementary and secondary education not dip below 2010 levels 
for 3 years.
  This is troubling. To accept the funds, Texas would have to violate 
its State constitution.
  Neither the Governor nor the State government branches are able to 
make budget decisions that bind future legislatures. This amendment is 
not about whether or not taxpayers' money will be spent or saved since 
the funds have already been appropriated. The amendment is about 
fairness, equal treatment for American taxpayers in one State, and 
malicious conduct in an arena involving Texas taxpayers and Texas 
schoolchildren where such legislative conduct is unconscionable.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Connecticut is recognized for 
3 minutes.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Doggett).
  Mr. DOGGETT. When Texas received $3.25 billion in education stimulus 
funds over the objection of every Texas Republican, Governor Perry 
played a shell game that left Texas schools not a dime better off than 
if no Federal aid had come in the first place. That is the only reason 
that, last summer, all 12 Democratic Texas Members--from Chet Edwards 
to Silvestre Reyes, from Henry Cuellar to Gene Green--united, joined 
together, in offering our Save Our Schools amendment, which is today 
Federal law.
  Tonight's proposal seeks to nullify that protection so that Governor 
Perry can reach out for another Federal bailout even if it means taking 
$830 million away from Texas schoolchildren. Defectively written, this 
amendment fails to repeal anything. The enforcement funds that it would 
limit are not in this bill. They are already appropriated. Vote ``no'' 
on a very flawed amendment for a failed purpose.
  Stop begging Washington for help, Governor. Just sign the 
application.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Fort Worth, Texas (Ms. Granger).
  Ms. GRANGER. I know it's late and people are tired, but it's not too 
late to right a wrong--the wrong that was done was against the 
schoolchildren of Texas to the tune of $830 million.
  The Congress is asking the Governor of Texas to do something that he 
is constitutionally unable to do. What is happening to our schools is 
the same as in many States, but Texas has this extra burden of 
scrambling to find ways to afford to keep those classrooms open and the 
teachers there.
  What we are asking you to do is to release Texas from this burden 
that only Texas has which was put on Texas by this Congress, I think 
unintentionally by most of the people in this Congress. So I would say 
tonight this is an issue that deals with Texas but that it affects 
every schoolchild and every teacher in our State.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. To my colleagues, what would you do if $3 
billion for education were denied the schoolchildren of Texas or of 
South Carolina or of California? You'd come to their aid. Nine 
Democratic Members, lonely Members--all by ourselves--decided to fight 
for the school

[[Page 2637]]

districts of Texas. They called us and asked us for help.

                              {time}  0310

  What we did was just ask the Governor to certify that the dollars 
that we would send them--that had no votes from the Republicans--would 
be for the schoolchildren of Texas. I will do it tomorrow, yesterday 
and forever.
  Today, our school districts are being cut--six in my district. 
Houston, Texas, HISD is being cut by $300 million. Our Governor is 
going against the funding process of this country. You cannot take and 
hoard money for children and expect us to sit idly by.
  I am proud to be one of nine Democrats who stood up for the children. 
I ask my colleagues to stand up for us. Let the moneys go to the 
children and not in the pocket of the Governor of the State of Texas.
  This amendment prevents the Department of Education from enforcing 
language that would ensure Texas school districts receive $830 million 
from the Education Jobs Fund that was passed last year. The Texas 
Delegation fought hard for these funds so that they are distributed to 
our neediest school districts and provides assurance that Texas will 
not single out education for disproportionate budget cuts in the next 
budget cycle.
  Mr. Chair, I recently met with several superintendents of school 
districts in my congressional district about this issue and this is not 
unique to schools in Houston. In fact over 40 Texas superintendents 
including: several Houston school districts, Texas Elementary 
Principals and Supervisors Association, Texas AFT, Texas Association of 
School Boards, Texas State Teachers Association, Association for Texas 
Professional Educators, Texas Association of School Administrators, 
Texas Classroom Teachers Association, requested that the Federal funds 
sent to the State for education should be released immediately to those 
districts. Our children deserve the best quality education so they can 
grow up to obtain good jobs. The Governor simply needs to certify that 
the 830 million Federal funds will only be used for education. What 
does this mean in terms of jobs in Texas? This amendment would 
essentially cut 14,500 teaching jobs in Texas. Republicans continue to 
say we need to create jobs, and this amendment does the complete 
opposite while placing our children at a disadvantage. We cannot turn 
our backs on our children who need a quality education and certainly 
not turn our backs on our teachers in a time when our economy is 
fragile and when they need us the most. Let us support our Texas 
children. Texas is estimated to have a projected deficit of up to $27 
billion and there are plans to cut millions for key programs. It is 
unacceptable to continue with politics as usual. The Federal dollars 
will be released upon certification that its only use is for the 
education of Texas school children.
  I urge my colleagues to join me and the thousands of teachers in 
Texas who are against this anti-Texas amendment and vote against the 
Burgess amendment and look out for the best interest of our children.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the remaining time?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas has 30 seconds remaining. 
The gentlewoman from Connecticut has 1 minute remaining.
  Mr. BURGESS. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  We are hearing a lot about $3.25 billion that was sent to Texas under 
the stimulus/ARRA funds in 2010-2011. This money was actually 
appropriated by the Texas State legislature--Texas Senate: 29 ayes, 2 
nays; the House: 142 ayes, 2 nays--in a bipartisan fashion. It was not 
the Governor. It was the State legislature, appropriately, that dealt 
with this money.
  Texas has long prioritized public education funding. From 2000 to 
2009, Texas public education spending increased $9 billion, or 82 
percent.

                                       Office of the Governor,

                                                February 18, 2011.
       Dear Texas Congressional Delegation: The current Education 
     Jobs statute directs me to violate the Texas Constitution by 
     requiring me to commit a certain level of spending on public 
     education in 2011, 2012 and 2013--prior to Texas even 
     adopting our 2012-13 budget. No other state has to make these 
     commitments beyond 2011.
       Texas submitted its application to the U.S. Department of 
     Education on September 3, 2010, making every assurance 
     allowed under Texas law. The application was nonetheless 
     rejected. To date, 48 out of 50 states have received their 
     share of Education Jobs funding.
       Texas has long prioritized public education funding; from 
     2000 to 2009 Texas public education spending increased $9 
     billion, or 82 percent.
       By passing Congressman Burgess' amendment, Congress can 
     help right a wrong, apply equity to Texas, and quickly get 
     $830 million flowing to Texas schools, teachers and children.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Rick Perry,
                                                         Governor.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Reyes).
  Mr. REYES. I thank the gentlelady for yielding.
  I rise in opposition to Mr. Burgess' amendment because the State of 
Texas today is facing a $27 billion deficit.
  Last week, Governor Rick Perry came to Washington to ask our 
Republican colleagues for an $830 million bailout--and voila--we have 
Mr. Burgess' amendment. If this amendment passes, it will shortchange 
our schools and give a huge bailout to Governor Rick Perry.
  Last year, as you have heard, he accepted more than $3 billion in 
Federal funds, but instead of going and putting that money towards 
education in Texas, he used it to expand the State's tax surplus rainy 
day fund.
  Today, Mr. Burgess' amendment would absolutely give Governor Perry a 
blank check--how good is that?--giving an $830 million bailout to the 
same State leadership that robbed Texas children and Texas schools and 
Texas teachers of that money before.
  With that, I ask support to bring down this amendment.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DICKS. I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. I want to thank my colleague and ranking 
member from Washington State.
  I rise in opposition to this amendment. Representative Burgess' 
amendment would endanger the $830 million already set aside for 
classrooms and school districts in Texas through the Education Jobs 
Fund that was passed last August. At a time when our State is facing an 
almost $27 billion deficit, these are crucial moneys that can be used 
immediately to help school districts throughout Texas.
  Let me give you a little history.
  During the Recovery Act of 2009, Texas received $12 billion. Of that, 
$3.2 billion was supposed to be for public education. Our Governor and 
the Texas legislature used $12 billion. Instead of supplementing the 
current education funding, they used the $3.2 billion in place of the 
current education funding. The Governor went all over the country, 
getting books signed, saying how bad the Federal Government is, but 
they didn't give back that $12 billion. They used it to plus-up the 
rainy day fund that's over $9 billion right now, and they don't even 
want to use it.
  So, at that time, what the Democratic Members from Texas said was 
that we want to make sure this $830 million goes to the schoolchildren 
of Texas. That's what this would do, and that's what this law does. It 
would make sure that that money would go to the schoolchildren. It 
wouldn't get stuck in Austin. It would go down to my Houston school 
district, the Galena Park School District, which is having to cut its 
budget right now because it didn't get that $3.2 billion 2 years ago.
  That's why the Burgess amendment should be defeated, Mr. Chairman, 
and that's why we put this amendment into law. It's in the law now, and 
I'm proud of it. Let the money go to the school districts instead of to 
the folks who decided to keep it in the State capital.
  Mr. DICKS. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I object.
  Mr. DICKS. You can't object.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington controls the time for 
striking the requisite number of words. He is entitled to 5 minutes. He 
has 2 minutes 45 seconds remaining.
  Mr. DICKS. I yield the gentleman 45 seconds.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DICKS. I yield to the distinguished chairman.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. We bent over backwards to accommodate the

[[Page 2638]]

gentleman, but this has gone beyond what we agreed to.
  Mr. DICKS. We will finish this up in 45 seconds.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Would the gentleman yield this gentleman, Mr. 
Burgess, 1 minute?
  Mr. DICKS. I would be delighted to do that.
  I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington cannot yield blocks 
of time under the five-minute rule.
  Mr. DICKS. That's right. I can regain the time under the five-minute 
rule.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, in the interest of comity, I will yield 
back any time that was yielded to me. The other side has had plenty of 
time to talk. We need to vote on this amendment and move on.
  Mr. DICKS. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. DOGGETT. I thank the gentleman.
  I enter in the Record the request of education organizations from all 
over the State of Texas for this amendment and the statements of the 
Texas delegation last year and again this year.
  Governor Perry may have come up here on a book tour for his book 
``Fed Up,'' but he's not afraid to ask for second and third helpings of 
Federal aid even though it takes it away from our schoolchildren.
  There is a clear path to getting this money. All the Governor needs 
to do is to sign a three-page application, like the one he signed to 
get that $3.25 billion of aid he used for purposes other than 
education. Though this is presented as an attempt to repeal our 
amendment, it does not repeal it. It is a meaningless gesture, though 
it does cloud up the possibility that some Federal court may suggest 
that Texas is not entitled to any money.
  Let's not shut the door of opportunity to our children. Reject this 
amendment.
                                                    June 22, 2010.
     Hon. Arne Duncan,
     Secretary, Department of Education, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Steny Hoyer,
     Majority Leader, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
     Hon. David Obey,
     Chairman, Committee on Appropriations, House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Secretary Duncan, Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader 
     Hoyer, and Chairman Obey: Last year, before the education 
     Stabilization funds were provided to Texas, many of us joined 
     together to urge you to ensure that these funds would 
     increase the funding for Texas schools instead of merely 
     replacing state education funding. Unfortunately, as the 
     legislation was written the State was able to reduce its own 
     obligations to fiscally support public education and supplant 
     those funds with $3.25 billion of federal stablization 
     monies. As the Administration considers additional emergency 
     education funding to save teachers' jobs, we urge you to 
     prevent history from repeating itself and ensure that any 
     funds Texas receives go to help Texas schools, teachers, and 
     students.
       We support the legislative language that Members of the 
     Texas Delegation have proposed that would guarantee these 
     emergency federal education funds are actually spent on 
     education in Texas. As drafted, this Texas fix has no impact 
     on any other state and would ensure that the law is 
     implemented as Congress and the Administration intended: to 
     save and create teacher jobs. Specifically, this language 
     includes four provisions that we would like to see included 
     in any emergency education jobs bill:
       Limits the additional requirements to states with Texas-
     sized rainy day funds;
       Requires the emergency education jobs funds be distributed 
     to Local Education Agencies within the state according to the 
     Title I-A formula;
       Prohibits supplanting of state Title I-type funds with 
     these new emergency federal funds for education jobs; and
       Requires maintenance of state primary and secondary 
     education support in FY11, FY12, and FY13 at the current 
     percentage of revenue provided for FY11.
       This language does not prohibit cuts to education in 
     Texas's budget, but it does prevent the state from singling 
     out education for more cuts than other budget items due to 
     the influx of funds from the emergency federal monies for 
     education jobs. With Texas facing a serious budget shortfall 
     in the coming biennial budget, the last thing we need to 
     allow is these funds to be diverted to fill non-education 
     gaps in the budget. We hope that you will ensure that Texas 
     school districts do not fall through the legislative cracks 
     this time around.
       The Texas superintendents and education organizations 
     listed below are in agreement with this letter and have given 
     permission to add their names in support.


                         Texas Superintendents

              (Total of 38 From Across the State of Texas)

       Wanda Bamberg, Aldine ISD; Meria Carstarphen, Austin ISD; 
     Jim T. Rumage, Banquete ISD; Jamey Harrision, Bridge City 
     ISD; Brett Springston, Brownsville ISD; Reece Blincoe, 
     Brownwood ISD; Jeff Turner, Coppell ISD; Scott Elliff, Corpus 
     Christi ISD; David Anthony, Cypress-Fairbanks ISD; Michael 
     Hinojosa, Dallas ISD.
       Leland Williams, Dickinson ISD; Frances Rocha, Edcouch-Elsa 
     ISD; Bob Wells, Edna ISD; Lorenzo Garcia, El Paso ISD; Melody 
     Johnson, Fort Worth ISD; Paul Clore, Gregory-Portland ISD; 
     Jeremy Lyon, Hays CISD; Terry Grier, Houston ISD; Emilia 
     Castro, Kingsville ISD; A. Marcus Nelson, Laredo ISD.
       Michelle Carroll Smith, Lytle ISD; James Ponce, McAllen 
     ISD; Richard A. Middleton, North East ISD; John M. Folks, 
     Northside ISD; John Kuhn, Perrin-Whitt CISD; Sharron L. 
     Doughty, Port Aransas ISD; Alfonso Obregon, Robstown ISD; 
     Robert J. Duron, San Antonio ISD; Mike Quatrini, San Elizario 
     ISD.
       Patty Shafer, San Marcos CISD; Greg Gibson, Schertz-Cibolo-
     Universal City ISD; Rock McNulty, Smithville ISD; Lloyd 
     Verstuyft, Southwest ISD; Robert Santos, United ISD; Joddie 
     W. Witte, Van ISD; Richard Rivera, Weslaco ISD; H. John 
     Fuller, Wylie ISD; Michael Zolkoski, Ysleta ISD.


                     Texas Education Organizations

       (Teachers, Principals, School Boards, and Administrators)

       Sandi Borden, Executive Director, Texas Elementary 
     Principals and Supervisors Association; Linda Bridges, 
     President, Texas AFT; James B. Crow, Executive Director, 
     Texas Association of School Boards; Rita Haecker, President, 
     Texas State Teachers Assocation; Doug Rogers, Executive 
     Director, Association of Texas Professional Educators; Johnny 
     L. Veselka, Executive Director, Texas Association of School 
     Administrators; Brad Willingham, President, Texas Classroom 
     Teachers Association.

 Texas Democratic Delegation Statement on Protection for Schoolchildren

       Last year, we voted for the Economic Recovery Act, which 
     included $3.25 billion to support local Texas school 
     districts. But instead of using these funds as Congress 
     intended, State Republican Leadership used them to replace 
     state education funding, thereby denying an increase in 
     support for our local school districts.
       We want to ensure that any new emergency funds Congress 
     provides for education actually help our Texas schools. We 
     have requested additional protections be incorporated into 
     any Supplemental Appropriations legislation specifically for 
     Texas schoolchildren to ensure local districts actually 
     receive this federal help. These protections will ensure that 
     the $820 million in new emergency federal funds for education 
     go to preserve teacher jobs throughout the State and meet 
     other local education needs.
       These funds would go to local schools as long as the 
     Governor certifies that (1) federal funds are not used merely 
     to replace state education support, and (2) education funding 
     will not be cut proportionally more than any other item in 
     the upcoming Texas General Appropriations Act. This prevents 
     any further shell games with federal education dollars at the 
     expense of local schools districts. This approach has been 
     endorsed by Texas statewide education organizations 
     representing teachers, principals, school boards, school 
     administrators, and nearly 40 superintendents.
       A solid education is the foundation on which our economy 
     and our democracy rest. Our support for our local school 
     districts reflects a two-fold understanding: First, local 
     districts know best what the needs of their students, 
     teachers, and administrators are. Second, especially in times 
     of a difficult economy, we need to invest in our schools.
       Our language helps ensure local school districts in Texas 
     have the support they need.
         Lloyd Doggett; Gene Green; Ruben Hinojosa; Chet Edwards; 
           Henry Cuellar; Charlie Gonzalez; Al Green; Solomon 
           Ortiz; Silvestre Reyes; Eddie Bernice Johnson; Sheila 
           Jackson Lee; and Ciro Rodriguez.

                            (January, 2011)

   Texas Democratic Delegation Statement on Funding for Texas Schools

       Since the U.S. House of Representatives approved new 
     education legislation that became federal law last August, 
     all that has stood between Texas schools and $830 million of 
     aid is Governor Rick Perry's signature on a three-page 
     application. More than five months later, the Governor still 
     refuses to turn in even that little bit of homework. With 
     Texas public education continuing to lag in math and science 
     scores while facing a budget crisis, our State has remained 
     one of only two in the entire country, which have not 
     received their share of these new federal education dollars. 
     And these funds should be going where they are needed--to 
     local Texas schools.
       Last year, Governor Perry raised previously unmentioned 
     constitutional limitations that allegedly prevented his 
     acting before the Texas Legislature had convened. We

[[Page 2639]]

     disagreed with that excuse then, and we continue to disagree 
     with it now. But with the Texas Legislature already in 
     session, the Governor has certainly lost his sole stated 
     excuse.
       In his own words, the Governor applied for previous 
     emergency federal education funds as part of the Economic 
     Recovery Act ``only in concert with State lawmakers while the 
     2010-2011 budget was being finalized.'' Now that the Texas 
     Legislature has consideration of the 2012-2013 budget 
     underway, we respectfully urge the Governor in 2011 to do 
     just what he did in 2009. After working ``in concert with 
     state lawmakers,'' he should simply sign on the dotted line 
     requesting the $830 million in federal education funds that 
     remain available a few months longer for local Texas schools.
       In 2009, the State used $3.25 billion emergency education 
     funds only to replace State funding, thereby denying an 
     opportunity to support improvements in the quality of public 
     education. That is why last year, our Delegation acted to 
     prevent history from repeating itself. We worked with Texas 
     superintendents and education organizations representing tens 
     of thousands of Texas teachers, principals, school boards, 
     and school administrators to craft legislative language 
     ensuring this new emergency education funding actually helps 
     Texas schoolchildren.
       The additional protections that our Delegation authored 
     simply ensure that federal funds are not once again used only 
     to replace State education support. This new federal law 
     offers Texas State officials the flexibility to cut, 
     maintain, or increase State education support, but prohibits 
     any further shell games with federal education dollars at the 
     expense of our local schools.
       Last summer, the Governor Perry told the Department of 
     Education that Texas planned to eventually complete the 
     proper application for these funds, but no such application 
     has been forthcoming. After so long, with so much at stake, 
     Texas students deserve better. We again urge the Governor to 
     sign the three-page application so that our Texas schools 
     will receive the federal aid that Congress has provided to be 
     used solely for public education.
         Lloyd Doggett; Gene Green; Ruben Hinojosa; Henry Cuellar; 
           Charlie Gonzalez; Al Green; Silvestre Reyes; Eddie 
           Bernice Johnson; Sheila Jackson Lee.

  Mr. DICKS. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will 
be postponed.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DICKS. The gentlelady from Hawaii (Ms. Hanabusa) had an amendment 
which she is going to withdraw. I want to enter into a very brief 
colloquy in which she can explain what her amendment attempted to do, 
and then we are not going to offer it.
  Ms. HANABUSA. I thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment that I had offered and that I am 
withdrawing has to do with the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant.
  The reason it is so critical to the people in Hawaii is that it is 
not like any other block grant. It really fulfills a trust obligation 
which this Congress created in 1920 by way of the Hawaiian Homes 
Commission Act. That act recognized that it was necessary to return 
native Hawaiians to the land for the preservation of their culture, 
their traditions and their values. What the Native Hawaiian Housing 
Block Grant did was actually facilitate that. It is a very successful 
program, nonpartisan in Hawaii, one that our Republican Governor 
considers to be her legacy and one that has done exactly--exactly--what 
we want to see these grants do.
  Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the amendment 
offered by my colleague Congresswoman Colleen Hanabusa that would 
restore funding for the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program.
  The Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant is an authorized program 
under title VIII of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-
Determination Act.
  The block grant is used to carry out affordable housing activities 
for Native Hawaiian families who are eligible to reside on Hawaiian 
Home Lands, which were established in trust by the United States under 
the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920.
  In 1903, Prince Jonah Kuhio Kalanianaole was elected to serve as 
Hawaii's delegate to Congress. One of his most notable achievements was 
the passage of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, which set aside some 
200,000 acres of land for Native Hawaiians. The reason for the 
legislation was the landless status of so many Native Hawaiians, who 
were displaced by newcomers to the islands and became the most 
disadvantaged population in their native land. Congress passed the 
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, which is still in force, in recognition 
of its responsibility toward Native Hawaiians.
  As with other indigenous people, Native Hawaiian views on land tenure 
were different from that of the newcomers, resulting in loss of much of 
the land that had been traditionally occupied and cultivated by Native 
Hawaiians to these newcomers.
  Despite the good intentions of the Congress and the State of Hawaii, 
progress in meeting the goal of delivering land to native Hawaiians was 
slow. Most of the Hawaiian Homelands were located in areas far from 
jobs and infrastructure like roads and utilities, were nonexistent. 
There are currently 23,000 native Hawaiians on the waiting list for 
residential, farm or ranch lots. Some families have been on the waiting 
lists for decades.
  I want to share the story of the Lincoln family. Aloysius Lincoln 
first applied for Hawaiian Home Lands in 1949. In 2006, a wait of 57 
years, his daughter, Frances Segundo, claimed a lease for a Department 
of Hawaiian Home Lands home in Kapolei on the island of Oahu. Frances 
claimed the lease because her father had unfortunately passed away two 
years earlier. Frances herself was just a baby when her father signed 
up for the program.
  The $13 million that the amendment restores to the Native Hawaiian 
Housing Block Grant program provides the opportunity for Native 
Hawaiian families to live the dream of homeownership.
  The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) is one of the most 
efficient users of funds provided under the Native American Housing 
Assistance and Self-Determination Act. The majority of these funds have 
been used for infrastructure development on Hawaiian Home Lands 
benefiting low-income residents. DHHL has also been able to use these 
funds to: Assist families in applying for FHA mortgage insurance and 
HUD loan guarantees; operate a direct loan program to provide new 
housing units and improve existing structures; support local housing 
and housing service providers such as Habitat for Humanity; and 
initiate highly successful pre- and post-purchase homeownership 
counseling programs.
  I urge my colleagues to support reinstating funding for the 
successful Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program.
  Mahalo nui loa (thank you very much).
  Mr. DICKS. I appreciate the gentlelady for withdrawing her amendment 
so we may proceed with the next speaker.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  0320


              Amendment No. 540 Offered by Mr. LaTourette

  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

  DIVISION A--FULL-YEAR CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011

        The following sums are hereby appropriated, out of any 
     money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, and out of 
     applicable corporate or other revenues, receipts, and funds, 
     for the several departments, agencies, corporations, and 
     other organizational units of Government for fiscal year 
     2011, and for other purposes, namely:
       Section 101. (a) Such amounts as may be necessary, at the 
     level specified in subsection (c) and under the authority and 
     conditions provided in applicable appropriations Acts for 
     fiscal year 2010, for each account, program, project, or 
     activity (including the costs of direct loans and loan 
     guarantees) for which appropriations, funds, or other 
     authority were made available in the following appropriations 
     Acts:
       (1) The Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 
     Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 
     (Public Law 111-80).
       (2) The Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2010 (division B of Public Law 111-117).
       (3) The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010 
     (Public Law 111-118).

[[Page 2640]]

       (4) The Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-85).
       (5) The Financial Services and General Government 
     Appropriations Act, 2010 (division C of Public Law 111-117).
       (6) The Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 
     2010 (Public Law 111-83).
       (7) The Department of the Interior, Environment, and 
     Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 (division A of 
     Public Law 111-88).
       (8) The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, 
     and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 
     (division D of Public Law 111-117).
       (9) The Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2010 
     (division A of Public Law 111-68).
       (10) The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and 
     Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 (division A of 
     Public Law 111-117).
       (11) The Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and 
     Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 (division E of 
     Public Law 111-117).
       (12) The Department of State, Foreign Operations, and 
     Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2010 (division F of 
     Public Law 111-117).
       (13) Section 102(c) (except the last proviso relating to 
     waiver of fees) of chapter 1 of title I of the Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-212) that addresses 
     guaranteed loans in the rural housing insurance fund.
       (14) The appropriation under the heading ``Department of 
     Commerce--United States Patent and Trademark Office'' in the 
     United States Patent and Trademark Office Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-224).
       (b) For purposes of this division, the term ``level'' means 
     an amount.
       (c)(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), the 
     level referred to in subsection (a) shall be, with respect to 
     the amounts appropriated in the appropriations Acts referred 
     to in the following paragraphs of such subsection, including 
     transfers and obligation limitations, equal to the following 
     percentage of such amounts:
       (A) In paragraph (1), 69.18 percent.
       (B) In paragraphs (2) and (14), 79.77 percent.
       (C) In paragraph (3), 101.30 percent.
       (D) In paragraph (4), 89 percent.
       (E) In paragraph (5), 81.25 percent.
       (F) In paragraph (6), 95.26 percent.
       (G) In paragraph (7), 80.94 percent.
       (H) In paragraph (8), 82.66 percent.
       (I) In paragraph (9), 93.69 percent.
       (J) In paragraphs (10) and (13), 71.4 percent.
       (K) In paragraph (11)--
       (i) 100 percent, with respect to amounts made available for 
     the Veterans Benefits Administration and the Veterans Health 
     Administration; and
       (ii) 96.19 percent, with respect to all other amounts.
       (L) In paragraph (12)--
       (i) 100 percent, with respect to amounts made available for 
     Israel; and
       (ii) 88.08 percent, with respect to all other amounts.
       (2) Such level shall not include any amount previously 
     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.
       (3) Such level shall be calculated without regard to any 
     rescission or cancellation of funds or contract authority.
       Sec. 102.  Appropriations made by section 101 shall be 
     available to the extent and in the manner that would be 
     provided by the pertinent appropriations Act.
       Sec. 103.  Appropriations provided by this division that, 
     in the applicable appropriations Act for fiscal year 2010, 
     carried a multiple-year or no-year period of availability 
     shall retain a comparable period of availability.
       Sec. 104.  Except as otherwise expressly provided in this 
     division, the requirements, authorities, conditions, 
     limitations, and other provisions of the appropriations Acts 
     referred to in section 101(a) shall continue in effect 
     through the date specified in section 106.
       Sec. 105.  No appropriation or funds made available or 
     authority granted pursuant to section 101 shall be used to 
     initiate or resume any project or activity for which 
     appropriations, funds, or other authority were specifically 
     prohibited during fiscal year 2010.
       Sec. 106.  Unless otherwise provided for in this division 
     or in the applicable appropriations Act, appropriations and 
     funds made available and authority granted pursuant to this 
     division shall be available through September 30, 2011.
       Sec. 107.  Expenditures made pursuant to the Continuing 
     Appropriations Act, 2011 (Public Law 111-242), shall be 
     charged to the applicable appropriation, fund, or 
     authorization provided by this division.
       Sec. 108.  Funds appropriated by this division 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. 2680), 
     section 313 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, 
     Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (22 U.S.C. 6212), and section 
     504(a)(1) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 
     414(a)(1)).
       Sec. 109. (a) For entitlements and other mandatory payments 
     whose budget authority was provided in appropriations Acts 
     for fiscal year 2010, and for activities under the Food and 
     Nutrition Act of 2008, the levels established by section 101 
     shall be the amounts necessary to maintain program levels 
     under current law and under the authority and conditions 
     provided in the applicable appropriations Acts for fiscal 
     year 2010.
       (b) In addition to the amounts otherwise provided by 
     section 101, the following amounts shall be available for the 
     following accounts for advance payments for the first quarter 
     of fiscal year 2012:
       (1) ``Department of Labor, Employment Standards 
     Administration, Special Benefits for Disabled Coal Miners'', 
     for benefit payments under title IV of the Federal Mine 
     Safety and Health Act of 1977, $41,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended.
       (2) ``Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for 
     Medicare and Medicaid Services, Grants to States for 
     Medicaid'', for payments to States or in the case of section 
     1928 on behalf of States under title XIX of the Social 
     Security Act, $86,445,289,000, to remain available until 
     expended.
       (3) ``Department of Health and Human Services, 
     Administration for Children and Families, Payments to States 
     for Child Support Enforcement and Family Support Programs'', 
     for payments to States or other non-Federal entities under 
     titles I, IV-D, X, XI, XIV, and XVI of the Social Security 
     Act and the Act of July 5, 1960 (24 U.S.C. ch. 9), 
     $1,200,000,000, to remain available until expended.
       (4) ``Department of Health and Human Services, 
     Administration for Children and Families, Payments to States 
     for Foster Care and Permanency'', for payments to States or 
     other non-Federal entities under title IV-E of the Social 
     Security Act, $1,850,000,000.
       (5) ``Social Security Administration, Supplemental Security 
     Income Program'', for benefit payments under title XVI of the 
     Social Security Act, $13,400,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended.
       Sec. 110.  Amounts incorporated by reference in this 
     division that were previously designated as available for 
     overseas deployments and other activities pursuant to S. Con. 
     Res. 13 (111th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the 
     budget for fiscal year 2010, are designated as being for 
     contingency operations directly related to the global war on 
     terrorism pursuant to section 3(c)(2) of H. Res. 5 (112th 
     Congress) and as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 
     403(a) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress).
       Sec. 111.  Any language specifying an earmark in an 
     appropriations Act for fiscal year 2010, or in a committee 
     report or joint explanatory statement accompanying such an 
     Act, shall have no legal effect with respect to funds 
     appropriated by this division. For purposes of this section, 
     the term ``earmark'' means a congressional earmark or 
     congressionally directed spending item, as defined in clause 
     9(e) of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives 
     and paragraph 5(a) of rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the 
     Senate.
       Sec. 112.  Notwithstanding section 101, none of the funds 
     appropriated or otherwise made available in this division or 
     any other Act (including division A of this Act) may be used 
     to transfer, release, or assist in the transfer or release to 
     or within the United States, its territories, or possessions 
     Khalid Sheikh Mohammed or any other detainee who--
       (1) is not a United States citizen or a member of the Armed 
     Forces of the United States; and
       (2) is or was held on or after June 24, 2009, at the United 
     States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the Department 
     of Defense.
       Sec. 113. (a)(1) Notwithstanding section 101, except as 
     provided in paragraph (2), none of the funds appropriated or 
     otherwise made available in this division or any other Act 
     (including division A of this Act) may be used to transfer 
     any individual detained at Guantanamo to the custody or 
     effective control of the individual's country of origin, any 
     other foreign country, or any other foreign entity unless the 
     Secretary of Defense submits to Congress the certification 
     described in subsection (b) by not later than 30 days before 
     the transfer of the individual.
       (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any action taken by 
     the Secretary of Defense to transfer any individual detained 
     at Guantanamo to effectuate an order affecting the 
     disposition of the individual that is issued by a court or 
     competent tribunal of the United States having lawful 
     jurisdiction. The Secretary of Defense shall notify Congress 
     promptly upon issuance of any such order.
       (b) The certification described in this subsection is a 
     written certification made by the Secretary of Defense, with 
     the concurrence of the Secretary of State, that the 
     government of the foreign country or the recognized 
     leadership of the foreign entity to which the individual 
     detained at Guantanamo is to be transferred--
       (1) is not a designated state sponsor of terrorism or a 
     designated foreign terrorist organization;

[[Page 2641]]

       (2) maintains effective control over each detention 
     facility in which an individual is to be detained if the 
     individual is to be housed in a detention facility;
       (3) is not, as of the date of the certification, facing a 
     threat that is likely to substantially affect its ability to 
     exercise control over the individual;
       (4) has agreed to take effective steps to ensure that the 
     individual cannot take action to threaten the United States, 
     its citizens, or its allies in the future;
       (5) has taken such steps as the Secretary determines are 
     necessary to ensure that the individual cannot engage or re-
     engage in any terrorist activity; and
       (6) has agreed to share any information with the United 
     States that--
       (A) is related to the individual or any associates of the 
     individual; and
       (B) could affect the security of the United States, its 
     citizens, or its allies.
       (c)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (3), none of the 
     funds appropriated or otherwise made available in this 
     division or any other Act (including division A of this Act) 
     may be used to transfer any individual detained at Guantanamo 
     to the custody or effective control of the individual's 
     country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other 
     foreign entity if there is a confirmed case of any individual 
     who was detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo 
     Bay, Cuba, at any time after September 11, 2001, who was 
     transferred to the foreign country or entity and subsequently 
     engaged in any terrorist activity.
       (2) The Secretary of Defense may waive the prohibition in 
     paragraph (1) if the Secretary determines that such a 
     transfer is in the national security interests of the United 
     States and includes, as part of the certification described 
     in subsection (b) relating to such transfer, the 
     determination of the Secretary under this paragraph.
       (3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any action taken by 
     the Secretary to transfer any individual detained at 
     Guantanamo to effectuate an order affecting the disposition 
     of the individual that is issued by a court or competent 
     tribunal of the United States having lawful jurisdiction. The 
     Secretary shall notify Congress promptly upon issuance of any 
     such order.
       (d) For the purposes of this section:
       (1) The term ``individual detained at Guantanamo'' means 
     any individual who is located at United States Naval Station, 
     Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as of October 1, 2009, who--
       (A) is not a citizen of the United States or a member of 
     the Armed Forces of the United States; and
       (B) is--
       (i) in the custody or under the effective control of the 
     Department of Defense; or
       (ii) otherwise under detention at United States Naval 
     Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
       (2) The term ``foreign terrorist organization'' means any 
     organization so designated by the Secretary of State under 
     section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1189).
       Sec. 114. (a) Notwithstanding section 101, none of the 
     funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this 
     division or any other Act (including division A of this Act) 
     may be used to construct or modify any facility in the United 
     States, its territories, or possessions to house any 
     individual described in subsection (c) for the purposes of 
     detention or imprisonment in the custody or under the 
     effective control of the Department of Defense.
       (b) The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not apply to 
     any modification of facilities at United States Naval 
     Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
       (c) An individual described in this subsection is any 
     individual who, as of June 24, 2009, is located at United 
     States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and who--
       (1) is not a citizen of the United States or a member of 
     the Armed Forces of the United States; and
       (2) is--
       (A) in the custody or under the effective control of the 
     Department of Defense; or
       (B) otherwise under detention at United States Naval 
     Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
       Sec. 115.  None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this division or any other Act (including 
     division A of 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.
       Sec. 116.  Section 550(b) of Public Law 109-295, as amended 
     by section 550 of Public Law 111-83, shall be applied by 
     substituting the date specified in section 106 of this 
     division for ``October 4, 2010''.
       Sec. 117.  Section 1(b)(2) of the Passport Act of June 4, 
     1920 (22 U.S.C. 214(b)(2)) shall be applied by substituting 
     the date specified in section 106 of this division for 
     ``September 30, 2010''.
       Sec. 118. (a) Section 1115(d) of Public Law 111-32 shall be 
     applied by substituting the date specified in section 106 of 
     this division for ``October 1, 2010''.
       (b) Section 824(g) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 
     U.S.C. 4064(g)) shall be applied by substituting the date 
     specified in section 106 of this division for ``October 1, 
     2010'' in paragraph (2).
       (c) Section 61(a) of the State Department Basic Authorities 
     Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2733(a)) shall be applied by 
     substituting the date specified in section 106 of this 
     division for ``October 1, 2010'' in paragraph (2).
       (d) Section 625(j)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 
     (22 U.S.C. 2385(j)(1)) shall be applied by substituting the 
     date specified in section 106 of this division for ``October 
     1, 2010'' in subparagraph (B).
       Sec. 119.  The authority provided by section 1334 of the 
     Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (22 
     U.S.C. 6553) shall remain in effect through the date 
     specified in section 106 of this division.
       Sec. 120.  The provisions of title II of the McKinney-Vento 
     Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11311 et seq.) shall 
     continue in effect, notwithstanding section 209 of such Act, 
     through the earlier of: (1) the date specified in section 106 
     of this division; or (2) the date of the enactment into law 
     of an authorization Act relating to the McKinney-Vento 
     Homeless Assistance Act.

                    DIVISION B--STIMULUS RESCISSIONS

       Sec. 201. (a) There are hereby rescinded all unobligated 
     balances remaining available as of February 11, 2011, of the 
     discretionary appropriations provided by division A of the 
     American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 
     111-5).
       (b) Subsection (a) shall not apply to funds appropriated or 
     otherwise made available to Offices of Inspector General and 
     the Recovery Act Accountability and Transparency Board by 
     division A of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 
     2009 (Public Law 111-5).
       Sec. 202.  Hereafter, no Federal agency administering funds 
     provided by division A of the American Recovery and 
     Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) may provide 
     funding or reimbursement to any entity awarded funds from 
     such Act for the cost associated with physical signage or 
     other advertisement indicating that a project is funded by 
     such Act.

                  DIVISION C--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS


                       spending reduction account

       Sec. 4001. [Here insert the text of section 4001 in the 
     pending text, as perfected, such that the matter proposed to 
     be inserted under the heading spending reduction account is 
     identical to the matter proposed to be stricken under that 
     heading.]
       This Act may be cited as the ``Full-Year Continuing 
     Appropriations Act, 2011''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to the order of the House of February 17, 
2011, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) and a Member opposed 
each will control 15 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the Chair very much.
  We have agreed informally that we are going to reduce the time on 
this to 20 minutes, 10 minutes per side, and I will move expeditiously 
through it.
  There was a little issue with the drafting that will be addressed 
later in the debate, and I may have a motion at the end of my 
discussion.
  I am honored to be joined in this amendment by Mr. Gibson and Mr. 
Dent.
  I hate across-the-board cuts. I really don't support across-the-board 
cuts; but I've got to tell you that this CR, as it currently stands, is 
the byproduct of the fact that we didn't get any appropriations bills 
done last year and that we have a deadline of March 4. I don't think 
the chairman of the full committee likes very much the CR that we are 
considering. If he did, he wouldn't have been required to write it 
three times in order to get the bill to the floor.
  As for the salient points, the substitute that we are presenting 
tonight is a deeper cut than the base bill. The base bill is advertised 
as saving, I believe, $106 billion. This amendment cuts $120 billion. 
It adopts numbers on Defense, MILCON, Homeland, Israel, Gitmo; the 
earmarks are gone; the stimulus money is back.
  To my Republican friends, I would say that, if this debate is really 
about the number, this is a bigger number, $120 billion, as opposed to 
$100 billion. If it's about social engineering, then you'll vote ``no'' 
on this particular amendment.
  To my Democratic friends, I say we just can't give speeches about, 
well, we would like to cut stuff, but we just want to cut this stuff, 
and we don't want to cut that stuff.
  The President's vision of a freeze was a bold strategy in 1995 when I 
got here. It's a failed strategy in 2011. This particular substitute 
restores NEA, CPB,

[[Page 2642]]

Food for Peace, CDBG, but with shared, across-the-board sacrifice. I 
would ask our Members to consider it.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DICKS. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 15 
minutes.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, it really pains me to not be able to help my 
friend from Ohio, who is a valued member of the Appropriations 
Committee, who was an outstanding member of the Interior Subcommittee 
when I was chairman, and who I enjoy working with very much.
  The LaTourette amendment would cut from the FY10 levels: 31 percent 
from Agriculture; 20 percent from CJS; 11 percent from Energy and 
Water; 19 percent from Financial Services; 5 percent from Homeland 
Security; 19 percent from Interior; 17 percent from Labor-HHS; 6 
percent from the Legislative Branch; 12 percent from State, Foreign 
Operations; and 30 percent from Transportation.
  Unfortunately, in addition, the amendment fails to incorporate for 
Afghanistan and Iraq operations provided by section 101(8) of the first 
continuing resolution. Omitting this provision effectively cuts 
Department of Defense contingency funding by nearly $30 billion. As a 
result, the amendment vastly underfunds DOD requirements for fiscal 
year 2011. It would preclude effective conduct of operations and put 
deployed troops at risk.
  The amendment would also harm job growth.
  For example, in the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development 
Subcommittee, the LaTourette amendment would cut nearly 30 percent, or 
more than $20 billion, from programs and activities under the 
subcommittee's jurisdiction. This would lead to a part-time air traffic 
control system by cutting over $2.8 billion from the FAA operations; 
cause severe reductions in service and work layoffs for Amtrak; and 
finally, this amendment would provide fewer resources for 
transportation safety overnight.
  The amendment also leads to the loss of 650,000 vouchers for low-
income families, and it cuts nearly $500 million from homeless 
assistance programs. In addition, it would threaten the ongoing 
recovery of the housing market by grossly underfunding the resource 
needs of the Federal Housing Administration.
  The LaTourette amendment would also affect our domestic security by 
requiring the Department of Homeland Security to lay off crucial staff 
we have hired over the past 2 years, which includes Border Patrol 
agents, CBP officers at the ports of entry, ICE investigators along the 
Southwest border, and Secret Service agents to respond to the 
heightened threats against the President.
  Finally, like other amendments that have already been rejected by 
this body, the LaTourette amendment puts OMB in charge, concedes the 
congressional authority on an across-the-board basis, and also takes 
out all the money in the CR for anomalies.
  I urge all Members to reject the LaTourette amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the distinguished ranking member for the kind 
words. I think your speech has gotten me votes from progressives and 
conservatives in the same speech, so I appreciate that very much.
  I now yield 2 minutes to one of my partners in crime here, a new 
Member of the House, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gibson).
  Mr. GIBSON. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  This is about jobs, fiscal responsibility and about doing what is 
right. A $1.65 trillion deficit. An over $14 trillion debt. We are on 
the path to bankruptcy, and we have got to change course.
  Now, as someone who until last year was protecting our cherished way 
of life by serving in the United States Army, I've got to tell you that 
I don't see this as a partisan issue. Both parties got us into this 
mess, and we're going to need leadership now to get out. This has 
become the generational issue of our time, and we need to begin to move 
towards a balanced budget and fiscal responsibility, and everything 
needs to be on the table.
  My family took the first cut. To lead by example, we're giving back 
to the U.S. Treasury my pension--that I earned.
  This substitute amendment was intended to be a nonpartisan approach 
to an American issue: cuts across the board; Democratic and Republican 
priorities treated the same in this CR; rolling back to 2008 levels 
rather than eliminating programs outright in the CR. There will be time 
for those kinds of investigations later on in the budget process and in 
committees where programs can be singled out for deeper potential cuts 
and long-term structural changes.
  As has been pointed out, in the process of writing this, there were 
some technical issues with it that we regret; but the point of this 
substitute amendment remains the same, that this is an American issue. 
We both have to come together to solve this. We're going to have to get 
our fiscal house in order, and to do that, many steps are going to be 
necessary, and among them is rolling back spending.
  Americans today are wondering whether or not we're going to do the 
right thing and whether or not we're going to cut that spending and 
whether or not our best days are in front of us. That choice is up to 
us--and we will get it right.
  Mr. DICKS. I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the 
House Appropriations Committee, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. 
Rogers).
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. It 
really is a substitute amendment, and it's an across-the-board cut. 
This body has spent many late nights all this week debating a yearlong 
CR which makes targeted spending decisions and weighs the pros and cons 
of each and every program in the Federal Government, and I think the 
House has done itself proud this week in that work.
  Under an open process, each Member has had the ability to weigh in 
and make their imprints on the bill through the consideration of 
literally hundreds of amendments--the embodiment of the democratic 
ideal. Adoption of this substitute proposal, however, would wipe out 
everything we've done this whole week. Every amendment adopted would be 
gone. Every calculated decision would be forgotten. Rather, the 
amendment would replace our hard-fought spending decisions by taking 
the easy way out, by making no real decisions at all, by punting the 
ball to OMB and the bureaucrats instead of making the decisions our 
electorate elected us to make.

                              {time}  0330

  The across-the-board nature of the amendment's cuts provides no 
opportunity for discretion. It punishes or rewards without regard to 
merit. For example, under this amendment, the FBI's operations would be 
cut by $1.5 billion. A reduction of that magnitude would result in the 
layoff of thousands of agents, undermining our ability to prevent 
terrorist attacks and to investigate the most serious Federal crimes.
  The amendment fails to include the $33 billion in DOD emergency 
funding for troops overseas, which was passed separately last year. The 
Department of Homeland Security would be cut an additional $1 billion 
below H.R. 1, forcing the reduction of Border Patrol agents, ICE agents 
and active duty Coast Guard personnel.
  While activities important to our national security would be unduly 
cut, other wasteful programs, as well as programs that put a regulatory 
stranglehold on our economy, are rewarded simply because they exist:
  The Census Bureau would continue to receive funding at the decennial 
FY10 level even though its needs are significantly reduced in FY11, 
giving the Census Bureau a $4.5 billion slush fund and no reason for 
having it.
  While H.R. 1 cuts $3 billion from the EPA and specifically targets 
that agency's climate change program funds, this amendment would 
provide the EPA with ample funding to continue in their anti-business 
regulatory regime.

[[Page 2643]]

  While some may feel that proportionately distributing cuts will 
proportionately distribute the sacrifices, they couldn't be more wrong. 
Instead, the amendment writes a check, and let's the administration 
fund their priorities while the Congress sits on the sidelines, leaving 
the American people saddled with the results.
  Congress has a responsibility to make tough choices and to provide 
the oversight of each department and of each program through the power 
of the purse. The amendment before us abdicates that responsibility.
  I urge my colleagues to reject the amendment.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the distinguished chairman for his remarks, 
and I congratulate him on his hard work this week.
  However, I would note that this amendment was in order during the 
reading of the table of contents, and as a courtesy to the committee, 
we didn't offer it then. We all could have been home on Tuesday at 
about 2 o'clock in the afternoon.
  It is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent).
  Mr. DENT. I want to commend Mr. LaTourette and Mr. Gibson on their 
efforts in drafting this amendment.
  Notwithstanding any technical drafting errors that may affect $30 
billion, I think it is important that we have this discussion.
  The intent of this amendment is to help restore funding to programs 
that have been zeroed out and to then better balance these cuts. 
Ordinarily, I would agree with the chairman and Mr. LaTourette that we 
would not want to engage in across-the-board cuts; but given where we 
are in this fiscal year 2011 process, I think we should embrace this 
policy, better balance these cuts in a way that I think is a bit more 
equitable, use the fiscal year 2012 appropriations process for 
oversight to make further revisions, then discuss zeroing out or, in a 
more discriminating manner, deal with those programs that should be cut 
even more substantially.
  This amendment will help restore programs like LIHEAP, CSBG, CDBG, 
which are programs that have been substantially reduced, and others 
that have been zeroed out. So that is why I believe it is important 
that we adopt this amendment.
  Again, I commend Mr. LaTourette and Mr. Gibson for their efforts.
  Mr. DICKS. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. It is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to a new 
Member of the House, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Dold).
  Mr. DOLD. I want to thank Mr. LaTourette for his work. I also want to 
thank the chairman in the appropriations process and also the 
leadership for being able to come out and really have an open 
discussion about what's going on.
  The spirit of the amendment wasn't to necessarily pick winners and 
losers or to zero out programs; and as much as I do not like the idea 
of across-the-board cuts, I do think that the American public right now 
is thinking, ``How can we tighten our belts?''
  The American people have tightened their belts. American businesses 
have tightened their belts. The Federal Government should be no 
different. Everything has to be on the table. The Department of Defense 
has to be on the table. We have to rein that in. We have to rein in 
every single department, and we know we have to do it without putting 
people in harm's way.
  This technical problem that has just surfaced in the amendment is 
certainly going to be problematic, but the spirit, the intent, of this 
amendment was to make sure that we are preserving some of what, I 
think, many on the other side would consider to be very important 
programs and what many of the independents in our Nation would consider 
to be appropriate programs--and important to them.
  We want to let the 2012 appropriations process go through the 
appropriate channels, and we want to make sure we make our cuts at that 
point in time, so I would just urge my colleagues to keep that in mind 
as we move forward.
  Mr. DICKS. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, it is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute 
to another fine Member, the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, we are now 6 months into our fiscal year, and we have 
not been able to pass a dozen or more individual appropriations bills 
within that time. We inherited a spending regime, but we have a mandate 
from the American people to cut spending. We must do it equitably, 
fairly and quickly; and I think that Mr. LaTourette has come up with an 
amendment which has a really fair way of doing this:
  Don't zero out programs without hearings. Don't pick winners and 
losers. Don't do this without having the proper hearings and oversight. 
By reducing our discretionary programs at the same rate across the 
board, we don't risk alienating future priorities or vulnerable 
constituencies that may receive funding which is at risk of being 
terminated.
  The chairman of Appropriations and this whole body have done a great 
job in looking at all of this, and I think we will come out with 
something that we will all be very proud of. The LaTourette amendment 
offers another way to do just that.
  Mr. DICKS. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. May I inquire as to how much time I have left, Mr. 
Chairman?
  The Acting CHAIR. Both the gentleman from Ohio and the gentleman from 
Washington have 8 minutes remaining.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Which is really 3 minutes remaining. So, if it's all 
right, I would like to yield 1 minute, and then I will notify the 
distinguished ranking member that I will take the last 2 minutes and 
close.
  I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass), the 
oldest returning freshman--a freshman in 1995 and again in 2011.
  Mr. BASS of New Hampshire. I thank my colleague from Ohio for such a 
wonderful introduction.
  I want to thank the chairman of the Appropriations Committee and the 
members of the committee for all their hard work.
  Cutting programs to zero in the middle of a fiscal year may be good 
legislative policy, but it isn't really all that practical. We need to 
address the future size and scope of government in the normal, regular 
order of the appropriations process. The LaTourette amendment makes us 
meet our spending reduction goals, but does it in a way that is simple 
and is fair and is effective and is practical.
  I support the LaTourette amendment because I think it is ``the'' 
vehicle that will actually do what we want to do, which is to cut 
spending now and then get on with the regular appropriations process, 
in which we can give these agencies the kind of oversight they need so 
that we will make the right decisions.
  So I urge the support and adoption of the LaTourette amendment.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I would notify the distinguished ranking member that 
I'm the last speaker, and I'm going to consume our last 2 minutes--so 
have at it.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DICKS. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Lewis).

                              {time}  0340

  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I very much appreciate my 
colleague for yielding me this time.
  It has been suggested by more than one person, not just today but 
also a moment ago, that we are headed towards a cliff in terms of our 
financial circumstances. It could take our country to bankruptcy and 
create a circumstance from which we would, perhaps, never come back.
  To suggest that this substitute makes sense really baffles me. I've 
been told by the Speaker that the gentleman from Ohio is a very 
thoughtful Member and will contribute a great deal to our committee, 
which he has and is; but across-the-board cutting in an effort to make 
sense out of our

[[Page 2644]]

spending process makes no sense at all. We are elected to look at the 
whole mix and to pick winners and losers, to decide what programs 
should be cut significantly, and to decide which ones should be 
eliminated. Indeed, that is part of our work.
  In this substitute, essentially we are taking all the work we've done 
these last several days and kicking it out the door. These efforts on 
the amendments were not worth any time at all. We shouldn't have been 
here these last several days. If this amendment is successful, there is 
just one thing that it does that is bothersome to me but which 
illustrates the point:
  This amendment would provide $1 billion below our CR in terms of 
Homeland Security. That is 2.6 percent lower in funding for those 
people who are protecting the border. To suggest by way of this 
substitute that we can eliminate 1,000 of those people who are on the 
border is ludicrous in my judgment.
  Indeed, it is our responsibility to select winners and losers, and 
this substitute is a waste of our time if we are serious about changing 
the direction of our country. So I would strongly oppose this 
substitute.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I have 2 minutes remaining; is that 
right?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Ohio has 7 minutes remaining.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Well, I've got 2 minutes, so I'm going to yield 
myself the balance of my time.
  I certainly don't wish to waste anybody's time, but I've sat through 
a lot of interesting debate over the last 3 or 4 days, and my time has 
been wasted plenty with silly things like not wanting to pay for the 
repairs at the White House, but we went through that exercise today.
  This was a serious attempt to talk about shared sacrifice and the 
belief that, in some parts of the country, some programs are more 
popular than others. So our belief was, if we're going to have shared 
sacrifice, everybody should be in the game. We shouldn't pick programs 
the Republicans like and keep them and pick programs that Democrats 
like and be done with them.
  Now, I do want to take one second to talk about this defense number--
because I drafted this thing. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, 
but I've got to tell you that it was never our intent to not carry over 
the emergency supplemental. The information that we had is that the 
language included in the substitute did, in fact, by indicating that we 
were not dealing with emergency spending and referencing section 423 of 
the supplemental, accomplish that purpose. I'm told by much brighter 
people than I that we didn't do that, so I apologize for that drafting 
error.
  Having said that, let me tell you, I'm not going to apologize for 
taking 20 minutes out of 80 hours--or whatever we had here--to talk 
about the vision of some people on our side who don't think this bill 
represents shared sacrifice.
  In Cleveland, Ohio, people listen to the radio, and some of them like 
to listen to NPR. We don't think that that should be zeroed out. In 
Cleveland, Ohio, some people value the arts, and we don't think that 
there should be a tremendous cut to the National Endowment for the 
Arts. In Cleveland, Ohio, we build our communities with the Community 
Development Block Grant, and we don't think it should get a 66 percent 
cut. As Americans, we happen to value the Food for Peace program, which 
not only feeds hungry people all across the world, but is really the 
last bastion, if we're going to talk about jobs around here, the 
merchant mariner, it's one of that merchant mariner's lifelines for 
employment.
  So I don't make any apologies for taking 20 minutes out of your busy 
lives to talk about this vision and why some of us wish that both sides 
would get together, not have the sacred cows that keep us from reaching 
a conclusion on this thing, and work this thing out.
  I guess I'm apologizing for being the last person; but in light of 
the defense number, I don't want to put my young lambs at risk of some 
stupid political ad that says they sponsored something that cut $33 
billion from the Defense Department of this great country.
  Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted 
to withdraw the amendment.
  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chair, I support the amendment offered by my colleague 
from Ohio, Representative LaTourette.
  I do believe the time has come for Congress to address a federal 
deficit that will exceed $1 trillion for the third consecutive year.
  I do agree that the total dollar amount cut by the underlying bill is 
appropriate and represents a move toward fiscal responsibility.
  The amendment under consideration shows the same commitment to fiscal 
responsibility; in fact, it cuts more spending than the underlying 
bill.
  Beyond that, the amendment spreads the spending cuts across all non-
security federal programs for the remainder of 2011.
  No programs are eliminated, and with limited exceptions, no non-
security spending is left untouched.
  Meeting our financial crisis will entail sacrifice from many 
quarters, and this amendment shares that sacrifice broadly across our 
entire discretionary spending budget.
  Beyond this year, an across-the-board cut provides a better point of 
departure for the 2012 appropriations process which will begin shortly.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments printed in the Congressional Record 
on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 273 by Mr. King of Iowa.
  Amendment No. 154 by Mr. Burgess of Texas.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


             Amendment No. 273 Offered by Mr. King of Iowa

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. 
King) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 189, 
noes 233, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 144]

                               AYES--189

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)

[[Page 2645]]


     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tipton
     Walberg
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--233

     Ackerman
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hultgren
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stivers
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Whitfield
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Costello
     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Smith (TX)
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)

                              {time}  0406

  Mr. CARSON of Indiana changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Amendment No. 154 Offered by Mr. Burgess

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Burgess) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 235, 
noes 187, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 145]

                               AYES--235

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--187

     Ackerman
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Campbell
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McClintock
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

[[Page 2646]]



                             NOT VOTING--11

     Costello
     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Smith (TX)
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)

                              {time}  0409

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 144 and 145, I was 
unfortunately detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' 
on both.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       This Act may be cited as the ``Full-Year Continuing 
     Appropriations Act, 2011''.

  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do 
now rise and report the bill back to the House with sundry amendments, 
with the recommendation that the amendments be agreed to and that the 
bill, as amended, do pass.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mrs. 
Capito) having assumed the chair, Mr. Thornberry, Acting Chair of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1) making 
appropriations for the Department of Defense and the other departments 
and agencies of the Government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
2011, and for other purposes, and reported the bill back to the House 
with sundry amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole, with the 
Recommendations that the amendments be agreed to and that the bill, as 
amended, do pass.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under House Resolution 92, the previous 
question is ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the 
Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
  The amendments were agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                           Motion to Recommit

  Mr. HEINRICH. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. HEINRICH. I am opposed in its current form.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Heinrich moves to recommit H.R. 1 to the Committee on 
     Appropriations with instructions to report the same back to 
     the House forthwith with the following amendment:
       At the end of title VIII of division B, insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. The amounts otherwise provided by this Act are 
     revised by reducing the amount made available for 
     ``Department of Education, Departmental Management, Program 
     Administration'', and increasing the amount made available 
     for ``Department of Education, Student Financial Assistance'' 
     (and the amount made available under such heading for subpart 
     1 of part A of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965), 
     by $39,000,000.

  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I reserve a point of order on 
the gentleman's motion.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman from New Mexico is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HEINRICH. Madam Speaker, Americans need jobs.
  Up until now, Republicans have ignored this problem, and now they're 
making it worse. Our Nation's large and unsustainable budget deficit is 
staring us in the face, but it is at critical moments like this when we 
must approach our Nation's greatest challenges with responsibility and 
prudence. The approach we take must focus on responsible cuts, which 
will have a lasting impact on the deficit, not arbitrary short-term 
cuts to programs that are needed to prepare the next generation of 
American workers and taxpayers.
  Consider the effects of the bill before us on Specialist John 
Carabillo from my home State of New Mexico. Specialist Carabillo served 
in the Army for 6 years, and he was deployed to Iraq twice during his 
service. He then enlisted with the National Guard, and served an 
additional tour in Iraq.
  After returning to New Mexico, Specialist Carabillo decided he wanted 
to go back to school and earn his degree in IT. The Pell Grant 
scholarships and GI benefits Specialist Carabillo receives have allowed 
him to enroll in an associate's program at a vocational school. When he 
graduates, he hopes to find an IT job at Kirtland Air Force Base.
  The Republican bill would cut Specialist Carabillo's Pell Grant 
scholarship. This cut in his financial aid means that he will have to 
take fewer courses this year and graduate later, try to take a loan he 
can't afford or drop out of school.
  Specialist Carabillo is not alone.
  If students who rely on college aid from the Pell Grant program drop 
out of school, America runs the risk of dropping out of first place in 
the world economy.
  This motion to recommit would be a downpayment to restore Specialist 
Carabillo's future. Simply put, this motion to recommit would transfer 
funds from the Department of Education administration to fund Pell 
Grant scholarships at the current level.
  My amendment to restore these scholarships won't add a penny to the 
deficit. In fact, this MTR is paid for by cutting salaries and expenses 
at the Department of Education, which takes it back to fiscal year 2008 
levels.
  So this motion to recommit calls on the House to make a choice. Do we 
want responsible, measured spending cuts or reckless ones? Do we want 
cuts to come at the expense of middle class America or corporate 
special interests? Do we want a weaker America that cuts education or a 
stronger America that competes and wins in the global economy? Whose 
side are we on?
  We say: We're on the side of American jobs. We're on the side of 
American education. We're on the side of working families and their 
sons and daughters.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this motion to recommit.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, it is time to vote.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman withdraw his reservation 
of the point of order?
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I withdraw my reservation.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does any Member rise in opposition to the 
motion?
  Without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to 
recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. HEINRICH. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair 
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on 
the question of passage.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 186, 
noes 238, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 146]

                               AYES--186

     Ackerman
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner

[[Page 2647]]


     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--238

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)

                              {time}  0433

  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  (By unanimous consent, Mr. Dicks was allowed to speak out of order.)


                        Recognizing John Blazey

  Mr. DICKS. Madam Speaker, first of all, I want to thank the entire 
staff of the House Appropriations Committee for the fantastic work that 
they have done.
  No one better exemplifies those qualities than Mr. John Blazey. One 
of the best moves we made was to steal him away from the Senate Budget 
Committee.
  Next week, Blazey will end his 20-year career with the committee, 
where he worked on five different subcommittees, and holds the 
distinction of having been named the Transportation subcommittee staff 
director at the youngest age. His knowledge of process and substance is 
matched only by his style and parties.
  Blazey--and his elf costume--will be missed.
  I yield to the distinguished chairman of the committee.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Let me associate myself with the remarks of 
my friend in thanking John Blazey for his long tenure and service here 
in this great body.
  Best wishes for the future.
  To all the rest of you, I think you've done yourselves proud this 
week. I think the House distinguished itself, and I thank you, 
especially this terrific staff that made all of this happen.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, 5-minute voting will 
continue.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  Under clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 235, 
nays 189, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 147]

                               YEAS--235

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NAYS--189

     Ackerman
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley

[[Page 2648]]


     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Campbell
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Flake
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Giffords
     Harman
     Hinojosa
     McCollum
     Paul
     Peters
     Quayle
     Stark
     Wilson (FL)

                              {time}  0440

  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________