[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 10113-10162]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2013


                             General Leave

  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on H.R. 5972 and that I may include tabular 
material on the same.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Iowa?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 697 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. 5972.
  Will the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) kindly take the 
chair.

                              {time}  1228


                     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. 5972) making appropriations for the Departments of 
Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013, and for other purposes, 
with Ms. Ros-Lehtinen (Acting Chair) in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Tuesday, 
June 26, 2012, the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Broun) had been disposed of, and the bill had been read through page 
74, line 6.
  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chair, I submit the following for the Record.

[[Page 10114]]





[[Page 10115]]



[[Page 10116]]



[[Page 10117]]



[[Page 10118]]



[[Page 10119]]



[[Page 10120]]



[[Page 10121]]



[[Page 10122]]

                              {time}  1230


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 74, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $6,500,000)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $6,500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. My amendment would reduce the proposed funding 
for salaries and expenses of the Office of Public and Indian Housing by 
$6.5 million. This is one of 13 offices which would receive increases 
for administrative expenses in the underlying bill.
  Madam Chairman, we're in an economic emergency as a Nation. We're 
broke. We absolutely must stop spending money that we don't have. We're 
borrowing 40 cents or more on every dollar that the Federal Government 
expends. Raising the funding for the Office of Public and Indian 
Housing by $6.5 million while we're broke makes no fiscal sense to me.
  This particular increase is among the highest for all the offices 
funded under this legislation. My amendment would simply freeze funding 
for this office for this next year. Passage of my amendment would bring 
this account back to this year's FY 2012 levels.
  I urge support of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. LATHAM. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chairman, I rise to oppose the gentleman's 
amendment.
  It's a good talking point, reducing administration accounts that 
received increases. We've scrubbed these accounts. We've held hearings, 
asked questions, and made recommendations about what should be funded 
rather than looking at an arbitrary number. The bill cuts $4 billion 
from fiscal year 2012, which is a fiscally responsible level.
  I would urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. The amendment that has been offered removes a 3 percent 
increase in the administrative account for the Office of Public and 
Indian Housing. I rise to oppose the amendment.
  In this instance, the cuts in the Office of Public and Indian Housing 
cover a number of things, including the VASH program. We're adding $75 
million for additional VASH vouchers--veterans' homelessness vouchers--
and that has to be administered. The arbitrary $6.5 million simply does 
not help with that effort. It hurts that effort.
  The Office also implements the operating and capital funds for public 
housing and the Native American housing grants. All of these require 
either layoffs, removal of people, because the salaries and expenses of 
the Office are subject to normal increases, small increases year by 
year for salaries for people in those places, and they are clearly 
going to end up having to reduce the number of personnel while they're 
administering more, and particularly the housing and the homeless 
program for veterans.
  So on that basis, I think this is an unwise reduction and one that is 
unjustified as well as unwise, and I would urge a ``no'' vote on the 
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, 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 Georgia will 
be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                   community planning and development

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of 
     Community Planning and Development, $103,500,000.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 74, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $3,500,000)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. My amendment would reduce the proposed funding 
for salaries and expenses for the Office of Community Planning and 
Development by $3.5 million.
  This amendment, like the ones I presented last night and the one I 
just presented, would freeze the funding for these offices. I've heard 
my good friend from Iowa and my good friends on the other side talk 
about how the underlying bill has cut expenses for this whole 
underlying bill, but here in the House of Representatives, we've 
reduced our expenses by over 11 percent. It seems to me that it just 
makes fiscal sense to freeze funding for these offices in the 
underlying bill and not raise them.
  We're in an economic emergency as a Nation. We are spending money 
that we simply do not have. We've got to stop the outrageous spending 
that's going on here in Washington, and I'm just asking a simple thing: 
let's freeze all of these offices at the current year's levels for 1 
more year. Hopefully, next year we'll have policy put in place that 
will increase our economy and start creating jobs here in this Nation, 
but we're not doing that this year with this administration and the 
policies that we see in the other body on the other side of the Hill.
  So let's just freeze the expenses of this office, and I'm proposing 
to freeze the expenses of virtually all the offices in this bill--most 
of them, anyway--and my amendment would bring the spending level that's 
proposed back to the current spending level of 2012.
  When families and businesses get overextended, they don't continue to 
raise their spending levels, and we should not be raising this one 
either. My amendment would just freeze it at the current spending 
levels.
  I urge support of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. OLVER. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. This amendment again, as the gentleman has said, is an 
amendment that would freeze at the level of the 2012 funding here for 
salaries and expenses of the Office of Community Planning and 
Development.
  Now, this office, it turns out, administers and implements the CDBG 
program, which in the bill, as presented by my chairman, is increased 
substantially--several hundred million dollars in the CDBG program--and 
increases the funding for the HOME program, which had been held at a 
much lower level in last year's program. In both of those cases, they 
were considerably lower.

                              {time}  1240

  And just last night, we added an amendment to increase the funding 
for HPWA, Helping Persons With AIDS, one of those vulnerable 
populations that we have, and our housing programs--as with veterans 
who are homeless, others who are homeless, those who are vulnerable 
such as those living with AIDS--have proven to be rather strong 
programs that have strong support.
  Furthermore, already, across the board in HUD, there has been a 
reduction in personnel services and in the salaries and expenses of $20 
million already compared with last year's overall within HUD. So this 
is a duplicate and hitting at vulnerable populations that

[[Page 10123]]

we do not want to or should not want to be reducing. The reduction 
again requires that there be some reduction in personnel because 
people's salaries go up. They go up because people get a COLA, or a 
cost-of-living increase, of some sort with their salaries, or they move 
up in their category because of longevity. So it ends up putting people 
who have jobs out of work and reducing the personnel to provide service 
to the American people and slows down the work of the offices in all 
these places where I think we all have a stake in making certain that 
they are efficiently implemented.
  So I would urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chairwoman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. 
We went through the hearing process. We have worked on these numbers 
to, number one, stay within our allocation, which we have done--we are 
actually cutting $4 billion in this bill--but also to prioritize. 
There's no one more sensitive about hardworking taxpayer dollars than I 
am. But the fact of the matter is, this is an absolutely critical 
function. The increase that is here is extremely important so that 
these programs are carried out properly without waste, fraud, and 
abuse.
  For that reason, I would again urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, 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 Georgia will 
be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:


                                housing

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of 
     Housing, $396,500,000, of which at least $8,200,000 shall be 
     for the Office of Risk and Regulatory Affairs.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 74, line 12, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, my amendment would reduce the 
proposed funding for salaries and expenses of bureaucrats here in 
Washington at the Office of Housing by $5 million. That's absolutely 
correct.
  This amendment, as well as all of my amendments, will not cut the 
programs. It will not cut the programs one iota. What this does is it 
reduces the salaries.
  I just heard my good friend from Massachusetts talking about Federal 
bureaucrats getting raises. I have frozen the salaries of people who 
work for me, and I know many Members of Congress have, for the last 2 
years. Why should we be giving Federal bureaucrats more money when the 
American people are not getting raises? It makes no sense to me, 
particularly as we are in an economic emergency. We are spending money 
we don't have. We have to stop the outrageous spending that's going on 
here in Washington. Enough is enough. And raising this office, as well 
as all these offices, above the 2012 makes no economic sense to me 
whatsoever. Let's be fiscally responsible.
  My good friend from Iowa, who I have the utmost respect for, has done 
a tremendous job in this bill, and I do appreciate the tremendous hard 
work that he and his committee has done. And I appreciate the $4 
million that they've cut. But why raise the salaries of Federal 
bureaucrats?
  My amendment would simply reduce the proposed funding back to the 
2012 levels. I urge support of my amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chair, I again rise in opposition to the 
gentleman's amendment. There are some factors that we need to take into 
consideration. For one thing next year, next fiscal year, we have an 
additional compensable day which has to be paid for. We have GSA that 
has raised rents. We have already cut $14 million out of salaries and 
expenses, so we would not be able to meet our requirements. We are not 
giving Federal employees raises, but there are additional costs that 
come into play because of rents, because of the additional day that our 
Federal workers will be working next year. And for those reasons--and 
again, I want to reiterate, we have cut $14 million out of this 
account--I would just urge a ``no'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. In this instance, it is again a case of freezing a 
salaries and expenses account at the previous year's level. But this 
one has an interesting sidelight in that, in the legislation that we 
have before us, we have adopted a Presidential recommendation for a 
partial-year funding for project-based section 8 vouchers, which is 
going to cause considerable additional administration than the usual 
program of doing full-year continuation of those voucher programs. 
There is going to be much uncertainty if this goes on all the way to 
adoption. There would be much uncertainty for the people who are the 
owners and providers of that housing, and probably some loss in actual 
affordable housing available under the project-based section 8 program. 
So this is a case where they need that assistance. This is where we 
administer the housing programs for the elderly and disabled, the so-
called 202 programs and 811, chapters 202 and chapter 811 for elderly 
and disabled people, as well as housing counseling assistance.
  In addition, we have the Federal Housing Administration, which is 
having a much larger level of activity as we are trying to dig out of 
the foreclosure crisis from the past, and that agency needs to have 
personnel that are qualified and able to do the right job.
  So again here--and by the way, I made an error in my previous 
comments when I said there was a reduction across the board for HUD. 
What I should have indicated was that it was a reduction in the 
salaries and expenses account over a period of time going back to 2010 
of $20 million across the programs of salaries and expenses within HUD 
over that time.

                              {time}  1250

  So I made a mistake saying it was a $20 million reduction in 1 year. 
But for all those reasons, I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, 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 Georgia will 
be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                    policy development and research

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of Policy 
     Development and Research, $22,326,000.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

[[Page 10124]]

  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 74, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $115,000)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $115,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chairman, again I rise to propose an 
amendment just to freeze the salaries of this Office of Policy 
Development and Research by a mere $115,000.
  Madam Chairman, I hear colleagues around here talking as if millions 
of dollars, tens of millions--hundreds of millions of dollars is 
nothing. Well, most of my constituents at home in Georgia, most 
Americans think that $1 million is a lot of money, and I certainly 
think $1 million is a lot of money. But we have proposed, in this 
underlying bill, to raise the administrative expenses and salaries.
  My good friend from Massachusetts, in the previous amendment, said we 
need to increase the salaries of the bureaucrats. I hope my good friend 
from Iowa (Mr. Latham), when he stood up on the last amendment saying 
that we weren't going to increase salaries of Federal bureaucrats, is 
factual. I hope that that goes in the Record and it becomes true that 
we're not going to raise the salaries of Federal bureaucrats.
  But they're proposing raising the administrative expenses and 
salaries in all of these offices, so I'm proposing just to freeze these 
expenses for 1 more year. Let's bring this account back down to this 
current year's levels of spending.
  We cannot continue on this road.
  Madam Chairman, I'm a medical doctor. As a medical doctor, part of my 
medical practice for many years has been involved in treating 
addictions, drug and alcohol addictions. In addiction medicine, we have 
a saying: When there's no denial, there's no addiction.
  Congress and government have a spending addiction. It's a spending 
addiction, and there's a tremendous amount of denial here in this 
city--in all branches of government, actually. We need to face the 
fact: We're broke as a Nation. We've got to stop the outrageous 
spending.
  I'm proposing just a mere $115,000 to freeze the expenses for this 
office and salaries for this office for 1 more year. I don't think 
that's too much for me to ask. I don't think that's too much for the 
American taxpayer, the hardworking American taxpayer to ask for us to 
freeze the salaries of these bureaucrats here in Washington and freeze 
their expenses for 1 more year--not only for this amendment, but for 
the amendments that I've already presented and the ones that I will 
present. Let's freeze this spending for 1 more year, keep it at the FY 
2012 levels.
  I urge support of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. OLVER. Madam Chairperson, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. The gentleman from Georgia just wants to freeze 
everything. But our personnel, in an agency like this, they are subject 
to the civil service laws, to the personnel laws under OPM, and they 
are assigned in grades and then steps. They add several steps as they 
gain seniority and go from step 1 to step 7, and then they may sit for 
a while. But you end up with people--unless you're really trying to put 
people out of work. Unless you're trying to put people out of work--and 
there's no reason to do that for this kind of an agency at all--then 
there has to be a slow, small increase for those people who move from 
step to step along the salary scale.
  So this is an amendment that would essentially cause disruption in 
the processing and in the personnel system for the agency, which has 
lots of work to do. We should be worrying about how to get productivity 
in the processing rather than about trying to jigger and freeze a step 
system's pay scale for the people who do the work at these agencies.
  I again urge that this amendment not be adopted, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. NADLER. Madam Chairman, I rise to disagree with the rhetoric and 
the mythology propounded here by the gentleman from Georgia.
  The mythology is that we have a tremendous spending binge that we 
must reduce, that the country is broke, and it's broke because we're 
spending much too much money and we've got to reduce the spending. It's 
simply not true.
  Twelve years ago, in 2000, we were looking at a $5.6 trillion surplus 
over the next 10 years. The Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, Alan 
Greenspan, testifying in favor of President Bush's tax reductions, said 
we have to reduce taxes, because if we don't, we will pay off the 
entire national debt by 2012 and that would be a bad thing, for some 
reason which I won't go into now. He thought it would be a bad thing if 
we paid off the entire national debt.
  The entire debate between the two candidates, Bush and Gore, then 
was: What should we do with this $5.6 trillion surplus.
  How did we change from a $5.6 trillion surplus to the budget deficits 
we have right now? Not by increasing spending. If you look at the 
spending amount other than military, if you look at the discretionary 
spending of the Federal Government other than military, adjusted for 
inflation and population growth, it has not increased by a nickel since 
2001, not by a nickel.
  What has changed? What has changed to create the deficit? Because if 
you want to solve the deficit, you have to know what created it to undo 
it. What has changed to create the deficit is several things:
  One, 40 percent of the deficit is caused by the Bush tax cuts, which 
will expire at the end of the year unless we change that. Forty percent 
of the current and anticipated deficits were caused by the Bush tax 
cuts of 2001 and 2003;
  Second, two unfunded wars in Iraq and Afghanistan--the first time in 
American history we fought major wars without increasing taxes to pay 
for them;
  Third, aside from the wars, completely aside from the wars, we have 
doubled Pentagon spending since 2001 in real terms; and
  Finally, we have a depression, or a recession. When you have a 
recession that started in 2007 or 2008, tax receipts go down. Expenses 
on things like food stamps and unemployment insurance goes up. That's 
when you should run a deficit. You should run a surplus in good times; 
you should run a deficit during a depression or recession in order to 
stimulate the economy and get it back up.
  If we want to deal with the deficit--and we should deal with the 
deficit--we shouldn't reduce necessary government spending and 
certainly not nickel-and-dime step pay increases for Federal employees. 
If we want to reduce the deficit, we should undo most of the Bush tax 
cuts for the rich, because most of the Bush tax cuts went to rich 
people and to very large corporations. We are only collecting about 14 
or 15 percent of GDP in taxes this year.

                              {time}  1300

  The normal range is between 19 and 21 percent. And I say ``normal,'' 
meaning the entire post-World War II period ranges between 18 or 19 and 
22 percent. We're collecting 14 or 15 percent in the last couple of 
years because, one, the recession, and, two, because we greatly reduced 
effective taxes on multi-national corporations and on rich people.
  We used to have in this country, under President Reagan, 25 different 
tax brackets. Someone making $5 million paid a higher tax rate than 
someone making $1 million, who paid a higher tax rate than someone 
making $250,000 and so forth. Now, the highest tax rate kicks in at 
below $250,000, and someone making $250 million pays no higher tax rate 
than someone making $175,000 or $200,000. There's something very wrong 
with that.
  So if we want to deal with the deficit, deal not with the nonexistent 
problem, which is the huge nonexistent spending surge that didn't 
occur. And we have great needs in this country. We have to

[[Page 10125]]

fix our highways, our roads, our bridges, our hospitals, our broadband. 
We have to invest so this country will be economically competitive, and 
our schools and our teachers and our cops and all of these things.
  If you want to fix the deficit, don't shortchange what we should be 
doing to invest in this country. Get rid of the Bush tax cuts, or most 
of them, or get rid of those portions of the Bush taxes that went to 
rich people, high-income people and to big corporations. Make 
corporations, the large corporations, pay an effective tax rate again, 
instead of a large number of our top corporations paying zero dollars 
in taxes.
  Reduce the Pentagon budget, which we can do. We no longer need all 
those troops in Germany to protect against a Soviet tank invasion, 
which is not likely to occur since the Soviets don't exist anymore. 
That's what we ought to be doing.
  But the key thing is don't have this mythology that we have greatly 
expanded Federal spending over the last 10 years, or even over the last 
3 years, which is simply not the case.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, 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 Georgia will 
be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                   fair housing and equal opportunity

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of Fair 
     Housing and Equal Opportunity, $72,904,000.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 74, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $304,000)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $304,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, again I rise just to freeze the 
funding for salaries and office expenses for the Office of Fair Housing 
and Equal Opportunity by a meager $304,000. If we cannot cut out 
$115,000 or $304,000, what are we going to cut?
  And as my friend from Massachusetts already said, actually, on two of 
my amendments, that it's to increase salaries of Federal bureaucrats. 
We've got to freeze the salaries of these bureaucrats. We've got to be 
fiscally responsible.
  My amendment doesn't cut any program, doesn't cut any service, 
doesn't cut out any part of the necessary aspects of the Federal 
Government. All it does is it freezes the salaries and the expenses of 
this office, as the other amendments would do. It freezes it at this 
year's levels. Doesn't even go backwards, freezes it at this year's 
levels.
  I urge support of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. OLVER. I rise in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Madam Chair, now at this point we have--I think this is 
the last of this group of amendments that have been proposed in this 
area, in essence. And when you put them together, because one was for 
$6.5 million, one was for about $5 million, then there were a couple 
that were a little--there was one that was a little over $1 million and 
then a couple that were smaller--the sum total of people who will be 
taken out of the--who this would require, the freeze, in that way, 
would require that some number around 200-or-so employees would be put 
out of positions.
  Now, the gentleman from Georgia thinks that, well, they're Federal 
bureaucrats; but they're providing a service. In this instance, it is 
the service in the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, which 
has a budget, total budget, of $70-million-or-so. And this 300,000 is 
only a couple of percent out of it.
  Most of the salaries and expenses, most of these agencies that he has 
been affecting are mostly done in salaries and expenses of the 
operation of the office. But they all provide a public service to 
people. In this instance, it's the Office of Fair Housing and Equal 
Opportunity.
  Well, it ensures that Americans have the same right, that all 
Americans have the same right to housing and investigates instances 
where those rights have been violated. So we are, in every instance of 
them, and we dealt with a couple of similar ones last night before in 
the other department under this bill--they only serve to slow down the 
effective operation of those offices to provide services across the 
whole gamut of things which have been given to them to do, whether it 
be public housing, whether it be the Veterans Administration program, 
here the Fair Housing Administration program, the FHA, the housing for 
elders, housing for disabled people. All of them are the same ilk. 
There's no reason to do anything other than the same thing that we have 
done in the past. And so I'm urging, again, a ``no'' vote on this.
  I yield back the balance of my time;
  Mr. LATHAM. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chair, I understand the gentleman, and I appreciate 
the fact that he wants to cut spending. We have, in fact, in this bill 
cut the spending from the request $1.4 million on this particular line 
item in the budget.
  The fact of the matter is, Madam Chair, we have additional rent that 
we have to pay. We have an extra day of work for the Federal workers 
next year that we have to pay. So there's not going to be any increase. 
It's basically going to maintain where we are in this function.
  But, again, we have already cut from the President's request, $1.4 
million. And there are additional costs we're going to incur just to 
stay even from last year. So with that, I would urge a ``no'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, 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 Georgia will 
be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

            office of healthy homes and lead hazard control

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of 
     Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control, $6,816,000.

                       Public and Indian Housing

                     tenant-based rental assistance

       For activities and assistance for the provision of tenant-
     based rental assistance authorized under the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) 
     (``the Act'' herein), not otherwise provided for, 
     $15,134,283,000, to remain available until expended, shall be 
     available on October 1, 2012 (in addition to the 
     $4,000,000,000 previously appropriated under this heading 
     that became available on October 1, 2012), and 
     $4,000,000,000, to remain available until expended, shall be 
     available on October 1, 2013: Provided, That amounts made 
     available under this heading are provided as follows:
       (1) $17,237,948,000 shall be available for renewals of 
     expiring section 8 tenant-based annual contributions 
     contracts (including renewals of enhanced vouchers under any 
     provision of law authorizing such assistance under section 
     8(t) of the Act) and including renewal of other special 
     purpose incremental vouchers: Provided, That notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, from amounts provided under this 
     paragraph and any carryover, the Secretary for the calendar 
     year 2013 funding cycle shall provide renewal funding for 
     each public housing agency based on validated voucher 
     management system (VMS) leasing and cost data for the prior 
     calendar year and by applying an inflation factor as 
     established by the Secretary, by notice published in the 
     Federal Register, and

[[Page 10126]]

     by making any necessary adjustments for the costs associated 
     with the first-time renewal of vouchers under this paragraph 
     including tenant protection and HOPE VI vouchers: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds provided under this paragraph 
     may be used to fund a total number of unit months under lease 
     which exceeds a public housing agency's authorized level of 
     units under contract, except for public housing agencies 
     participating in the Moving to Work (MTW) demonstration, 
     which are instead governed by the terms and conditions of 
     their MTW agreements: Provided further, That the Secretary 
     shall, to the extent necessary to stay within the amount 
     specified under this paragraph, pro rate each public housing 
     agency's allocation otherwise established pursuant to this 
     paragraph: Provided further, That except as provided in the 
     following provisos, the entire amount specified under this 
     paragraph (except as otherwise modified under this Act) shall 
     be obligated to the public housing agencies based on the 
     allocation and pro rata method described above, and the 
     Secretary shall notify public housing agencies of their 
     annual budget not later than 60 days after enactment of this 
     Act: Provided further, That the Secretary may extend the 60-
     day notification period, with the prior written approval of 
     the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations: Provided 
     further, That up to $75,000,000 shall be available only: (1) 
     for adjustments in the allocations for public housing 
     agencies, after application for an adjustment by a public 
     housing agency, that experienced a significant increase, as 
     determined by the Secretary, in renewal costs of vouchers 
     resulting from unforeseen circumstances or from portability 
     under section 8(r) of the Act; (2) for vouchers that were not 
     in use during the 12-month period in order to be available to 
     meet a commitment pursuant to section 8(o)(13) of the Act; 
     (3) for adjustments for costs associated with HUD-Veterans 
     Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) vouchers; and (4) for 
     adjustments in the allocations for public housing agencies 
     that experienced a significant increase, as determined by the 
     Secretary, in renewal costs as a result of participation in 
     the Small Area Fair Market Rent demonstration: Provided 
     further, That the Secretary shall allocate amounts under the 
     previous proviso based on need as determined by the 
     Secretary;
       (2) $75,000,000 shall be for section 8 rental assistance 
     for relocation and replacement of housing units that are 
     demolished or disposed of pursuant to section 18 of the Act, 
     conversion of section 23 projects to assistance under section 
     8, the family unification program under section 8(x) of the 
     Act, relocation of witnesses in connection with efforts to 
     combat crime in public and assisted housing pursuant to a 
     request from a law enforcement or prosecution agency, 
     enhanced vouchers under any provision of law authorizing such 
     assistance under section 8(t) of the Act, HOPE VI vouchers, 
     mandatory and voluntary conversions, and tenant protection 
     assistance including replacement and relocation assistance or 
     for project-based assistance to prevent the displacement of 
     unassisted elderly tenants currently residing in section 202 
     properties financed between 1959 and 1974 that are refinanced 
     pursuant to Public Law 106-569, as amended, or under the 
     authority as provided under this Act: Provided, That when a 
     public housing development is submitted for demolition or 
     disposition under section 18 of the Act, the Secretary may 
     provide section 8 rental assistance when the units pose an 
     imminent health and safety risk to residents: Provided 
     further, That the Secretary may only provide replacement 
     vouchers for units that were occupied within the previous 24 
     months that cease to be available as assisted housing, 
     subject only to the availability of funds: Provided further, 
     That of the amounts made available under this paragraph, 
     $10,000,000 may be available to provide tenant protection 
     assistance, not otherwise provided under this paragraph, to 
     residents residing in low-vacancy areas and who may have to 
     pay rents greater than 30 percent of household income, as the 
     result of (1) the maturity of a HUD-insured, HUD-held or 
     section 202 loan that requires the permission of the 
     Secretary prior to loan prepayment; (2) the expiration of a 
     rental assistance contract for which the tenants are not 
     eligible for enhanced voucher or tenant protection assistance 
     under existing law; or (3) the expiration of affordability 
     restrictions accompanying a mortgage or preservation program 
     administered by the Secretary: Provided further, That such 
     tenant protection assistance made available under the 
     previous proviso may be provided under the authority of 
     section 8(t) or section 8(o)(13) of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(t)): Provided further, That the 
     Secretary shall issue guidance to implement the previous 
     provisos, including, but not limited to, requirements for 
     defining eligible at-risk households within 120 days of the 
     enactment of this Act;
       (3) $1,575,000,000 shall be for administrative and other 
     expenses of public housing agencies in administering the 
     section 8 tenant-based rental assistance program, of which up 
     to $50,000,000 shall be available to the Secretary to 
     allocate to public housing agencies that need additional 
     funds to administer their section 8 programs, including fees 
     associated with section 8 tenant protection rental 
     assistance, the administration of disaster -related vouchers, 
     Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing vouchers, and other 
     special purpose incremental vouchers: Provided, That no less 
     than $1,525,000,000 of the amount provided in this paragraph 
     shall be allocated to public housing agencies for the 
     calendar year 2013 funding cycle based on section 8(q) of the 
     Act (and related Appropriation Act provisions) as in effect 
     immediately before the enactment of the Quality Housing and 
     Work Responsibility Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-276): 
     Provided further, That if the amounts made available under 
     this paragraph are insufficient to pay the amounts determined 
     under the previous proviso, the Secretary may decrease the 
     amounts allocated to agencies by a uniform percentage 
     applicable to all agencies receiving funding under this 
     paragraph or may, to the extent necessary to provide full 
     payment of amounts determined under the previous proviso, 
     utilize unobligated balances, including recaptures and 
     carryovers, remaining from funds appropriated to the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development under this 
     heading from prior fiscal years, notwithstanding the purposes 
     for which such amounts were appropriated: Provided further, 
     That all public housing agencies participating in the MTW 
     demonstration shall be funded pursuant to their MTW 
     agreements, and shall be subject to the same uniform 
     percentage decrease as under the previous proviso: Provided 
     further, That amounts provided under this paragraph shall be 
     only for activities related to the provision of tenant-based 
     rental assistance authorized under section 8, including 
     related development activities;
       (4) $60,000,000 shall be available for family self-
     sufficiency coordinators under section 23 of the Act;
       (5) $111,335,000 for the renewal of tenant-based assistance 
     contracts under section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013), including necessary 
     administrative expenses;
       (6) $75,000,000 for incremental rental voucher assistance 
     for use through a supported housing program administered in 
     conjunction with the Department of Veterans Affairs as 
     authorized under section 8(o)(19) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937: Provided, That the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development shall make such funding available, 
     notwithstanding section 204 (competition provision) of this 
     title, to public housing agencies that partner with eligible 
     VA Medical Centers or other entities as designated by the 
     Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, based on 
     geographical need for such assistance as identified by the 
     Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, public 
     housing agency administrative performance, and other factors 
     as specified by the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development in consultation with the Secretary of the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may waive, or 
     specify alternative requirements for (in consultation with 
     the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs), any 
     provision of any statute or regulation that the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development administers in connection with 
     the use of funds made available under this paragraph (except 
     for requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, 
     labor standards, and the environment), upon a finding by the 
     Secretary that any such waivers or alternative requirements 
     are necessary for the effective delivery and administration 
     of such voucher assistance: Provided further, That assistance 
     made available under this paragraph shall continue to remain 
     available for homeless veterans upon turn-over; and
       (7) The Secretary shall separately track all special 
     purpose vouchers funded under this heading.


                 Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Nadler

  Mr. NADLER. Madam 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:

       Page 75, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $460,000,000)''.
       Page 75, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $460,000,000)''.

  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 minutes.

                              {time}  1310

  Mr. NADLER. Madam Chairman, we spend a lot of time talking about how 
we need to do more with less. The reality is that, all too often, we do 
less with less. This is the unfortunate reality facing our rental 
assistance programs if the House-proposed funding levels are enacted.
  The Housing Choice Voucher program, more commonly known as section 8, 
provides rental assistance to over 2 million households with very

[[Page 10127]]

low incomes. Half of these households are of seniors or people with 
disabilities. Most of the rest are of families with children.
  Experts agree with HUD's assessment of section 8. It is a cost-
effective means of delivering decent, safe, and affordable housing to 
low-income families in the private market. Because of the widely 
accepted success of the program, section 8 has enjoyed bipartisan 
support for many years.
  Despite agreement among policy experts and politicians, section 8 
funding levels continue to come up short of the actual need. The 
National Low Income Housing Coalition found that, according to the 
latest census data, for every 100 households with extremely low 
incomes, only 30 rental units are affordable and available. Three-
quarters of renters with extremely low incomes pay housing costs that 
exceed half of their incomes, placing them at a high risk of housing 
instability and homelessness. Yet, because of limited funds, only one 
in four eligible families receives rental assistance.
  Without increasing funds beyond what is included in this bill for the 
section 8 program, an estimated 58,000 low-income families will lose 
their existing rental assistance next year, putting these families at 
risk of homelessness. Even the more conservative estimate of the 
section 8 budget shortfall by the OMB finds that 30,000 low-income 
families will be at risk of losing their current vouchers and, 
therefore, of losing their homes.
  With housing instability and homelessness comes the destabilizing of 
families and the possible long-term negative impacts on kids. That's 
why I'm offering this amendment.
  This amendment would increase funding for section 8 voucher renewals 
by $460 million to cover the actual costs of ensuring that existing 
vouchers will continue and that no family will lose an existing section 
8 voucher. This does not increase the number of vouchers, though I 
would love to do that, but it does ensure that no families would lose 
their currently existing section 8 vouchers.
  Additionally, by funding section 8 at the figures necessary to 
continue existing vouchers, we can make sure that it would be 
unnecessary for HUD to implement its proposal for $75 minimum rent even 
if that $75 exceeds the normal section 8 rental limit of 30 percent of 
income. To most of us here, $75 may not seem like a lot of money as 
it's a meal for two in many Washington and New York City restaurants, 
but for 500,000 of the poorest HUD-assisted families, families who have 
annual incomes of less than $3,000--that's around $250 a month--$75 is 
a lot of money. For 400,000 HUD-assisted families, $75 minimum would be 
a 50 percent rent increase from what they're paying now, leaving these 
families with less money for food, transportation, and other basic 
necessities. We're talking about families with annual incomes of $2,000 
or $2,500 annually.
  Madam Chairman, our first objective must be to prevent further 
hardship to the poorest people in our country and to prevent additional 
potential homelessness among vulnerable low-income families. To do 
this, we must ensure that we do not lose current section 8 assistance 
and that we do not impose a new minimum rent that could be way beyond 
30 percent of income for people earning $2,000 and $2,500. This 
amendment is necessary in order to do that, so I urge my colleagues to 
support my amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chairman, I insist on the point of order.
  The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the 
bill.
  The amendment is not in order under section 3(j)(3) of House 
Resolution 5, 112th Congress, which states:
  It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general 
appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the 
bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments 
proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority 
pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.
  The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill 
in violation of such section.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of 
order?
  The gentleman from New York is recognized.
  Mr. NADLER. Madam Chairman, the necessity for this amendment is 
undeniable.
  The hardship and the suffering this budget would cause without this 
amendment, by imposing minimum rentals way beyond 30 percent of income 
on people with incomes of $2,000 to $2,500 annually, is undeniable. 
That this Congress should do such a thing is regrettable, to put it 
mildly.
  I understand the rule. The rule would require an offset of an equal 
amount of money; but in this overly restrictive bill to start with, 
there is no way of finding such an offset of that amount of money 
without hurting people in an equal fashion in other ways. So that says 
that we have a choice of really injuring ``these'' people or of really 
injuring ``those'' people. It's not an acceptable choice. I understand 
the rule. That is regrettable.
  I hope that as we progress with this budget that we can find a way of 
finding the funds that we have in this amendment for this purpose so 
that we do not injure all of these thousands and thousands of very low-
income people.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa makes a point of order that 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York violates section 
3(j)(3) of House Resolution 5.
  Section 3(j)(3) establishes a point of order against an amendment 
proposing a net increase in budget authority in the pending bill.
  The Chair has been persuasively guided by an estimate from the chair 
of the Committee on the Budget that the amendment proposes a net 
increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the point of order 
is sustained. The amendment is not in order.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                        housing certificate fund

                              (rescission)

       Unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryover, 
     remaining from funds appropriated to the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development under this heading, the 
     heading, ``Annual Contributions for Assisted Housing'', and 
     the heading ``Project-Based Rental Assistance'', for fiscal 
     year 2013 and prior years may be used for renewal of or 
     amendments to section 8 project-based contracts and for 
     performance-based contract administrators, notwithstanding 
     the purposes for which such funds were appropriated: 
     Provided, That any obligated balances of contract authority 
     from fiscal year 1974 and prior that have been terminated 
     shall be rescinded: Provided further, That amounts previously 
     recaptured, or recaptured during the current fiscal year, 
     from section 8 project-based contracts from source years 
     fiscal year 1975 through fiscal year 1987 are hereby 
     rescinded, and an amount of additional new budget authority, 
     equivalent to the amount permanently cancelled is hereby 
     appropriated, to remain available until expended, for the 
     purposes set forth under this heading, in addition to amounts 
     otherwise available.

                      public housing capital fund

       For the Public Housing Capital Fund Program to carry out 
     capital and management activities for public housing 
     agencies, as authorized under section 9 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g) (the ``Act'') 
     $1,985,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016: 
     Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of law or 
     regulation, during fiscal year 2013 the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development may not delegate to any Department 
     official other than the Deputy Secretary and the Assistant 
     Secretary for Public and Indian Housing any authority under 
     paragraph (2) of section 9(j) regarding the extension of the 
     time periods under such section: Provided further, That for 
     purposes of such section 9(j), the term ``obligate'' means, 
     with respect to amounts, that the amounts are subject to a 
     binding agreement that will result in outlays, immediately or 
     in the future: Provided further, That up to $15,345,000 shall 
     be to support the ongoing Public Housing Financial and 
     Physical Assessment activities of the Real Estate Assessment 
     Center (REAC): Provided further, That of the total amount 
     provided under this heading, not to exceed $20,000,000 shall 
     be available for the Secretary to make grants, 
     notwithstanding section 204 of this Act, to public housing 
     agencies for emergency capital needs including safety and 
     security measures necessary to address crime and drug-related 
     activity as well as needs resulting from unforeseen or 
     unpreventable emergencies and natural disasters excluding 
     Presidentially declared

[[Page 10128]]

     emergencies and natural disasters under the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et 
     seq.) occurring in fiscal year 2013: Provided further, That 
     of the total amount provided under this heading $50,000,000 
     shall be for supportive services, service coordinator and 
     congregate services as authorized by section 34 of the Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1437z-6) and the Native American Housing 
     Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4101 
     et seq.): Provided further, That of the total amount provided 
     under this heading, up to $5,000,000 is to support the costs 
     of administrative and judicial receiverships: Provided 
     further, That from the funds made available under this 
     heading, the Secretary shall provide bonus awards in fiscal 
     year 2013 to public housing agencies that are designated high 
     performers.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 84, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $110,000,000)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $110,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chairman, the underlying bill is 
suggesting that Congress allot an increase of $110 million in Federal 
funding for the Public Housing Capital Fund from this fiscal year, from 
fiscal year 2012.
  My amendment would simply freeze funding at our current level and 
reduce the proposed funding by $110 million. We've got to stop 
spending. That's what all my efforts are geared towards. We can 
continue to perform the necessary functions of the Federal Government 
for those who need it. My amendment would just freeze the proposed 
increase in funding so that we keep it at this current year's level.
  I urge my colleagues to support this very simple amendment, which 
would save over $110 million for the hardworking taxpayers of America.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Madam Chairwoman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. The amendment that the gentleman from Georgia has now 
offered has to do with the Public Housing Capital Fund.
  The public housing infrastructure currently has an estimated $26 
billion of maintenance backlog. In fact, capital repairs accumulate at 
the rate of something over $3 billion a year, which is considerably 
higher than $1.9 billion that is contained in this--$1.985 billion 
that's contained in this bill. So what we are doing is, year by year, 
continuing to provide maintenance funding: the replacement of 
utilities, the replacement of appliances, as well as such simple 
maintenance as painting if it's needed, and so on.

                              {time}  1320

  In our more than a million housing units, in the 3,500 or so of our 
total housing authorities around the country, we are steadily putting 
these in a situation where we're building a further capital maintenance 
backlog gap year by year by year.
  This is never a wise thing to do when it's at the extent that we are 
presently doing it. But the $110 million at least is a little bit 
better than not having the $110 million, which would be an even greater 
increase in the backlog gap that we have for maintenance, repair, and 
upgrading of our housing units.
  All of those housing units are intended to last for many years and be 
used long into the future. If we don't maintain them properly in a 
reasonable way, then eventually we will lose those units. It is much 
more expensive to replace the units with new units than it is to 
maintain them in a proper way.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment so that we do not continue to 
dig our hole deeper on the maintenance needs for the stock of housing 
that we have in our 3,500 public housing authorities around the 
country.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Madam Chairwoman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Madam Chairwoman, I rise in support of this 
amendment. This is a $110 million increase in spending, and it is 
simply too much under the circumstances.
  I want to first of all, though, certainly commend Chairman Latham and 
all those who have worked on this bill because the material that has 
been provided to our office said that this bill overall contains a 7.1 
percent decrease in funding, which I think is the biggest cut of any 
appropriations bill that we've dealt with so far. I also want to 
commend and salute the gentleman from Georgia for trying even harder to 
rein in spending, because I think almost everyone on both sides of the 
aisle knows that we have to reduce spending and we have to do more than 
we've been doing.
  This $110 million increase is double the rate of inflation. The 
amendment by the gentleman from Georgia does not reduce the funding of 
this agency. It just holds it at the same level. We've cut our own 
budgets, Madam Chairwoman, for the last couple of years. We've tried to 
cut many other things. But megabillions have been poured into this 
program over the last 10 or 15 years. Even with the gentleman's 
amendment, this fund will still get $1.765 billion. I can tell you most 
people around the country think that's an awful lot of money.
  I rise in support of this amendment. I certainly hope that if this 
amendment does not pass, that we will at least pass the much smaller 
cut in the gentleman's next amendment. But I think this is a good 
amendment.
  We have to get serious about cutting spending when we're facing a 
national debt of over $16 trillion, which is going much higher and much 
faster. Unless we want this country to become a gigantic Greece and 
have the problems that we're seeing all over the world, then we've got 
to do more than we're doing.
  So I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment, and I yield back 
that balance of my time.
  Mr. LATHAM. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  We have been fiscally responsible in this bill by reducing the public 
housing capital fund by $85 million below the budget request, and we're 
hearing that this funding level will be a challenge because there's a 
backlog, Madam Chairman, of over $25 billion in capital projects. 
However, this does represent one of the toughest choices we've had to 
make to meet our allocation in this bill. A deeper cut to this account 
will merely defer projects to future years and I believe will cost more 
money in the future by running up the cost of those projects in the 
years ahead.
  With that, I would urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam 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 Georgia will 
be postponed.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chairman, I was going to introduce 
another amendment to this same program which would have been a decrease 
of just 10 percent of the increase. As I see things going on here 
today, we can't even cut out $115,000. Cutting out $11 million, I'm 
sure, is out of the question for my colleagues.
  Madam Chair, we've just got to stop this outrageous spending here in 
Washington. So I'm not going to offer the other one. I would anticipate 
a point of order being brought against it, and rightfully so. So I'm 
not going to introduce that amendment.
  I just ask my colleagues--and I hope that they hear from Americans 
all over this country--to stop the spending.

[[Page 10129]]

  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                     public housing operating fund

       For 2013 payments to public housing agencies for the 
     operation and management of public housing, as authorized by 
     section 9(e) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437g(e)), $4,524,000,000: Provided, That in 
     determining public housing agencies', including Moving to 
     Work agencies', calendar year 2013 funding allocations under 
     this heading, the Secretary may, contingent on authorization, 
     take into account the impact of changes in minimum rents, 
     flat rents, and medical expense thresholds on public housing 
     agencies' formula income levels.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 86, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $562,150,000)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $562,150,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chairwoman, the underlying bill increases 
funding for the public housing operating fund by over $500 million for 
fiscal year 2013.
  My amendment would simply return the funding back to this year from 
the proposed levels. It's a $500 million increase at a time when our 
Nation is broke and American taxpayers are struggling to put food on 
their tables and looking for jobs.
  It is imperative that we look for commonsense cuts wherever we can, 
and this is one of those. It's a lot of money, $500 million. Some would 
say it's a very small amount compared to the overall funding level 
proposed in this bill, but it's still $500 million. We just have to 
stop spending money that we don't have.
  I urge my colleagues to support this very simple amendment that would 
save over $500 million, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chair, I do rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment. This is an amendment that on face value is somewhat 
confusing, shall we say.
  While it appears that there is a large increase in this account when 
it says $562 million over last year, this account is approximately 
level funded from last year because last year we went in and took $500 
million out of reserve funds of the public housing authorities that 
were sitting there that were unexpended balances.

                              {time}  1330

  Those reserves are no longer there. So what we're having to do in 
this bill basically to stay virtually even is to have the $562 million 
over last year.
  This fund provides many of the necessary operating and maintenance 
activities for our housing authorities, including health, safety, and 
sanitation. Our funding levels for public housing build in savings from 
reform proposals that we urge the authorizers to complete before we go 
to a final conference on this bill. Again, in this entire bill, while 
you talk about the highway bill, financial services doing their work, 
but that would be extremely helpful if, in fact, we had authorizations 
that would actually limit spending and that we could follow.
  But again, I just wanted to reiterate: We used $500 million a year 
ago out of the funds that were available, sitting there idle. So what, 
in fact, this does is basically even from last year. While it appears 
to be a large increase, it, in fact, is not because the use of those 
funds from last year, the reserve funds.
  I believe we are providing a responsible level of funding for this 
program. And again, I want to reiterate, Madam Chairman, we are cutting 
about $4 billion in this appropriation bill--I think the gentleman 
earlier mentioned that's the largest percentage cut of any bill so far 
on the floor. But this particular issue, this particular amendment 
would be extremely devastating because of funding issues in the reserve 
account that we used last year. With that, I would urge a ``no'' vote 
on the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes
  Mr. OLVER. I'm not sure I have anything much to add to what my 
chairman has said, other than to just point out, if you look back at 
the number of dollars that were assigned for the fiscal year '11 bill, 
that was over $4.6 billion. So in 2012, the amount of money brought 
that down to under $4 billion. The $500-plus million that the gentleman 
from Iowa had pointed out was part of the reserves that were taken from 
those housing authorities around the country that had substantial 
reserves. So that has been done. That was a one-shot kind of a deal. 
And now the funding has to go back to something that is in line with 
the yearly fundings, going back to a period of time of well into a 
decade ago, that were on a different guide path. So this is just 
returning to that.
  It is at the President's request. It's below the amount that has been 
granted in the other body's allocation. They had a larger allocation in 
their numbers for it. This particular account is well below ours. It's 
$70 million or so below what has been provided by the chairman in the 
mark for this year.
  So I think this is entirely appropriate, given the size of the 
maintenance gaps and the need to keep maintaining your facilities, your 
housing quality so that you don't end up losing that or ending up with 
much higher expense for replacement. I urge a ``no'' vote on the 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, 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 Georgia will 
be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                  native american housing block grants

       For the Native American Housing Block Grants program, as 
     authorized under title I of the Native American Housing 
     Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA) (25 
     U.S.C. 4111 et seq.), $650,000,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2017: Provided, That, notwithstanding the 
     Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act 
     of 1996, to determine the amount of the allocation under 
     title I of such Act for each Indian tribe, the Secretary 
     shall apply the formula under section 302 of such Act with 
     the need component based on single-race census data and with 
     the need component based on multi-race census data, and the 
     amount of the allocation for each Indian tribe shall be the 
     greater of the two resulting allocation amounts: Provided 
     further, That of the amounts made available under this 
     heading, $2,000,000 shall be contracted for assistance for 
     national or regional organizations representing Native 
     American housing interests for providing training and 
     technical assistance to Indian housing authorities and 
     tribally designated housing entities: Provided further, That 
     of the amount provided under this heading, $2,000,000 shall 
     be made available for the cost of guaranteed notes and other 
     obligations, as authorized by title VI of NAHASDA: Provided 
     further, That such costs, including the costs of modifying 
     such notes and other obligations, shall be as defined in 
     section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as 
     amended: Provided further, That these funds are available to 
     subsidize the total principal amount of any notes and other 
     obligations, any part of which is to be guaranteed, not to 
     exceed $20,000,000: Provided further, That the Department 
     will notify grantees of their formula allocation within 60 
     days of enactment of this Act.


                   Amendment Offered by Ms. Hanabusa

  Ms. HANABUSA. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 88, after line 2, insert the following:

                  native hawaiian housing block grant

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program, as 
     authorized under title

[[Page 10130]]

     VIII of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-
     Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4221 et seq.), 
     $13,000,000, to remain available until expended, which amount 
     shall be derived by transfer from the amount provided in this 
     title under ``Management and Administration--Administration, 
     Operations, and Management'' for the Office of the Chief 
     Human Capital Officer.

  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentlewoman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentlewoman from Hawaii is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. HANABUSA. My amendment inserts the amount of $13 million for the 
Native Hawaiian housing block grant. This is in line with the 
President's budget. The President provided for the same amount and 
states that the Native Hawaiian block grant that is authorized under 
title VIII of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self 
Determination Act of 1996, easier called NAHASDA. The block grant 
authorizes an annual grant to the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands for 
housing and housing-related assistance.
  Madam Chair, let us understand the significance of this block grant 
to this Congress and the Nation. In 1921, the Congress passed into law 
the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. Congress recognized that it was 
necessary to return Native Hawaiians to their land to support self-
sufficiency, and the preservation of their values, traditions, and 
culture.
  Madam Chair, in 1893, when the queen was overthrown, Hawaii was a 
vibrant, modern nation. And what happened after the overthrow resulted 
in the need--and Congress saw the need--to look at the return of Native 
Hawaiians to their lands.
  In essence, a trust relationship was created by the creation of the 
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. The Hawaiian Homes Commission Act made 
very clear that only Hawaiians of 50 percent blood quantum qualify, 
that the lands could only be leased, not owned, and it also restricted 
the ability to mortgage and have occupancy restrictions as well.
  This block grant assists in fulfilling the special trust relationship 
which was created and acknowledged in the Hawaiian Homes Commission 
Act. It assures the return to the land of Native Hawaiians, which was 
the concern of Congress. If this provision is authorized and people 
vote for it, what it will do is it will permit the existing and ongoing 
projects, along with those planned, to be competed with the ultimate 
goal of putting Native Hawaiians on the land, which was the purpose of 
the trust relationship that we created in the Hawaiian Homes Commission 
Act of 1921.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment because it provides an appropriation for an unauthorized 
program and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI. Clause 2 of rule 
XXI states in pertinent part: ``An appropriation may not be in order as 
an amendment for an expenditure not previously authorized by law.''
  Madam Chairman, the amendment proposes to appropriate funds for a 
program that has not been authorized. The amendment, therefore, 
violates clause 2 of rule XXI.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any Member seek to be heard on the point of 
order?
  The gentlewoman from Hawaii is recognized.
  Ms. HANABUSA. Madam Chair, I understand the point of order that has 
been raised. But let me, with all due respect, say that when we look at 
the language of any rule--the language that is, I guess, suspect here 
is not previously authorized by law--in fact, as stated by the 
President, as well as in my amendment, this provision has been 
authorized by law, and it is found in NAHASDA, title VIII.

                              {time}  1340

  When we look at the wording ``not previously authorized,'' the 
technical argument may be that it was authorized at some point in time 
and then expired in 2005. However, that is not what the rule says. The 
rule says: not previously authorized. And this has been previously 
authorized.
  In the recent United States Supreme Court case of Lamie v. U.S. 
Trustee, it's very clear. And we can borrow from the Supreme Court when 
it gives its opinion as to what it means. The plain language is what 
controls in any interpretation of any statute or any rule. It is 
clearly plain language that what is being referred to here is the fact 
that it was not previously authorized. And it has been previously 
authorized.
  In addition to that, I would also like to say that there is an 
exception to this rule that says that you can continue appropriations 
for public works and objects that are already in progress. And to that, 
Madam Chair, I point out that, as we have said, this money is used for 
the return of the Native Hawaiians to the lands, and it includes, of 
course, construction and public works.
  They are projects ongoing that need this money in Kakaina, Waimanalo; 
Piilani Mai ke kai, phase II in Anahola on the island of Kauai; Laiopua 
on the Big Island on the Kona side; Lalamilo, Waimea; Kanehili, 
Kapolei; and East Kapolei, II, also in Kapolei, Kapolei being on the 
island of Oahu.
  So on this point of order, Madam Speaker, I believe that it has been 
misinterpreted. The words are ``not previously authorized.'' And in 
addition to that, this specific provision has been authorized. In 
addition to that, the exception is for public works projects in 
progress. And the public works projects are the ones that I have 
listed, which as we know, is the object of the grant of the Native 
Hawaiian Housing Block Grant.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member seek to be heard on the point 
of order?
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Iowa.
  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chair, I will insist on my point of order. The fact 
of the matter is this program is not currently authorized. There are no 
ongoing public works in progress.
  So, once again, I would insist on my point of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. The proponent of an item of appropriation carries 
the burden of persuasion on the question whether it is supported by an 
authorization in law.
  Having reviewed the amendment and entertained arguments on the point 
of order, the Chair is unable to conclude that the item of 
appropriation in question is authorized in law. In response to one of 
the specific arguments, an authorization that has lapsed does not 
qualify under the rule.
  The Chair is therefore constrained to sustain the point of order 
under clause 2(a) of rule XXI. The amendment is not in order.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

           indian housing loan guarantee fund program account

       For the cost of guaranteed loans, as authorized by section 
     184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (12 
     U.S.C. 1715z-13a), $6,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That such costs, including the costs of 
     modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of 
     the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That 
     these funds are available to subsidize total loan principal, 
     any part of which is to be guaranteed, up to $633,000,000: 
     Provided further, That up to $750,000 of this amount may be 
     used for administrative contract expenses including 
     management processes and systems to carry out the loan 
     guarantee program.

                   Community Planning and Development

              housing opportunities for persons with aids

       For carrying out the Housing Opportunities for Persons with 
     AIDS program, as authorized by the AIDS Housing Opportunity 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 12901 et seq.), $330,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2014, except that amounts 
     allocated pursuant to section 854(c)(3) of such Act shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2015: Provided, That the 
     Secretary shall renew all expiring contracts for permanent 
     supportive housing that were funded under section 854(c)(3) 
     of such Act that meet all program requirements before 
     awarding funds for new contracts and activities authorized 
     under this section: Provided further, That the Department 
     shall notify grantees of their formula allocation within 60 
     days of enactment of this Act.

[[Page 10131]]



                       community development fund

       For assistance to units of State and local government, and 
     to other entities, for economic and community development 
     activities, and for other purposes, $3,404,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2015, unless otherwise 
     specified: Provided, That of the total amount provided, 
     $3,344,000,000 is for carrying out the community development 
     block grant program under title I of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1974, as amended (the ``Act'' 
     herein) (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.): Provided further, That 
     unless explicitly provided for under this heading, not to 
     exceed 20 percent of any grant made with funds appropriated 
     under this heading shall be expended for planning and 
     management development and administration: Provided further, 
     That $60,000,000 shall be for grants to Indian tribes 
     notwithstanding section 106(a)(1) of such Act, of which, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law (including section 
     204 of this Act), up to $3,960,000 may be used for 
     emergencies that constitute imminent threats to health and 
     safety: Provided further, That none of the funds made 
     available under this heading may be used for grants for the 
     Economic Development Initiative (``EDI'') or Neighborhood 
     Initiatives activities, Rural Innovation Fund, or for grants 
     pursuant to section 107 of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5307): Provided further, 
     That the Department shall notify grantees of their formula 
     allocation within 60 days of enactment of this Act.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Chaffetz

  Mr. CHAFFETZ. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 89, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $396,000,000)''.
       Page 89, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $396,000,000)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $396,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Utah is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CHAFFETZ. I first want to applaud and thank the committee for 
their work. They've reached the laudable goal of reducing the overall 
expenditures by $4 billion. And that is much appreciated and noted. I 
just happen to think we can do just a little bit better.
  I'm looking at the committee report regarding the committee's 
recommendation on the Community Development Fund, specifically the 
Community Development Block Grants. And I read:
  ``This is $396 million above both fiscal year 2012 and the budget 
request.''
  So you have the President making a budget request, and you have last 
year's expenditures. What this amendment does is reduces by $396 
million to get it back to where we were. Again, I think the President 
is even also on the same page.
  Now, Madam Chair, we have to recognize what a dire financial strait 
we're in in this country. We have to understand that we have a 
multitrillion-dollar challenge. We talk about a trillion with a capital 
T and it's hard to get your arms around it. But if you were to spend a 
million dollars a day everyday, it would take you almost 3,000 years to 
get to $1 trillion.
  So when we're racking up a trillion-plus-dollar deficit each year, 
when our national debt at the end of this year will approach $16 
trillion, when we're spending more than $600 million a day in interest 
on our national debt, we're going to have to cut some spending.
  To actually bring back and reduce this to the proper level, I think 
would be more appropriate. I encourage my colleagues to support this 
amendment. It returns the funding to the fiscal year 2012 level. Again, 
as the committee report says, this is $396 million above both fiscal 
year 2012 and the budget request. I think this is reasonable. I hope 
the committee would find a place where we can join on this, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Madam Chairwoman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Madam Chair, this is an amendment that would take a huge 
chunk out of the CDBG program. This is one of the areas in which I have 
been particularly, I thought, most commendable about what the 
chairman's mark is in the bill for the CDBG.
  The CDBG is a hugely popular program in communities around the 
country. We have, as I have mentioned in my opening remarks at the 
beginning of this bill, 65 percent of our population living in 
communities in metropolitan areas with over half a million people, and 
close to 90 percent of our people live in communities with over 50,000 
people. It's roughly around 50,000 people that are entitlement 
communities and get an amount of money that they may use in a flexible 
kind of a way in their cities and towns of large size, and can directly 
get that money to use for things that they need in their cities. Their 
cities and towns have suffered greatly in the Great Recession that we 
have had before us, and they have housing needs which are very 
substantial.
  Now I would point out to the gentleman from Utah that the amount for 
the CDBG program as proposed by Chairman Latham I am commending him for 
and strongly support his allocation for this. The amount that he has 
provided in this bill within the allocation and with the $4 billion 
reduction that the bill entails is below the number that CDBG was given 
all the way back in 2008. It has varied up and down, depending upon the 
allocations and depending upon what has gone on. But this one still is 
below. And I strongly support it and would urge that it be maintained.
  And by the way, about 20 percent of the whole amount goes directly to 
States, which then can use it in a discretionary way in groups of 
smaller communities. So it actually gets into rural areas and small 
communities--in communities like those of the chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee, whose district has no community larger than 
about 15,000 people. But his district manages to get a considerable 
amount of money through the State of Kentucky for the congressional 
district.

                              {time}  1350

  So it is something that goes to everybody in their districts in a 
flexible way for things that are eligible under the law.
  But when it is being used for the development of housing, then it 
ends up clearly directly providing for jobs. If it's used in the way of 
social services through nonprofit organizations, again it is providing 
jobs for people who are doing great service for our population. So I'm 
a strong supporter of this.
  I certainly urge that the amendment be defeated, and I will stop 
there because other people wish to speak, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the 
last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition 
to this amendment. I will be brief because I know we have many more 
amendments to consider, but I want to focus on this one because I think 
this proposal to cut the Community Development Block Grant program by 
$396 million is particularly ill-advised, and I suspect Members on both 
sides of the aisle will understand that and will agree. We are all, 
after all, hearing from our mayors and from our local communities with 
great regularity that CDBG is money well spent.
  First of all, this program has been much better funded in past years. 
Even with the increase in the current bill, for which we commend the 
chairman, even with that, the funding is much less than could be 
utilized.
  We know the CDBG program has some very strong virtues. One of them is 
flexibility and community self-determination in terms of how this money 
is spent, how it is applied, and the kind of leverage that this money 
represents, for bringing forth participation and funding from other 
sources.
  This is a program that has stood the test of time, that has strong 
bipartisan support in this Chamber and across the country. So I think 
the notion that we would cut back this appropriation by hundreds of 
millions of dollars is most unwise, and I urge defeat of the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.

[[Page 10132]]


  Mr. LATHAM. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Community Development Block Grant program is very important to 
cities and States across the country. There is a great deal of local 
control in this program. Communities use the block grants to meet local 
needs such as building water and sewer infrastructure, community 
centers, housing for low-income families, and other development 
important to their local communities. Although the bill increases the 
funding, this funding level is still well below what it was in fiscal 
year 2010. The bill actually is $1.046 billion below the level of 2010, 
to be exact.
  Madam Chair, as we were going through this bill, we had many Members 
on both sides of the aisle, Republicans and Democrats, request 
additional funding for these grants. For many Members, there is strong 
constituent support for these programs. We have seen individual cases 
of abuse, not unlike a lot of other government programs, but really the 
way to fix those reforms, and we're not going to do it through the 
appropriations process, is through the authorizers, to have them do 
their work and make sure that these programs are well run, that they're 
focused and they actually do what the intention is.
  Again, I want everybody to understand that we are actually below 
fiscal year 2010 levels on a very, very important program, and I would 
recommend and urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Chair, 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 Utah will be 
postponed.


                  Amendment Offered by Mr. McClintock

  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 89, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced to $0)''.
       Page 89, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced to $0)''.
       Page 89, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced to $60,000,000)''.
       Page 90, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     to $3,960,000)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,404,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Chair, this amendment finishes the good work 
begun by the gentleman from Utah on the previous amendment. It saves 
$3.4 billion by eliminating all funding for the Community Development 
Block Grant program.
  This program was created in 1974 with the stated objective of 
eliminating blight and providing affordable housing, but in the nearly 
four decades since then, it has degenerated into a Federal slush fund 
for pet projects of local politicians and politically connected 
businesses. It is plagued by profligate waste and outright fraud.
  This is an unauthorized expenditure. The legal authority for it 
expired back in 1994, 18 years ago, and Congress has not bothered to 
renew it ever since, but we keep shoveling money at it year after year. 
Madam Chair, $3.5 billion averages to almost $50 from the earnings of a 
family of four, and they have a right to know where their $50, taken 
from their family budgets, is going.
  Senator Coburn gave some examples in his Back to Black report: Summit 
County, Ohio, spent $100,000 of CDBG funds to create a doggie daycare 
and kennel last year, and Nyack, New York, directed $10,000 of CDBG 
funds to Amazing Grace Circus in 2009 to put on ``A Day At the 
Circus.''
  CDBG funds are being spent creating a ``hip'' atmosphere for 
employees of an L.A. architectural firm, providing decorative sidewalks 
in a wealthy Virginia community, and upgrading Victorian cottages in 
Alabama. Indeed, some communities use these funds to pay off Federal 
loans they've taken out on projects that are now defaulting because 
they've utterly failed to produce all of the benefits they've promised.
  Even in the best of circumstances, these are all projects that 
exclusively benefit local communities or private interests and ought to 
be paid for exclusively by those local communities or private 
interests. They are of such questionable merit that no city council is 
willing to face its constituents and say, This is how we have spent 
your local taxes. But they are more than happy to spend somebody else's 
Federal taxes, so we end up robbing St. Petersburg to pay St. Paul for 
projects so dubious that the purported beneficiaries won't pay for 
them.
  And that's all before we discuss the realm of fraud. This program is 
replete with individuals directing six-figure sums to their personal 
bank accounts or political activities. The Office of Management and 
Budget has repeatedly branded this program as ``ineffective.'' That's 
its official designation for government programs that cannot ascertain 
how their funds are spent. HUD's own inspector general found that, in a 
relatively short 2-year timespan, over 150 criminal indictments were 
issued for false claims, bribery, fraudulent contracts, theft, 
embezzlement, or corruption in connection with this program.
  This a slush fund that cries for abolition, and it should be one of 
the first places that we look to bring spending under control and stop 
wasting our constituents' money. Once again, though, this unauthorized 
program is not targeted for elimination by the Appropriations 
Committee. It is not even targeted for a token reduction in spending. 
As we just discussed, the Appropriations Committee proposes spending 
$400 million more than we spent last year, indeed, $400 million more 
than even the President requested.
  Now, let's be very clear on this. The House Appropriations Committee, 
with a Republican majority that has a clear mandate to stop wasting 
money, is about to appropriate $400 million more than requested by the 
most spendthrift administration in our Nation's history on a program 
with no Federal nexus, with a solid history of fraud, and that funds 
the most unworthy of local projects and special interest handouts.

                              {time}  1400

  The rules of the House were specifically written to prevent this type 
of unauthorized expenditure, and they provide for a point of order to 
be raised if it's included in an appropriations bill. That is exactly 
what we have here. But, alas, that rule is routinely waived when these 
measures are brought to the floor, making this amendment necessary.
  Madam Chairwoman, this is another critical test of the Republican 
majority's intention to stand by the promises it made to the American 
people in the most dangerous fiscal crisis in our Nation's history. I 
pray that we rise to the occasion.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Fortenberry). The gentleman is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I believe, with the 
offering of this amendment, we are in great need of a reality check in 
this Chamber. After all, it was President Nixon, and it was a strong, 
bipartisan majority, with the Republicans playing a leading role, that 
first initiated the Community Development Block Grant programs, and I 
assume that this amendment will be rejected today by that same kind of 
bipartisan coalition.
  The whole idea of the CDBG program was to get away from inflexible, 
one-size-fits-all approaches to urban development. The whole idea was 
to get away from top-down bureaucratic direction. CDBG was designed to 
empower communities, to give them flexibility, to maximize the 
possibility for leverage of private sector funds, to let the community 
determine its own projects and its own priorities.
  All of us have experience with this program, I dare say. My 
experience has

[[Page 10133]]

been that the bang for the buck from CDBG is virtually unmatched in any 
other Federal program. Housing rehabilitation, for example, is one of 
the main uses in many communities of CDBG funds. What you're doing with 
housing rehabilitation is not building public housing from scratch. 
You're not totally developing new neighborhoods, but you're taking 
houses that are likely to deteriorate, where a relatively small 
investment can rehab those houses, can salvage those houses, and can 
make quality housing available more widely in the community.
  Another major use of CDBG funds is infrastructure. How many Habitat 
for Humanity communities have been built across our country with CDBG 
funds furnishing the basic infrastructure, and from there the volunteer 
efforts take off?
  The gentleman sponsoring this amendment made the incredible statement 
that these are projects that communities wouldn't undertake on their 
own. On the contrary, no CDBG project is going to be undertaken without 
community participation, financial and otherwise, without community 
self-determination that this is a priority.
  So there's an air of unreality about this debate. These are programs 
that maximize the values that many of our colleagues profess--self-
determination, flexibility, leveraging of private funds. They're 
programs that have stood the test of time. And we, in this bill, should 
be proud to appropriate CDBG funds, because we know these funds will 
have great multiplier effects throughout this country. So I very 
strongly urge colleagues to reject this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. I rise to oppose the amendment--the same, basically, that 
I said before: we are below fiscal year 2010 levels. Certainly, I 
believe the authorizing committee must set very strict parameters as to 
how these dollars should be used, but we are below fiscal year 2010, 
and I would urge a ``no'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. 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. 4 Offered 
                           by Mr. Diaz-Balart

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. 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:

       Page 90, line 12, before the period insert the following:
       Provided further, That unless explicitly provided for under 
     this heading, not to exceed 25 percent of any grant made with 
     funds appropriated under this heading may be expended for 
     public services (as such term is defined for purposes of 
     section 105 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
     1974 (42 U.S.C. 5305))

  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I recognize that this amendment is 
subject to a point of order, but I'd like to discuss what this 
amendment is attempting to address.
  As we all know, the Community Development Block Grant program, which 
is known as the CDBG grant program, is one of the most widely utilized 
sources of assistance by local governments. These block grants are 
intended to address housing, community development and economic 
development needs as determined by local officials.
  This amendment, Mr. Chairman, is very straightforward. It simply 
gives greater flexibility to the local communities and the cities and 
the counties, et cetera, for part of their CDBG funding. It increases 
the cap of what is known as public services expenditures from the 
current 15 percent up to 25 percent.
  Now, public services, in reference to this legislation, deals with 
issues like child care, senior services, disabled services, educational 
programs, medical services, transportation services, domestic violence, 
crime prevention, food banks, and others.
  The current 15 percent public service cap was enacted into statute 
over 30 years ago; and it, frankly, just doesn't reflect the reality of 
today. We all acknowledge, obviously, the tremendous fiscal challenges 
that we are facing here in Congress, that our country is facing; but we 
also acknowledge, Mr. Chairman, the challenges that our local 
communities are facing.
  CDBG public services funds have really played a key role in providing 
crucial aid to our most at-risk, our most vulnerable populations, 
especially during difficult times like these. The restrictive and, 
frankly, outdated cap has denied many communities, Mr. Chairman, the 
option of providing their residents with the most basic services within 
the framework of the existing CDBG program. So this amendment provides 
flexibility to local leaders to meet certain unique challenges.
  Now, I want to make something very clear: this amendment does not 
increase or decrease CDBG funds, does not change the formula, and does 
not require those communities that are entitled to use more of their 
funds on public services. It simply grants those cities and counties 
greater flexibility in their usage of certain CDBG funds. Let me 
mention that my colleague, Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen, has a standalone 
piece of legislation that I'm honored to be a cosponsor of.
  It's imperative that the authorizing committee, the Financial 
Services Committee, work to update the CDBG program--for a lot of 
reasons. I also need to mention that Chairman Latham is well aware of 
these concerns. I want to thank him and his staff for really trying to 
accommodate us on this issue, but unfortunately we were not able to do 
it at this time for a number of different reasons. I'd like to continue 
to work with Chairman Latham and the Financial Services chairman, 
Chairman Bachus, on finding real solutions that will give local 
communities flexibility to meet their unique challenges and to make 
sure that those funds are well utilized.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the Diaz-Balart 
amendment and to draw attention to a crisis that will soon hit the city 
of Miami and many other cities throughout south Florida, our State of 
Florida, and indeed throughout the Nation.
  We are all aware of the difficult funding decisions that will need to 
be made by many departments and programs. Programs like the Community 
Development Block Grant may see overall reductions because of the sad 
realities of the current budget constraints and in the interest of 
fiscal responsibility. However, because of an arbitrary Community 
Development Block Grant expenditure cap, countless vulnerable citizens 
in the city of Miami and throughout the United States will lose their 
only means of sustenance.

                              {time}  1410

  This amendment is not about increased funding, Mr. Chairman, nor is 
it about changing the overall formula of the Community Development 
Block Grant. It is simply about providing greater flexibility to cities 
on how they allocate their CDBG funds. Currently, only 15 percent of 
Community Development Block Grant funds can go toward public services.
  Now, what are public services? Well, they include food for senior 
citizens, the disabled, the homeless, the abused, or neglected 
children. They also may be used for child care, for health services, 
for job training services.

[[Page 10134]]

  The city of Miami, which I am proud to represent, currently provides 
these vital services, especially meals, through the current Community 
Development Block Grant public services. But, because of the overall 
decrease in CDBG allocations, many disadvantaged men, women, and 
children will be without the vital support that they deserve and need.
  This amendment is simply a painless solution to this development, 
allowing cities the flexibility they need in how they expand their CDBG 
funds. It would allow up to 25 percent of CDBG funds to go to public 
services, a position that has been endorsed by the U.S. Conference of 
Mayors and the National League of Cities.
  The current 15 percent public service expenditure cap was enacted 
with the original statute over 30 years ago. It does not reflect the 
evolution of this program, nor the necessity to provide flexibility to 
local leaders on how funds should be expended during this time of belt 
tightening. The current restrictive and outdated limit has denied many 
communities the option of providing their residents with the most basic 
and necessary services within the framework established by the program.
  CDBG public services have played a key role in providing crucial aid 
to our most at-risk and vulnerable constituents, especially during this 
enduring recession. Cities across our country have had to do more with 
less, and this amendment will help them accomplish just that.
  I wish to thank Chairman Latham and his staff for working with 
Congressman Diaz-Balart and me on trying to give this flexibility 
through the proper channel to our local leaders.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LATHAM. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman continue to reserve his point 
of order?
  Mr. LATHAM. I do.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. I just want to make the point that I want to continue to 
work with these two great Members from Florida. It is a real problem 
for the community, and I will do everything possible to try to be of 
assistance with addressing this real problem for them.
  With that, I yield to the gentleman from Miami.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, again, want to thank you 
and your staff, who have been great on this issue, understanding the 
problem.
  At this time I would ask unanimous consent, Mr. Chairman, to withdraw 
my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, I rise to engage in a colloquy with the 
distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Transportation, HUD, and 
Related Agencies, Mr. Latham, and also with Mr. Wolf on the Driver 
Alcohol Detection System for Safety, or DADSS.
  I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I would be glad to engage in a colloquy 
with the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes) and the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Wolf).
  Mr. SARBANES. I thank the chairman. As the gentlemen are aware, the 
National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, NHTSA, has been 
working on a public-private research program known as the Driver 
Alcohol Detection System for Safety, or DADSS, that would develop a 
passive technology to detect if a driver's blood alcohol content is 
above the legal limit.
  I would urge the chairman to consider funding for the DADSS program 
as this bill moves forward, and I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. WOLF. I thank the gentleman from Maryland, and rise to support 
his initiative.
  Mr. Chairman, too many times a mother or a father or a loved one has 
gotten that dreaded call in the middle of the night that someone has 
been killed in an accident involving a drunk driver. And I appreciate 
my friend from Maryland raising the DADSS program, and also urge my 
good friend, the chairman, to look at this program as the bill moves 
forward.
  Mr. SARBANES. I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.
  Mr. LATHAM. I thank the gentlemen from Maryland and Virginia. I 
appreciate their taking the time to raise this very important issue. I 
will be mindful of their concerns as the process moves forward.
  Mr. SARBANES. I appreciate it, Mr. Chairman.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

         community development loan guarantees program account

       For the cost of guaranteed loans, $6,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2014, as authorized by section 
     108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 
     U.S.C. 5308): Provided, That such costs, including the cost 
     of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 
     of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, 
     That these funds are available to subsidize total loan 
     principal, any part of which is to be guaranteed, not to 
     exceed $244,000,000, notwithstanding any aggregate limitation 
     on outstanding obligations guaranteed in section 108(k) of 
     the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as 
     amended.


               Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. McClintock

  Mr. McCLINTOCK. 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:

       Page 90, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced to $0)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $6,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, this amendment eliminates funding for 
the Community Development loan guarantee program. Like the Community 
Development Block Grants that we just discussed, these loan guarantees 
support strictly local projects that have no Federal nexus.
  Now, unlike the House Appropriations Committee, President Obama has 
requested no taxpayer subsidies for this program, and that's a pretty 
profound statement. Remember, this is the same President who had no 
problem placing billions of taxpayer dollars at risk for failed schemes 
like Solyndra, for which he was soundly and rightly criticized by many 
in this House.
  But even the architect of the Solyndra fiasco is unwilling to risk 
taxpayer money on this loan guarantee program, so, enter the House 
Appropriations Committee that apparently has money to burn.
  What are the recent projects funded by these loan guarantees? Well, 
$7 million went to the city of Hartford to buy a 393-room Hilton Hotel; 
$15 million went to build a movie studio in Norristown, Pennsylvania; a 
$10 million loan to Bass Pro Shops to redevelop the Memphis Pyramid.
  Now, why would we put our taxpayers' money at risk for these 
ventures? Obviously, private investors were unwilling to risk their own 
money. Obviously, President Obama sees these loans as far riskier than 
anything that he's loaned in the Solyndra fiasco. But we're about to 
put our constituents' hard-earned money at risk to prop up these 
projects.
  Now, when Bass Pro Shops takes $10 million to redevelop the Memphis 
Pyramid, will this mean more jobs in Memphis? Well, yes. And will it 
mean precisely that many fewer jobs in other regions as, once again, we 
take from one community to give to another? Unfortunately, the answer 
is yes to that question as well.
  My amendment simply takes taxpayer exposure to these risky loans down 
to the level of fiscal restraint proposed by the least fiscally 
restrained President in the history of our

[[Page 10135]]

Nation. I'd invite my Republican colleagues on the Appropriations 
Committee to follow.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, here we have kind of the yang that went with 
the yin. The gentleman's amendment here a few minutes ago, the last one 
that he offered, was $3.5 billion, and taking that out of this 
allocation.

                              {time}  1420

  In this case, it's a $6 million amount. That's about 5,000 times as 
much as the six. The first was 5,000 times as much as this one. Maybe 
I'm off by an order of magnitude. I'm not quite sure.
  The gentleman from California has pointed out that the President did 
not want to do this at all. Well, actually, the President had asked the 
committee to create a user fee to pay for this rather than the 
mechanism by which this really very small program--this $6 million 
program of loan guarantees--has been functioning, which was to pay for 
any risk involved. The gentleman is claiming, if there were any serious 
risk, that it should be paid for out of the subsequent years' 
allocations under CDBG.
  It turns out, for those places that would use this program, the loan 
guarantee program, there has never been a penny lost of the Federal 
taxpayers on any of the section 108 projects that we have issued in 
this program, and there have been a number of them. It actually is one 
of the most flexible. The Community Development loan guarantee program 
is exceedingly flexible and very creative. It has been used to create 
larger projects, projects that create jobs and that may be part of the 
revitalization of a whole target area, and it always ends up bringing 
in substantial additional private investment into the neighborhood.
  So it's creating jobs. It is used often for the reuse of old factory 
buildings that are no longer viable in the forms that they were. 
Particularly in my part of the country, it has been used in that kind 
of a way--and successfully--to make a project that may turn out to be 
housing, that may turn out to be a business incubator or whatever. This 
is a very flexible program and one that the Federal taxpayer has never 
lost money on.
  The creation of jobs and the development of new businesses that come 
into a place that may be part of a development of this sort is what 
gives us a robust economy. A robust economy is the best way we have of 
reducing the deficit because you can end up cutting and cutting and 
cutting programs, and if you do not end up creating jobs in the long 
run, you're simply not going to return to a robust economy. I think we 
know that.
  So I rise in opposition to this amendment. I think it is a 
counterproductive thing to do. It's very small. It has never lost any 
money. It operates quite well. The chairman, with my assent--though he 
didn't need my assent--certainly left it in there. I support his 
position very strongly, and I urge the defeat of this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOMACK. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Chairman, I also oppose the amendment.
  The Community Development Block Grant program is very important to 
cities and States throughout our country. As a former mayor, I can 
attest to the fact of the impact the Community Development Block Grants 
have on our local communities. This year, we had many Members, both 
Republicans and Democrats, request funding for CDBG programs. For many 
Members, there is strong constituent support for the program.
  The section 108 CDBG loan guarantee is a good community development 
tool because it does something that we should be interested in doing, 
and that is leveraging funding. With only $6 million provided in the 
bill, HUD is able to make nearly a quarter of a billion dollars in loan 
guarantees for community development. So it's a small amount of Federal 
money that creates a pretty significant impact. Now, if a fee is 
warranted, we would encourage the authorizing committee to enact 
legislation to create a fee and lower the cost of the program.
  So I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. 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.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                  home investment partnerships program

       For the HOME investment partnerships program, as authorized 
     under title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act, as amended, $1,200,000,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2015: Provided, That notwithstanding the 
     amount made available under this heading, the threshold 
     reduction requirements in sections 216(10) and 217(b)(4) of 
     such Act shall not apply to allocation of such amount: 
     Provided further, That funds made available under this 
     heading used for projects not completed within 4 years of the 
     commitment date, as determined by a signature of each party 
     to the agreement, shall be repaid: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary may extend the deadline for 1 year if the Secretary 
     determines that the failure to complete the project is beyond 
     the control of the participating jurisdiction: Provided 
     further, That no funds provided under this heading may be 
     committed to any project included as part of a participating 
     jurisdiction's plan under section 105(b), unless each 
     participating jurisdiction certifies that it has conducted an 
     underwriting review, assessed developer capacity and fiscal 
     soundness, and examined neighborhood market conditions to 
     ensure adequate need for each project: Provided further, That 
     any homeownership units funded under this heading which 
     cannot be sold to an eligible homeowner within 6 months of 
     project completion shall be rented to an eligible tenant: 
     Provided further, That no funds provided under this heading 
     may be awarded for development activities to a community 
     housing development organization that cannot demonstrate that 
     it has staff with demonstrated development experience: 
     Provided further, That funds provided in prior appropriations 
     Acts for technical assistance, that were made available for 
     Community Housing Development Organizations technical 
     assistance, and that still remain available, may be used for 
     HOME technical assistance notwithstanding the purposes for 
     which such amounts were appropriated: Provided further, That 
     the Department shall notify grantees of their formula 
     allocation within 60 days of enactment of this Act.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake

  Mr. FLAKE. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 91, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $200,000,000)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $200,000,000)''.

  Mr. FLAKE (during the reading). I ask unanimous consent that the 
amendment be considered as read.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Arizona?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would cut $200 million from 
the HOME Investment Partnership and transfer the savings to the deficit 
reduction account. This simply takes the level of funding to where it 
was last year.
  We are often told we need to cut spending. I think we need to. Yet, 
with this program, we're actually increasing the funding from $1 
billion to $1.2 billion, so it's about a 20 percent increase. This is 
the largest Federal block grant to State and local governments, 
designed exclusively to create affordable housing for low-income 
households.
  In 2011, a nationwide investigation by The Washington Post described 
the program as:


[[Page 10136]]

       a dysfunctional system that delivers billions of dollars to 
     local housing agencies with few rules, safeguards or even a 
     reliable way to track projects.

  This was The Washington Post saying this. It wasn't some conservative 
Republicans. This was The Washington Post. According to The Post:

       These lapses have led to widespread misspending and delays 
     in a two-decade-old program meant to deliver decent housing 
     to the working poor. Nearly 700 projects awarded $400 million 
     have been idling for years while the U.S. Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development has largely looked the other 
     way. It does not track the pace of construction, and it often 
     fails to spot defunct deals. Instead, they're trusting local 
     agencies to police projects.

  Again, that was a quote from the investigation.
  In 2009-2010, HUD's Office of Inspector General came out with reports 
that questioned not only HUD's ability to monitor these HOME project 
funds but also whether the program was in compliance with its own 
rules. In addition, several Members of Congress have acknowledged 
concerns about HUD's ability to ensure that HOME funds are used in a 
way that produce the program's intended results.
  The full Financial Services Committee has held congressional hearings 
in response to these concerns. In a spending bill just last year, 
Congress included language that placed additional restrictions on the 
use of HOME funds for FY12. The problem is those are the funds that are 
being implemented now. We don't even know if they're following the 
guidelines and are doing what we asked them to do. Yet here we're 
appropriating $200 million more to them rather than saying, Hey, we 
wanted you to do these things. Let's check and see if you've done them 
before we award you with more money.
  It's difficult to evaluate these projects when they haven't been done 
yet. That's the reason we ought to cut back and simply go level with 
the funding of last year. Again, it's not a cut from last year. It's 
level funding from last year. It's the least we can do when running 
these kinds of deficits and when we have this kind of debt and when 
we've found massive, massive problems with this program.

                              {time}  1430

  The remedy isn't to award a 20 percent increase. If anything, we 
ought to be cutting the program. I'm simply saying with this amendment, 
let's take it back to where it was last year. What is the point of 
oversight that we exercise here in Congress if we exercise that 
oversight, we find problems, we ask for a remedy, and then we award 
money before we even see if the remedy was actually entered into? We 
have oversight here. We have the power of the purse. Let's use it.
  This program is troubled. It has problems. It's not just people on 
one side of the aisle that recognize that. The Congress as a whole 
does. So why in the world are we awarding 20 percent more funding this 
year than we had last year? This amendment would take it back to last 
year's funding level.
  I urge its adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. I rise today to speak on the Transportation and 
Housing and Urban Development appropriations bill on the floor.
  First off, I want to say that whether it's the mayor of Jacksonville, 
Florida; Orlando; California; or Texas, every single mayor that I've 
talked to--Democrats or Republicans--support Community Development 
Block Grants and are very concerned with what we're doing here and 
making sure that we send funds that they can decide how the community 
is to use the funds to meet their needs.
  In addition, I want to talk about transportation. I've been on the 
Transportation Committee for the entire 20 years that I've been here in 
Congress, and transportation has always been bipartisan. It did not 
matter who the President was, and it did not matter who the Speaker 
was. In fact, when Newt Gingrich was the Speaker and President Clinton 
was the President, the House passed the transportation bill over both 
of them and funded the Transportation Committee for 6 years.
  This House has not been able to pass a transportation bill. For the 
first time, you see people who really don't want to put America to work 
because the Transportation Committee is the committee that put the 
American people to work. When you look at the engineers or architects, 
they rate America as a ``D minus,'' as far as our infrastructure is 
concerned. Yet you have people that do not want to put the American 
people back to work.
  In my home State of Florida, we received close to $3 billion for a 
high-speed train from Orlando to Tampa. What did we do? We sent it 
back. Eighteen States have our money, and they are putting people to 
work. We're talking about transportation money.
  When you have people with other agendas besides putting people to 
work, that is a real problem in the area of transportation. We know 
that for every $1 billion we invest, it generates 44,000 permanent 
jobs. Yet you have people in this House with a different agenda, and 
their agenda has nothing to do with jobs and putting people to work. It 
is a sad state of affairs. But I've often said you can fool some of the 
people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of 
the time.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment that 
is ostensibly before us.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, we were talking about the amendment that the 
gentleman from Arizona has offered, and he has offered an amendment 
that would take $200 million out of the HOME Investment Partnership 
program as recommended by Chairman Latham and the subcommittee and 
through the procedures of the subcommittee and the full committee 
actions before coming to the floor.
  I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. There have been some 
controversies with the HOME Investment Partnership program; but there 
were statutory changes last year, and HUD is now in the process of 
finishing the rule to go along with those statutory changes. So those 
reforms are now basically in place.
  To my understanding, at least, there has been no instance of our 
actual loss of money from the HOME Partnership program at any time, but 
there have been projects that have been stalled. This is one of the few 
programs that we have in this bill that actually results in the 
construction of housing. Most affordable housing projects use multiple 
sources to complete a development, and occasionally it is possible that 
the private development monies don't materialize to a project that has 
been approved for the HOME Partnership program. If that happens, then 
HUD takes the money back and uses it someplace else. It doesn't in any 
way end up resulting in a loss to the taxpayers of the country.
  The HOME program is, as I say, one of the few programs that actually 
funds newly constructed housing under this legislation. These funds are 
used. They provide needed jobs in our communities; they ease the 
unemployment in the construction sector; they produce housing; and they 
don't end up costing the taxpayers any money.
  To the degree that that is followed and we can produce housing, then 
I am certainly in favor of it and strongly support Chairman Latham's 
assignment of the additional money. I would point out that the level of 
the funding at the level that has been recommended by the 
Appropriations Committee and by the subcommittee that Mr. Latham 
chairs, that the amount of money that has been assigned is below the 
amount that was assigned 5 years ago for the 2008 budget.
  We have been through ups and downs on this one over time, and I 
certainly would urge a ``no'' vote on the gentleman's amendment.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting Chair. The gentlewoman from Ohio is recognized for 5 
minutes.

[[Page 10137]]



                              {time}  1440

  Ms. KAPTUR. I rise to associate myself with the remarks of our 
esteemed ranking member, John Olver of Massachusetts, and rise to 
oppose Mr. Flake's proposal.
  Now, if Mr. Flake came to the floor and cut money from well-larded 
Arizona projects, I might ponder that type of amendment--but I don't 
support cuts in HOME. With the devastation that's occurred across our 
housing market, we shouldn't harm housing for sure. But, if he would 
take the money to balance the budget from the subsidized Central 
Arizona Water Project, or if he would take the funds from the major 
Federal monuments that are stacked wall-to-wall in his State of 
Arizona, or if he would take the funds from all the defense facilities 
that help to employ and hold up the economy of his State--those might 
be worthy of debate.
  It's very interesting where he cuts money from--from among the 
poorest areas in this country, some of the most devastated parts of 
America that are trying to rebuild themselves. It's very curious to me 
when he proposes amendments, whether it be this one or other ones in 
subcommittee, he always leaves his home turf sacrosanct.
  Mr. FLAKE. Would the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. KAPTUR. Yes. I would be interested in the gentleman's response.
  Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio.
  For all I know, this cuts money from my district as well. I have not 
discriminated in where I have taken money from. I think everybody who 
has followed the process over the past several years knows that.
  With regard to the Central Arizona Project, Arizona repays the 
Federal Government to the tune of about $55 million a year, still after 
all these years. The fact that we are 83 percent publicly owned in 
Arizona means that our local communities have to run their facilities 
and run their services on just a narrow sliver of private land.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Reclaiming my time, all those loans were subsidized and 
capital was made available at very favorable terms compared to my 
region of America that paid its own way. Just look where federal 
dollars flow to Arizona--if one looks at the defense bases across 
northern Ohio, we don't have anything like Arizona has. Defense dollars 
flow heavily to Arizona. Or, if we look at the kinds of subsidies we 
are providing for water in the West--The Central Arizona project or for 
Bureau of Land Management projects, for all of the investments that 
have been made to allow Arizona to even get water, federal funds have 
built Arizona--and then to say to the part of the country that said, 
Well, we want the West to develop. So we're going to help you out. But 
now you say, No, no, no, no. Now we're going to take money away from 
Cleveland and Toledo and Detroit and Pittsburgh and Philadelphia and 
Chicago and Milwaukee--all of the places that taxed themselves for the 
development of the modern West.
  So I would say to the gentleman, I think the answer to the problem we 
have is economic growth, and we have to invest in that. The housing 
sector has been dead in the water since 2008, largely because of the 
nonregulation of the Bush administration during those years when the 
Wall Street house of cards and derivatives were created. So let's look 
at what happened back then.
  But, please, don't take it out of the hides of the most stressed 
communities in America that, despite all the odds, are in the process 
of reinvesting and rebuilding themselves to fuel recovery.
  So I just want to associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman 
from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver). Oppose the Flake amendment. Support 
programs that will help the revitalization of the housing sector of 
this country.
  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. 5 Offered by Mr. Bachus

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

       Page 92, line 16, before the period insert the following:

     : Provided further, That of the total amount provided under 
     this heading, up to $200,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended, shall be for necessary expenses for activities 
     authorized under the HOME Investment Partnerships Act (42 
     U.S.C. 12721 et seq.) related to disaster relief, long-term 
     recovery, restoration of housing and infrastructure, and 
     economic revitalization in the most impacted and distressed 
     areas resulting from a major disaster declared pursuant to 
     the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
     Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) in 2011: Provided 
     further, That such disaster relief funds shall be awarded 
     only to States and units of general local government that 
     were awarded funds under section 239 of Public Law 112-55 
     (125 Stat. 703), shall be awarded directly to such States and 
     units of general local government at the discretion of the 
     Secretary, and shall be awarded in accordance with such 
     formula or requirements as the Secretary shall establish, 
     except that such formula or requirements shall give 
     preference to awards based on a county's unmet housing needs 
     for renter occupied units: Provided further, That prior to 
     the obligation of such disaster relief funds a grantee shall 
     submit a plan to the Secretary detailing the proposed use of 
     all such funds, including criteria for eligibility and how 
     the use of these funds will address long-term recovery and 
     restoration of infrastructure: Provided further, That such 
     disaster relief funds may not be used for activities 
     reimbursable by, or for which funds are made available by, 
     the Federal Emergency Management Agency or the Army Corps of 
     Engineers: Provided further, That such disaster relief funds 
     allocated under this heading shall not be considered relevant 
     to the other non-disaster formula allocations under this 
     heading: Provided further, That a State or subdivision 
     thereof may use up to 5 percent of its allocation of such 
     disaster relief funds for administrative costs: Provided 
     further, That in administering such disaster relief funds 
     under this heading, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development may waive, or specify alternative requirements 
     for, any provision of any statute or regulation that the 
     Secretary administers in connection with the obligation by 
     the Secretary or the use by the recipient of these funds or 
     guarantees (except for requirements related to fair housing, 
     nondiscrimination, labor standards, and the environment), 
     upon a request by a State or subdivision thereof explaining 
     why such waiver is required to facilitate the use of such 
     funds or guarantees, if the Secretary finds that such waiver 
     would not be inconsistent with the overall purpose of the 
     HOME Investment Partnerships Act: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register any waiver of 
     any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers 
     pursuant to HOME Investment Partnerships Act no later than 5 
     days before the effective date of such waiver

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
Bachus amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman from Alabama is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BACHUS. Let me acknowledge the point of order is due to be 
granted.
  I am, however, here to ask for the cooperation of the appropriating 
committee as we move forward on addressing a problem that we found as a 
result of the many tornadoes that devastated our country last year. And 
I will use an example from the city of Tuscaloosa.
  In the aftermath of the tornado that struck Tuscaloosa on April 27, 
HUD came in and calculated the loss of residences and rental units. 
Part of their charge was to replace the critical needs. However--and I 
will just use one census tract as an example--they came into a census 
tract that includes University Boulevard, which is a census tract made 
up almost entirely of rental units. However, according to HUD's 
calculation, they came in and they simply surveyed the owner-occupied 
units. Now, there were 23 owner-occupied units that were destroyed in 
the census tract, but there were 440 rental units that were destroyed 
in this same tract. So almost all the loss of property was rental 
units. It left the city of Tuscaloosa, a university town, woefully 
inadequate in its number of rental units.

[[Page 10138]]

  In their calculation, they only take the owner-occupied units, and 
they extrapolate from that what they consider the number of rental 
units to be in that same census tract. Well, you can't really base a 
calculation of how many rental units there are based on how many owner-
occupied dwellings there are. And to tell you how much they missed it, 
they calculated that there were no rental units destroyed, which is 
obviously a tremendous miscalculation.
  So we've offered an amendment today which essentially will say that 
you have to consider--and your survey must include--both owner-occupied 
units and rental units and that you must calculate both of them, not 
simply the owner-occupied units.
  HUD's model, in short, needs to be changed. We believe that our 
authorizing committee will correct this in future cases, but there's an 
urgent need to replace the rental housing that was lost in last year's 
tornadoes throughout the Nation. And my amendment simply creates a 
mechanism to do so and directs HUD to develop a formula for 
distributing assistance to communities that have already suffered 
damage. This will restore what we think is fairness and a more correct 
calculation.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Thank you for allowing me to explain the purpose of the amendment 
that my colleague Congresswoman Terri Sewell and I are proposing.
  Communities in the State of Alabama and other states are still 
recovering from the devastating tornadoes of April 27, 2011.
  A critical issue is replacing rental housing that was destroyed by 
the tornadoes. Rental housing is an important and affordable option for 
individuals and families, especially in larger cities.
  Unfortunately, the methodology used by the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development to award recovery assistance may be weighted--in some 
cases--against rebuilding rental housing.
  To provide an example, according to a study by the office of Mayor 
Walt Maddox, one census tract in Tuscaloosa sustained tornado damage to 
463 housing units: 23 owner-occupied units and 440 rental units. Rather 
than document the actual damage and distribute recovery aid 
accordingly, HUD used a mathematical model to calculate the damage.
  The result is that only 2.2% of the units in this devastated 
neighborhood were deemed to have been severely damaged. None of the 
rental properties were included in the formula, regardless of their 
damage.
  This bureaucratic discrepancy has put Tuscaloosa and other 
communities at an unfair disadvantage when it comes to receiving 
funding for the restoration of their rental housing stock.
  HUD's model needs to be changed. We are working to correct it for 
future cases, but there is an urgent need to replace the rental housing 
that was lost during last year's tornadoes.
  Our amendment creates a mechanism to do that. It directs HUD to 
develop a formula for distributing assistance to communities that have 
already suffered damage. This will help restore fairness and promote 
the continued recovery of our communities from some of the most 
devastating tornadoes in the history of the State of Alabama and our 
nation.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes 
legislation in an appropriations bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 
of rule XXI.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of 
order?
  The Chair is prepared to rule.
  The Chair finds that this amendment includes language imparting 
direction to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
  The amendment, therefore, constitutes legislation in violation of 
clause 2 of rule XXI.
  The point of order is sustained, and the amendment is not in order.
  Ms. SEWELL. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Alabama is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. SEWELL. Mr. Chairman, I understand the point of order; but I rise 
today in support of this amendment by my fellow colleague from Alabama, 
which adds critical funding to assist communities devastated as a 
result of last year's severe weather.
  This bipartisan amendment would add $200 million to the underlying 
bill and direct it towards communities that received CDBG disaster 
assistance in FY 2012. Prior to awarding of these new funds, this 
amendment directs HUD to establish a formula of funding that would give 
preference to applicants based on a county's unmet housing need, 
including renter-occupied units.
  Currently, there is still an ongoing and urgent need for housing 
options, particularly rental units, across several parts of my district 
as well as my colleague's district. This amendment would help 
communities like Tuscaloosa, Alabama, receive adequate funds to help 
repair and rebuild the rental housing units that were destroyed by the 
April 27 tornadoes. This would help to provide rental housing units 
that will provide critical shelter for women, children, and families.

                              {time}  1450

  A recent report released by HUD estimated that the amount of unmet 
housing needs for Tuscaloosa County alone would exceed $56 million. 
Most of this figure was associated with unmet rental housing need.
  The devastation and destruction that was caused by the April tornados 
across the State of Alabama is still being felt, especially in places 
that already have economically disadvantaged areas. This amendment 
would provide the additional funds needed for these affected areas to 
continue their efforts toward full recovery.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

        self-help and assisted homeownership opportunity program

       For the Self-Help and Assisted Homeownership Opportunity 
     Program, as authorized under section 11 of the Housing 
     Opportunity Program Extension Act of 1996, as amended, 
     $60,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2015: 
     Provided, That of the total amount provided under this 
     heading, $20,000,000 shall be made available to the Self-Help 
     and Assisted Homeownership Opportunity Program as authorized 
     under section 11 of the Housing Opportunity Program Extension 
     Act of 1996, as amended: Provided further, That $35,000,000 
     shall be made available for the second, third and fourth 
     capacity building activities authorized under section 4(a) of 
     the HUD Demonstration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 9816 note), of 
     which not less than $5,000,000 may be made available for 
     rural capacity-building activities: Provided further, That 
     $5,000,000 shall be made available for capacity-building 
     activities for national organizations with expertise in rural 
     housing, including experience working with rural housing 
     organizations, local governments, and Indian tribes: Provided 
     further, That no funds made available for capacity building 
     activities under this heading in this Act or any prior Act 
     may be set-aside, reserved, or awarded in connection with the 
     Department's demand-response initiative, described in section 
     V(A)(3)(d) of the Notices of Funding Availability for fiscal 
     years 2010, 2011, and 2012: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding any requirement in any Notice of Funding 
     Availability, grant application, grant agreement, or work 
     plan, any unexpended amounts provided under this heading for 
     capacity building activities in fiscal years 2010, 2011, 
     2012, and 2013 may not be used in connection with such 
     demand-response initiative or any similar initiative, unless 
     a grantee, in its sole discretion, decides to undertake or 
     continue such a project: Provided further, That prior to 
     undertaking, or asking others to undertake, any further 
     demand-response or similar place-based initiatives, the 
     Department shall submit for Congressional approval in its 
     operating plan and budget proposal a detailed justification 
     of such initiative, including how it fits within the 
     Department's overall capacity building efforts, why it is 
     consistent with authorizing legislation, and how the 
     Department plans to implement it effectively.

                       homeless assistance grants

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the emergency solutions grants program as authorized 
     under subtitle B of title IV of the McKinney-Vento Homeless 
     Assistance Act, as amended; the continuum of care program as 
     authorized under subtitle C of title IV of such Act; and the 
     rural housing stability assistance program as authorized 
     under subtitle D of title IV of such Act, $2,000,000,000, of 
     which $1,995,000,000 shall remain available until September 
     30, 2015, and of which $5,000,000 shall remain available

[[Page 10139]]

     until expended for project-based rental assistance with 
     rehabilitation projects with 10-year grant terms and any 
     rental assistance amounts that are recaptured under such 
     continuum of care program shall remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That not less than $286,000,000 of the 
     funds appropriated under this heading shall be available for 
     such emergency solutions grants program: Provided further, 
     That not less than $1,650,000,000 of the funds appropriated 
     under this heading shall be available for such continuum of 
     care and rural housing stability assistance programs: 
     Provided further, That up to $6,000,000 of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading shall be available for the 
     national homeless data analysis project: Provided further, 
     That all funds awarded for supportive services under the 
     continuum of care program and the rural housing stability 
     assistance program shall be matched by not less than 25 
     percent in cash or in kind by each grantee: Provided further, 
     That for all match requirements applicable to funds made 
     available under this heading for this fiscal year and prior 
     years, a grantee may use (or could have used) as a source of 
     match funds other funds administered by the Secretary and 
     other Federal agencies unless there is (or was) a specific 
     statutory prohibition on any such use of any such funds: 
     Provided further, That all awards of assistance under this 
     heading shall be required to coordinate and integrate 
     homeless programs with other mainstream health, social 
     services, and employment programs for which homeless 
     populations may be eligible, including Medicaid, State 
     Children's Health Insurance Program, Temporary Assistance for 
     Needy Families, Food Stamps, and services funding through the 
     Mental Health and Substance Abuse Block Grant, Workforce 
     Investment Act, and the Welfare-to-Work grant program: 
     Provided further, That all balances for Shelter Plus Care 
     renewals previously funded from the Shelter Plus Care Renewal 
     account and transferred to this account shall be available, 
     if recaptured, for continuum of care renewals in fiscal year 
     2013: Provided further, That the Department shall notify 
     grantees of their formula allocation from amounts allocated 
     (which may represent initial or final amounts allocated) for 
     the emergency solutions grant program within 60 days of 
     enactment of this Act.


              Amendment Offered by Mr. Clarke of Michigan

  Mr. CLARKE of Michigan. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 94, line 19, after each of the first and second dollar 
     amounts, insert ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 95, line 4, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 110, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $5,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. CLARKE of Michigan. I offer this amendment on behalf of citizens 
who feel that they have no voice in this Congress; people who have 
given up hope altogether. These are citizens who earn money by 
scavenging through alleys to find empty bottles and cans and get their 
return deposits. They survive by rummaging through garbage dumpsters to 
find food to eat. These are citizens who have no place to live. They're 
on the street.
  According to the Detroit Rescue Mission Ministries, every night in 
the city of Detroit there are nearly 20,000 people who are in need of 
shelter and who are homeless. Nearly a quarter of these people are 
children. And what is perhaps most tragic is that many of these 
citizens--and I have spoken to them as I have seen them in the alleys--
are men who have sacrificed themselves and proudly served this country 
in the military. Many of the homeless in the city of Detroit are 
veterans.
  Some of the folks on the street I know personally. I grew up with 
them. They need help. They need substance abuse treatment. They need a 
place to stay. And in Detroit, because of the housing crisis, because 
foreclosures forced many people out of their homes, we also have many 
apartment buildings that are now vacant--vacant, but could be 
rehabilitated and renovated to provide a home to our veterans who are 
currently on the street.
  This amendment that I offer will add $5 million to homeless 
assistance grants to provide our homeless veterans with a home, but 
also with the hope and dignity that all Americans deserve.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LATHAM. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. I would just tell the gentleman that we accept your 
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Clarke).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder 
of the bill through page 134, line 11, be considered as read, printed 
in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Iowa?
  There was no objection.
  The text of that portion of the bill is as follows:

                            Housing Programs

                    project-based rental assistance

       For activities and assistance for the provision of project-
     based subsidy contracts under the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) (``the Act''), not otherwise 
     provided for, $8,300,400,000, to remain available until 
     expended, shall be available on October 1, 2012 (in addition 
     to the $400,000,000 previously appropriated under this 
     heading that became available October 1, 2012), and 
     $400,000,000, to remain available until expended, shall be 
     available on October 1, 2013: Provided, That the amounts made 
     available under this heading shall be available for expiring 
     or terminating section 8 project-based subsidy contracts 
     (including section 8 moderate rehabilitation contracts), for 
     amendments to section 8 project-based subsidy contracts 
     (including section 8 moderate rehabilitation contracts), for 
     contracts entered into pursuant to section 441 of the 
     McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11401), for 
     renewal of section 8 contracts for units in projects that are 
     subject to approved plans of action under the Emergency Low 
     Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987 or the Low-Income 
     Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990, 
     and for administrative and other expenses associated with 
     project-based activities and assistance funded under this 
     paragraph: Provided further, That of the total amounts 
     provided under this heading, not to exceed $260,000,000 shall 
     be available for performance-based contract administrators 
     for section 8 project-based assistance: Provided further, 
     That the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may also 
     use such amounts in the previous proviso for performance-
     based contract administrators for the administration of: 
     interest reduction payments pursuant to section 236(a) of the 
     National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1(a)); rent supplement 
     payments pursuant to section 101 of the Housing and Urban 
     Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s); section 236(f)(2) 
     rental assistance payments (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1(f)(2)); project 
     rental assistance contracts for the elderly under section 
     202(c)(2) of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q(c)(2)); 
     project rental assistance contracts for supportive housing 
     for persons with disabilities under section 811(d)(2) of the 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 
     8013(d)(2)); project assistance contracts pursuant to section 
     202(h) of the Housing Act of 1959 (Public Law 86-372; 73 
     Stat. 667); and loans under section 202 of the Housing Act of 
     1959 (Public Law 86-372; 73 Stat. 667): Provided further, 
     That amounts recaptured under this heading, the heading 
     ``Annual Contributions for Assisted Housing'', or the heading 
     ``Housing Certificate Fund'' may be used for renewals of or 
     amendments to section 8 project-based contracts or for 
     performance-based contract administrators, notwithstanding 
     the purposes for which such amounts were appropriated: 
     Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, upon the request of the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development, project funds that are held in residual 
     receipts accounts for any project subject to a section 8 
     project-based Housing Assistance Payments contract that 
     authorizes HUD to require that surplus project funds be 
     deposited in an interest-bearing residual receipts account 
     and that are in excess of an amount to be determined by the 
     Secretary, shall be remitted to the Department and deposited 
     in this account, to be available until expended: Provided 
     further, That amounts deposited pursuant to the previous 
     proviso shall be available in addition to the amount 
     otherwise provided by this heading for uses authorized under 
     this heading.

                        housing for the elderly

       For capital advances, including amendments to capital 
     advance contracts for housing for the elderly, as authorized 
     by section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959, as amended, and 
     for project rental assistance for the elderly under section 
     202(c)(2) of such Act, including amendments to contracts for 
     such assistance and renewal of expiring contracts for such 
     assistance for up to a 1-year term, and for senior 
     preservation rental assistance contracts, as authorized by 
     section 811(e) of the American Housing and Economic 
     Opportunity Act of 2000, as amended, and for supportive 
     services associated with the housing,

[[Page 10140]]

     $425,000,000 to remain available until September 30, 2016: 
     Provided, That of the amount provided under this heading, up 
     to $90,000,000 shall be for service coordinators and the 
     continuation of existing congregate service grants for 
     residents of assisted housing projects: Provided further, 
     That amounts under this heading shall be available for Real 
     Estate Assessment Center inspections and inspection-related 
     activities associated with section 202 projects: Provided 
     further, That the Secretary may waive the provisions of 
     section 202 governing the terms and conditions of project 
     rental assistance, except that the initial contract term for 
     such assistance shall not exceed 5 years in duration: 
     Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, in this fiscal year and hereafter, upon the request 
     of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, project 
     funds that are held in residual receipts accounts for any 
     project subject to a section 202 Project Rental Assistance 
     Contract that requires surplus project funds to be deposited 
     in an interest-bearing residual receipts account and be 
     remitted to the Secretary upon termination of the contract, 
     shall be remitted to the Secretary and deposited in this 
     account upon termination of such contract, to be available 
     until expended for capital advances and other eligible 
     assistance for housing for the elderly, as authorized by 
     section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959, as amended: Provided 
     further, That amounts deposited in this account pursuant to 
     the previous proviso shall be available in addition to the 
     amounts otherwise provided by this heading for uses 
     authorized under this heading.

                 housing for persons with disabilities

       For amendments to capital advance contracts for supportive 
     housing for persons with disabilities, as authorized by 
     section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013), for project rental assistance 
     for supportive housing for persons with disabilities under 
     section 811(d)(2) of such Act and for project assistance 
     contracts pursuant to section 202(h) of the Housing Act of 
     1959 (Public Law 86-372; 73 Stat. 667), including amendments 
     to contracts for such assistance and renewal of expiring 
     contracts for such assistance for up to a 1-year term, for 
     project rental assistance to State housing finance agencies 
     and other appropriate entities as authorized under section 
     811(b)(3) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Housing Act, and 
     for supportive services associated with the housing for 
     persons with disabilities as authorized by section 811(b)(1) 
     of such Act, $165,000,000 to remain available until September 
     30, 2016: Provided, That amounts made available under this 
     heading shall be available for Real Estate Assessment Center 
     inspections and inspection-related activities associated with 
     section 811 Projects.

                     Housing Counseling Assistance

       For contracts, grants, and other assistance excluding 
     loans, as authorized under section 106 of the Housing and 
     Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended, $45,000,000, 
     including up to $2,500,000 for administrative contract 
     services: Provided, That grants made available from amounts 
     provided under this heading shall be awarded within 120 days 
     of enactment of this Act: Provided further, That funds shall 
     be used for providing counseling and advice to tenants and 
     homeowners, both current and prospective, with respect to 
     property maintenance, financial management/literacy, and such 
     other matters as may be appropriate to assist them in 
     improving their housing conditions, meeting their financial 
     needs, and fulfilling the responsibilities of tenancy or 
     homeownership; for program administration; and for housing 
     counselor training.

                    other assisted housing programs

            payment to manufactured housing fees trust fund

       For necessary expenses as authorized by the National 
     Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 
     1974 (42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.), up to $4,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended, which is to be derived from the 
     Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund: Provided, That not to 
     exceed the total amount appropriated under this heading shall 
     be available from the general fund of the Treasury to the 
     extent necessary to incur obligations and make expenditures 
     pending the receipt of collections to the Fund pursuant to 
     section 620 of such Act: Provided further, That the amount 
     made available under this heading from the general fund shall 
     be reduced as such collections are received during fiscal 
     year 2013 so as to result in no fiscal year 2013 
     appropriation from the general fund estimated and fees 
     pursuant to such section 620 shall be modified as necessary 
     to ensure such a final fiscal year 2013 appropriation: 
     Provided further, That for the dispute resolution and 
     installation programs, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development may assess and collect fees from any program 
     participant: Provided further, That such collections shall be 
     deposited into the Fund, and the Secretary, as provided 
     herein, may use such collections, as well as fees collected 
     under section 620, for necessary expenses of such Act: 
     Provided further, That, notwithstanding the requirements of 
     section 620 of such Act, the Secretary may carry out 
     responsibilities of the Secretary under such Act through the 
     use of approved service providers that are paid directly by 
     the recipients of their services.

                     Federal Housing Administration

               mutual mortgage insurance program account

                     (including transfers of funds)

       New commitments to guarantee single family loans insured 
     under the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund shall not exceed 
     $400,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2014: Provided, That during fiscal year 2013, obligations to 
     make direct loans to carry out the purposes of section 204(g) 
     of the National Housing Act, as amended, shall not exceed 
     $50,000,000: Provided further, That the foregoing amount in 
     the previous proviso shall be for loans to nonprofit and 
     governmental entities in connection with sales of single 
     family real properties owned by the Secretary and formerly 
     insured under the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund. For 
     administrative contract expenses of the Federal Housing 
     Administration, $215,000,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2014, of which up to $71,500,000 may be 
     transferred to and merged with the Working Capital Fund: 
     Provided further, That to the extent guaranteed loan 
     commitments exceed $200,000,000,000 on or before April 1, 
     2012, an additional $1,400 for administrative contract 
     expenses shall be available for each $1,000,000 in additional 
     guaranteed loan commitments (including a pro rata amount for 
     any amount below $1,000,000), but in no case shall funds made 
     available by this proviso exceed $30,000,000.

                general and special risk program account

       New commitments to guarantee loans insured under the 
     General and Special Risk Insurance Funds, as authorized by 
     sections 238 and 519 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 
     1715z-3 and 1735c), shall not exceed $25,000,000,000 in total 
     loan principal, any part of which is to be guaranteed: 
     Provided, That during fiscal year 2013, gross obligations for 
     the principal amount of direct loans, as authorized by 
     sections 204(g), 207(l), 238, and 519(a) of the National 
     Housing Act, shall not exceed $20,000,000, which shall be for 
     loans to nonprofit and governmental entities in connection 
     with the sale of single family real properties owned by the 
     Secretary and formerly insured under such Act.

                Government National Mortgage Association

guarantees of mortgage-backed securities loan guarantee program account

       New commitments to issue guarantees to carry out the 
     purposes of section 306 of the National Housing Act, as 
     amended (12 U.S.C. 1721(g)), shall not exceed 
     $500,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2014: Provided, That $20,500,000 shall be available for 
     necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of Government 
     National Mortgage Association: Provided further, That to the 
     extent that guaranteed loan commitments will and do exceed 
     $155,000,000,000 on or before April 1, 2013, an additional 
     $100 for necessary salaries and expenses shall be available 
     until expended for each $1,000,000 in additional guaranteed 
     loan commitments (including a pro rata amount for any amount 
     below $1,000,000), but in no case shall funds made available 
     by this proviso exceed $3,000,000: Provided further, That 
     receipts from Commitment and Multiclass fees collected 
     pursuant to title III of the National Housing Act, as 
     amended, shall be credited as offsetting collections to this 
     account.

                    Policy Development and Research

                        research and technology

       For contracts, grants, and necessary expenses of programs 
     of research and studies relating to housing and urban 
     problems, not otherwise provided for, as authorized by title 
     V of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 
     1701z-1 et seq.), including carrying out the functions of the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under section 
     1(a)(1)(I) of Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1968, $52,000,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2014: Provided, That 
     with respect to amounts made available under this heading, 
     notwithstanding section 204 of this title, the Secretary may 
     enter into cooperative agreements funded with philanthropic 
     entities, other Federal agencies, or State or local 
     governments and their agencies for research projects: 
     Provided further, That with respect to the previous proviso, 
     such partners to the cooperative agreements must contribute 
     at least a 50 percent match toward the cost of the project: 
     Provided further, That for non-competitive agreements entered 
     into in accordance with the previous two provisos, the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall comply with 
     section 2(b) of the Federal Funding Accountability and 
     Transparency Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-282, 31 U.S.C. note) 
     in lieu of compliance with section 102(a)(4)(C) with respect 
     to documentation of award decisions.

                   Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

                        fair housing activities

       For contracts, grants, and other assistance, not otherwise 
     provided for, as authorized by title VIII of the Civil Rights 
     Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 
     1988, and section 561 of the Housing and Community 
     Development

[[Page 10141]]

     Act of 1987, as amended, $68,000,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2014, of which $42,500,000 shall be to 
     carry out activities pursuant to such section 561: Provided, 
     That, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, the Secretary may 
     assess and collect fees to cover the costs of the Fair 
     Housing Training Academy, and may use such funds to provide 
     such training: Provided further, That no funds made available 
     under this heading shall be used to lobby the executive or 
     legislative branches of the Federal Government in connection 
     with a specific contract, grant or loan: Provided further, 
     That, of the funds made available under this heading, 
     $300,000 shall be available to the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development for the creation and promotion of 
     translated materials and other programs that support the 
     assistance of persons with limited English proficiency in 
     utilizing the services provided by the Department of Housing 
     and Urban Development.

            Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes

                         lead hazard reduction

       For the Lead Hazard Reduction Program, as authorized by 
     section 1011 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard 
     Reduction Act of 1992, $120,000,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2014: Provided, That up to $10,000,000 of 
     that amount shall be for the Healthy Homes Initiative, 
     pursuant to sections 501 and 502 of the Housing and Urban 
     Development Act of 1970 that shall include research, studies, 
     testing, and demonstration efforts, including education and 
     outreach concerning lead-based paint poisoning and other 
     housing-related diseases and hazards: Provided further, That 
     for purposes of environmental review, pursuant to the 
     National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 
     seq.) and other provisions of the law that further the 
     purposes of such Act, a grant under the Healthy Homes 
     Initiative, Operation Lead Elimination Action Plan (LEAP), or 
     the Lead Technical Studies program under this heading or 
     under prior appropriations Acts for such purposes under this 
     heading, shall be considered to be funds for a special 
     project for purposes of section 305(c) of the Multifamily 
     Housing Property Disposition Reform Act of 1994: Provided 
     further, That of the total amount made available under this 
     heading, $45,000,000 shall be made available on a competitive 
     basis for areas with the highest lead paint abatement needs: 
     Provided further, That each recipient of funds provided under 
     the third proviso shall make a matching contribution in an 
     amount not less than 25 percent: Provided further, That each 
     applicant shall certify adequate capacity that is acceptable 
     to the Secretary to carry out the proposed use of funds 
     pursuant to a notice of funding availability: Provided 
     further, That amounts made available under this heading in 
     this or prior appropriations Acts, and that still remain 
     available, may be used for any purpose under this heading 
     notwithstanding the purpose for which such amounts were 
     appropriated if a program competition is undersubscribed and 
     there are other program competitions under this heading that 
     are oversubscribed.

                     Management and Administration

                          working capital fund

       For additional capital for the Working Capital Fund (42 
     U.S.C. 3535) for the development of, modifications to, and 
     infrastructure for Department-wide and program-specific 
     information technology systems, for the continuing operation 
     and maintenance of both Department-wide and program-specific 
     information systems, and for program-related maintenance 
     activities, $175,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2014: Provided, That any amounts transferred to this Fund 
     under this Act shall remain available until expended: 
     Provided further, That any amounts transferred to this Fund 
     from amounts appropriated by previously enacted 
     appropriations Acts may be used for the purposes specified 
     under this Fund, in addition to any other information 
     technology the purposes for which such amounts were 
     appropriated: Provided further, That not more than 25 percent 
     of the funds made available under this heading for 
     Development, Modernization and Enhancement, including 
     development and deployment of a Next Generation of Voucher 
     Management System and development and deployment of 
     modernized Federal Housing Administration systems may be 
     obligated until the Secretary submits to the Committees on 
     Appropriations a plan for expenditure that--(A) identifies 
     for each modernization project: (i) the functional and 
     performance capabilities to be delivered and the mission 
     benefits to be realized, (ii) the estimated life-cycle cost, 
     and (iii) key milestones to be met; (B) demonstrates that 
     each modernization project is: (i) compliant with the 
     department's enterprise architecture, (ii) being managed in 
     accordance with applicable life-cycle management policies and 
     guidance, (iii) subject to the department's capital planning 
     and investment control requirements, and (iv) supported by an 
     adequately staffed project office; and (C) has been reviewed 
     by the Government Accountability Office.

                      office of inspector general

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of 
     Inspector General in carrying out the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, $125,600,000: Provided, That the 
     Inspector General shall have independent authority over all 
     personnel issues within this office.

                       transformation initiative

       For necessary expenses of research, evaluation, and program 
     metrics activities; program demonstrations; and technical 
     assistance and capacity building, $50,000,000 to remain 
     available until September 30, 2015: Provided, That with 
     respect to amounts made available under this heading for 
     research, evaluation and program metrics or program 
     demonstrations, notwithstanding section 204 of this title, 
     the Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements funded 
     with philanthropic entities, other Federal agencies, or State 
     or local governments and their agencies for research 
     projects: Provided further, That with respect to the previous 
     proviso, such partners to the cooperative agreements must 
     contribute at least a 50 percent match toward the cost of the 
     project.

    General Provisions--Department of Housing and Urban Development

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 201.  Fifty percent of the amounts of budget 
     authority, or in lieu thereof 50 percent of the cash amounts 
     associated with such budget authority, that are recaptured 
     from projects described in section 1012(a) of the Stewart B. 
     McKinney Homeless Assistance Amendments Act of 1988 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437 note) shall be rescinded or in the case of cash, 
     shall be remitted to the Treasury, and such amounts of budget 
     authority or cash recaptured and not rescinded or remitted to 
     the Treasury shall be used by State housing finance agencies 
     or local governments or local housing agencies with projects 
     approved by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     for which settlement occurred after January 1, 1992, in 
     accordance with such section. Notwithstanding the previous 
     sentence, the Secretary may award up to 15 percent of the 
     budget authority or cash recaptured and not rescinded or 
     remitted to the Treasury to provide project owners with 
     incentives to refinance their project at a lower interest 
     rate.
       Sec. 202.  None of the amounts made available under this 
     Act may be used during fiscal year 2013 to investigate or 
     prosecute under the Fair Housing Act any otherwise lawful 
     activity engaged in by one or more persons, including the 
     filing or maintaining of a nonfrivolous legal action, that is 
     engaged in solely for the purpose of achieving or preventing 
     action by a Government official or entity, or a court of 
     competent jurisdiction.
       Sec. 203.  Sections 203 and 209 of division C of Public Law 
     112-55 (125 Stat. 693-694) shall apply during fiscal year 
     2013 as if such sections were included in this title, except 
     that during such fiscal year such sections shall be applied 
     by substituting ``fiscal year 2013'' for ``fiscal year 2011'' 
     and ``fiscal year 2012'', each place such terms appear.
       Sec. 204.  Except as explicitly provided in law, any grant, 
     cooperative agreement or other assistance made pursuant to 
     title II of this Act shall be made on a competitive basis and 
     in accordance with section 102 of the Department of Housing 
     and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3545).
       Sec. 205.  Funds of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development subject to the Government Corporation Control Act 
     or section 402 of the Housing Act of 1950 shall be available, 
     without regard to the limitations on administrative expenses, 
     for legal services on a contract or fee basis, and for 
     utilizing and making payment for services and facilities of 
     the Federal National Mortgage Association, Government 
     National Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage 
     Corporation, Federal Financing Bank, Federal Reserve banks or 
     any member thereof, Federal Home Loan banks, and any insured 
     bank within the meaning of the Federal Deposit Insurance 
     Corporation Act, as amended (12 U.S.C. 1811-1).
       Sec. 206.  Unless otherwise provided for in this Act or 
     through a reprogramming of funds, no part of any 
     appropriation for the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development shall be available for any program, project or 
     activity in excess of amounts set forth in the budget 
     estimates submitted to Congress.
       Sec. 207.  Corporations and agencies of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development which are subject to the 
     Government Corporation Control Act are hereby authorized to 
     make such expenditures, within the limits of funds and 
     borrowing authority available to each such corporation or 
     agency and in accordance with law, and to make such contracts 
     and commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations as 
     provided by section 104 of such Act as may be necessary in 
     carrying out the programs set forth in the budget for 2013 
     for such corporation or agency except as hereinafter 
     provided: Provided, That collections of these corporations 
     and agencies may be used for new loan or mortgage purchase 
     commitments only to the extent expressly provided for in this 
     Act (unless such loans are in support of other forms of 
     assistance provided for in this or prior appropriations 
     Acts), except that this proviso shall not apply to the 
     mortgage insurance or guaranty operations of these 
     corporations, or where loans or mortgage purchases are 
     necessary to protect the financial interest of the United 
     States Government.
       Sec. 208.  The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall provide quarterly

[[Page 10142]]

     reports to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 
     regarding all uncommitted, unobligated, recaptured and excess 
     funds in each program and activity within the jurisdiction of 
     the Department and shall submit additional, updated budget 
     information to these Committees upon request.
       Sec. 209.  The President's formal budget request for fiscal 
     year 2014, as well as the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development's congressional budget justifications to be 
     submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate, shall use the identical 
     account and sub-account structure provided under this Act.
       Sec. 210.  A public housing agency or such other entity 
     that administers Federal housing assistance for the Housing 
     Authority of the county of Los Angeles, California, the 
     States of Alaska, Iowa, and Mississippi shall not be required 
     to include a resident of public housing or a recipient of 
     assistance provided under section 8 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 on the board of directors or a similar 
     governing board of such agency or entity as required under 
     section (2)(b) of such Act. Each public housing agency or 
     other entity that administers Federal housing assistance 
     under section 8 for the Housing Authority of the county of 
     Los Angeles, California and the States of Alaska, Iowa and 
     Mississippi that chooses not to include a resident of public 
     housing or a recipient of section 8 assistance on the board 
     of directors or a similar governing board shall establish an 
     advisory board of not less than six residents of public 
     housing or recipients of section 8 assistance to provide 
     advice and comment to the public housing agency or other 
     administering entity on issues related to public housing and 
     section 8. Such advisory board shall meet not less than 
     quarterly.
       Sec. 211. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     subject to the conditions listed in subsection (b), for 
     fiscal years 2013 and 2014, the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development may authorize the transfer of some or all 
     project-based assistance, debt and statutorily required low-
     income and very low-income use restrictions, associated with 
     one or more multifamily housing project to another 
     multifamily housing project or projects.
       (b) Phased Transfers.--Transfers of project-based 
     assistance under this section may be done in phases to 
     accommodate the financing and other requirements related to 
     rehabilitating or constructing the project or projects to 
     which the assistance is transferred, to ensure that such 
     project or projects meet the standards under section (c).
       (c) The transfer authorized in subsection (a) is subject to 
     the following conditions:
       (1) Number and bedroom size of units.--
       (A) For occupied units in the transferring project: the 
     number of low-income and very low-income units and the 
     configuration (i.e. bedroom size) provided by the 
     transferring project shall be no less than when transferred 
     to the receiving project or projects and the net dollar 
     amount of Federal assistance provided by the transferring 
     project shall remain the same in the receiving project or 
     projects.
       (B) For unoccupied units in the transferring project: the 
     Secretary may authorize a reduction in the number of dwelling 
     units in the receiving project or projects to allow for a 
     reconfiguration of bedroom sizes to meet current market 
     demands, as determined by the Secretary and provided there is 
     no increase in the project-based section 8 budget authority.
       (2) The net dollar amount of Federal assistance provided to 
     the transferring project shall remain the same as the 
     receiving project or projects.
       (3) The transferring project shall, as determined by the 
     Secretary, be either physically obsolete or economically 
     nonviable.
       (4) The receiving project or projects shall meet or exceed 
     applicable physical standards established by the Secretary.
       (5) The owner or mortgagor of the transferring project 
     shall notify and consult with the tenants residing in the 
     transferring project and provide a certification of approval 
     by all appropriate local governmental officials.
       (6) The tenants of the transferring project who remain 
     eligible for assistance to be provided by the receiving 
     project or projects shall not be required to vacate their 
     units in the transferring project or projects until new units 
     in the receiving project are available for occupancy.
       (7) The Secretary determines that this transfer is in the 
     best interest of the tenants.
       (8) If either the transferring project or the receiving 
     project or projects meets the condition specified in 
     subsection (d)(2)(A), any lien on the receiving project 
     resulting from additional financing obtained by the owner 
     shall be subordinate to any FHA-insured mortgage lien 
     transferred to, or placed on, such project by the Secretary, 
     except that the Secretary may waive this requirement upon 
     determination that such a waiver is necessary to facilitate 
     the financing of acquisition, construction, and/or 
     rehabilitation of the receiving project or projects.
       (9) If the transferring project meets the requirements of 
     subsection (d)(2)(E), the owner or mortgagor of the receiving 
     project or projects shall execute and record either a 
     continuation of the existing use agreement or a new use 
     agreement for the project where, in either case, any use 
     restrictions in such agreement are of no lesser duration than 
     the existing use restrictions.
       (10) The transfer does not increase the cost (as defined in 
     section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as 
     amended) of any FHA-insured mortgage, except to the extent 
     that appropriations are provided in advance for the amount of 
     any such increased cost.
       (d) For purposes of this section--
       (1) the terms ``low-income'' and ``very low-income'' shall 
     have the meanings provided by the statute and/or regulations 
     governing the program under which the project is insured or 
     assisted;
       (2) the term ``multifamily housing project'' means housing 
     that meets one of the following conditions--
       (A) housing that is subject to a mortgage insured under the 
     National Housing Act;
       (B) housing that has project-based assistance attached to 
     the structure including projects undergoing mark to market 
     debt restructuring under the Multifamily Assisted Housing 
     Reform and Affordability Housing Act;
       (C) housing that is assisted under section 202 of the 
     Housing Act of 1959 as amended by section 801 of the 
     Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable Housing Act;
       (D) housing that is assisted under section 202 of the 
     Housing Act of 1959, as such section existed before the 
     enactment of the Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable 
     Housing Act;
       (E) housing that is assisted under section 811 of the 
     Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable Housing Act; or
       (F) housing or vacant land that is subject to a use 
     agreement;
       (3) the term ``project-based assistance'' means--
       (A) assistance provided under section 8(b) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937;
       (B) assistance for housing constructed or substantially 
     rehabilitated pursuant to assistance provided under section 
     8(b)(2) of such Act (as such section existed immediately 
     before October 1, 1983);
       (C) rent supplement payments under section 101 of the 
     Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965;
       (D) interest reduction payments under section 236 and/or 
     additional assistance payments under section 236(f)(2) of the 
     National Housing Act;
       (E) assistance payments made under section 202(c)(2) of the 
     Housing Act of 1959; and
       (F) assistance payments made under section 811(d)(2) of the 
     Housing Act of 1959;
       (4) the term ``receiving project or projects'' means the 
     multifamily housing project or projects to which some or all 
     of the project-based assistance, debt, and statutorily 
     required low-income and very low-income use restrictions are 
     to be transferred;
       (5) the term ``transferring project'' means the multifamily 
     housing project which is transferring some or all of the 
     project-based assistance, debt and the statutorily required 
     low-income and very low-income use restrictions to the 
     receiving project or projects; and
       (6) the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development.
       (e) The Secretary shall publish by notice in the Federal 
     Register the terms and conditions, including criteria for HUD 
     approval, of transfers pursuant to this section no later than 
     30 days before the effective date of such notice.
       Sec. 212.  No funds provided under this title may be used 
     for an audit of the Government National Mortgage Association 
     that makes applicable requirements under the Federal Credit 
     Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 661 et seq.)
       Sec. 213. (a) No assistance shall be provided under section 
     8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f) 
     to any individual who--
       (1) is enrolled as a student at an institution of higher 
     education (as defined under section 102 of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002));
       (2) is under 24 years of age;
       (3) is not a veteran;
       (4) is unmarried;
       (5) does not have a dependent child;
       (6) is not a person with disabilities, as such term is 
     defined in section 3(b)(3)(E) of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(3)(E)) and was not receiving 
     assistance under such section 8 as of November 30, 2005; and
       (7) is not otherwise individually eligible, or has parents 
     who, individually or jointly, are not eligible, to receive 
     assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f).
       (b) For purposes of determining the eligibility of a person 
     to receive assistance under section 8 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f), any financial 
     assistance (in excess of amounts received for tuition and any 
     other required fees and charges) that an individual receives 
     under the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et 
     seq.), from private sources, or an institution of higher 
     education (as defined under the Higher Education Act of 1965 
     (20 U.S.C. 1002)), shall be considered income to that 
     individual, except for a person over the age of 23 with 
     dependent children.
       Sec. 214.  The funds made available for Native Alaskans 
     under the heading ``Native

[[Page 10143]]

     American Housing Block Grants'' in title III of this Act 
     shall be allocated to the same Native Alaskan housing block 
     grant recipients that received funds in fiscal year 2005.
       Sec. 215.  Notwithstanding the limitation in the first 
     sentence of section 255(g) of the National Housing Act (12 
     U.S.C. 1715z-g), the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development may, until September 30, 2013, insure and enter 
     into commitments to insure mortgages under section 255(g) of 
     the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-20).
       Sec. 216.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in 
     fiscal year 2013, in managing and disposing of any 
     multifamily property that is owned or has a mortgage held by 
     the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and during 
     the process of foreclosure on any property with a contract 
     for rental assistance payments under section 8 of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 or other Federal programs, the 
     Secretary shall maintain any rental assistance payments under 
     section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 and other 
     programs that are attached to any dwelling units in the 
     property. To the extent the Secretary determines, in 
     consultation with the tenants and the local government, that 
     such a multifamily property owned or held by the Secretary is 
     not feasible for continued rental assistance payments under 
     such section 8 or other programs, based on consideration of 
     (1) the costs of rehabilitating and operating the property 
     and all available Federal, State, and local resources, 
     including rent adjustments under section 524 of the 
     Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 
     1997 (``MAHRAA'') and (2) environmental conditions that 
     cannot be remedied in a cost-effective fashion, the Secretary 
     may, in consultation with the tenants of that property, 
     contract for project-based rental assistance payments with an 
     owner or owners of other existing housing properties, or 
     provide other rental assistance. The Secretary shall also 
     take appropriate steps to ensure that project-based contracts 
     remain in effect prior to foreclosure, subject to the 
     exercise of contractual abatement remedies to assist 
     relocation of tenants for imminent major threats to health 
     and safety after written notice to and informed consent of 
     the affected tenants and use of other available remedies, 
     such as partial abatements or receivership. After disposition 
     of any multifamily property described under this section, the 
     contract and allowable rent levels on such properties shall 
     be subject to the requirements under section 524 of MAHRAA.
       Sec. 217.  The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall report quarterly to the House of Representatives and 
     Senate Committees on Appropriations on HUD's use of all sole-
     source contracts, including terms of the contracts, cost, and 
     a substantive rationale for using a sole-source contract.
       Sec. 218.  During fiscal year 2013, in the provision of 
     rental assistance under section 8(o) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)) in connection with a 
     program to demonstrate the economy and effectiveness of 
     providing such assistance for use in assisted living 
     facilities that is carried out in the counties of the State 
     of Michigan notwithstanding paragraphs (3) and (18)(B)(iii) 
     of such section 8(o), a family residing in an assisted living 
     facility in any such county, on behalf of which a public 
     housing agency provides assistance pursuant to section 
     8(o)(18) of such Act, may be required, at the time the family 
     initially receives such assistance, to pay rent in an amount 
     exceeding 40 percent of the monthly adjusted income of the 
     family by such a percentage or amount as the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development determines to be appropriate.
       Sec. 219.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     recipient of a grant under section 202b of the Housing Act of 
     1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q) after December 26, 2000, in accordance 
     with the unnumbered paragraph at the end of section 202(b) of 
     such Act, may, at its option, establish a single-asset 
     nonprofit entity to own the project and may lend the grant 
     funds to such entity, which may be a private nonprofit 
     organization described in section 831 of the American 
     Homeownership and Economic Opportunity Act of 2000.
       Sec. 220.  The amounts provided under the subheading 
     ``Program Account'' under the heading ``Community Development 
     Loan Guarantees'' may be used to guarantee, or make 
     commitments to guarantee, notes, or other obligations issued 
     by any State on behalf of non-entitlement communities in the 
     State in accordance with the requirements of section 108 of 
     the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974: Provided, 
     That any State receiving such a guarantee or commitment shall 
     distribute all funds subject to such guarantee to the units 
     of general local government in non-entitlement areas that 
     received the commitment.
       Sec. 221.  Public housing agencies that own and operate 400 
     or fewer public housing units may elect to be exempt from any 
     asset management requirement imposed by the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development in connection with the 
     operating fund rule: Provided, That an agency seeking a 
     discontinuance of a reduction of subsidy under the operating 
     fund formula shall not be exempt from asset management 
     requirements.
       Sec. 222.  With respect to the use of amounts provided in 
     this Act and in future Acts for the operation, capital 
     improvement and management of public housing as authorized by 
     sections 9(d) and 9(e) of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g(d) and (e)), the Secretary shall not 
     impose any requirement or guideline relating to asset 
     management that restricts or limits in any way the use of 
     capital funds for central office costs pursuant to section 
     9(g)(1) or 9(g)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     (42 U.S.C. 1437g(g)(1), (2)): Provided, That a public housing 
     agency may not use capital funds authorized under section 
     9(d) for activities that are eligible under section 9(e) for 
     assistance with amounts from the operating fund in excess of 
     the amounts permitted under section 9(g)(1) or 9(g)(2).
       Sec. 223.  No official or employee of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development shall be designated as an 
     allotment holder unless the Office of the Chief Financial 
     Officer has determined that such allotment holder has 
     implemented an adequate system of funds control and has 
     received training in funds control procedures and directives. 
     The Chief Financial Officer shall ensure that, not later than 
     90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, a trained 
     allotment holder shall be designated for each HUD subaccount 
     under the heading ``Administration, Operations, and 
     Management'' as well as each account receiving appropriations 
     for ``Program Office Salaries and Expenses'' within the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development.
       Sec. 224.  Payment of attorney fees in program-related 
     litigation must be paid from individual program office 
     personnel benefits and compensation funding. The annual 
     budget submission for program office personnel benefit and 
     compensation funding must include program-related litigation 
     costs for attorney fees as a separate line item request.
       Sec. 225.  The Secretary of the Department of Housing and 
     Urban Development shall for fiscal year 2013 and subsequent 
     fiscal years, notify the public through the Federal Register 
     and other means, as determined appropriate, of the issuance 
     of a notice of the availability of assistance or notice of 
     funding availability (NOFA) for any program or discretionary 
     fund administered by the Secretary that is to be 
     competitively awarded. Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, for fiscal year 2013 and subsequent fiscal years, the 
     Secretary may make the NOFA available only on the Internet at 
     the appropriate Government Web site or through other 
     electronic media, as determined by the Secretary.
       Sec. 226.  The Secretary of the Department of Housing and 
     Urban Development is authorized to transfer up to 5 percent 
     or $5,000,000, whichever is less, of the funds appropriated 
     for any office funded under the heading ``Administration, 
     Operations, and Management'' to any other office funded under 
     such heading: Provided, That no appropriation for any office 
     funded under the heading ``Administration, Operations, and 
     Management'' shall be increased or decreased by more than 5 
     percent or $5,000,000, whichever is less, without prior 
     written approval of the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations: Provided further, That the Secretary is 
     authorized to transfer up to 5 percent or $5,000,000, 
     whichever is less, of the funds appropriated for any account 
     funded under the general heading ``Program Office Salaries 
     and Expenses'' to any other account funded under such 
     heading: Provided further, That no appropriation for any 
     account funded under the general heading ``Program Office 
     Salaries and Expenses'' shall be increased or decreased by 
     more than 5 percent or $5,000,000, whichever is less, without 
     prior written approval of the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations: Provided further, That the Secretary may 
     transfer funds made available for salaries and expenses 
     between any office funded under the heading ``Administration, 
     Operations, and Management'' and any account funded under the 
     general heading ``Program Office Salaries and Expenses'', but 
     only with the prior written approval of the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations.
       Sec. 227.  The Disaster Housing Assistance Programs, 
     administered by the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development, shall be considered a ``program of the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development'' under section 
     904 of the McKinney Act for the purpose of income 
     verifications and matching.
       Sec. 228.  None of the funds made available by this Act, or 
     any other Act, for purposes authorized under section 8 (only 
     with respect to the tenant-based rental assistance program) 
     and section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) may be used by any public housing agency 
     for any amount of salary, for the chief executive officer of 
     which, or any other official or employee of which, that 
     exceeds the annual rate of basic pay payable for a position 
     at level IV of the Executive Schedule at any time during any 
     public housing agency fiscal year 2013.
       Sec. 229.  Paragraph (1) of section 242(i) of the National 
     Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-7(i)(1)) is amended by striking 
     ``July 31, 2011'' and inserting ``July 31, 2016''.
       Sec. 230.  Subsection (d) of section 184 of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 1715z-13a) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(d) Guarantee Fee.--The Secretary shall establish and 
     collect, at the time of issuance

[[Page 10144]]

     of the guarantee, a fee for the guarantee of loans under this 
     section, in an amount not exceeding 3 percent of the 
     principal obligation of the loan. The Secretary may also 
     establish and collect annual premium payments in an amount 
     not exceeding 1 percent of the remaining guaranteed balance 
     (excluding the portion of the remaining balance attributable 
     to the fee collected at the time of issuance of the 
     guarantee). The Secretary shall establish the amount of the 
     fees and premiums by publishing a notice in the Federal 
     Register. The Secretary shall deposit any fees and premiums 
     collected under this subsection in the Indian Housing Loan 
     Guarantee Fund established under subsection (i).''.
       Sec. 231. (a) Subsection (b) of section 225 of the 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 
     12755) is amended by inserting at the end the following 
     sentence: ``Such 30 day waiting period is not required if the 
     grounds for the termination or refusal to renew involve a 
     direct threat to the safety of the tenants or employees of 
     the housing, or an imminent and serious threat to the 
     property (and the termination or refusal to renew is in 
     accordance with the requirements of State or local law).''.
       (b) Section 231 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12771) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b) by striking ``make such funds 
     available by direct reallocation'' and all that follows 
     through ``were recaptured'' and inserting ``reallocate the 
     funds by formula in accordance with section 217(d) of this 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 12747(d))''; and
       (2) by striking subsection (c).
       Sec. 232.  Notwithstanding Section 24(o) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437v(o)), amounts made 
     available in prior appropriations Acts under the heading 
     ``Revitalization of Severely Distressed Public Housing (HOPE 
     VI)'' or under the heading ``Choice Neighborhoods 
     Initiative'' may continue to be provided as assistance 
     pursuant to such Section 24.
       Sec. 233.  The proviso under the ``Community Development 
     Fund'' heading in Public Laws 109-148, 109-234, 110-252, and 
     110-329 which requires the Secretary to establish procedures 
     to prevent duplication of benefits and to report to the 
     Committees on Appropriations on all steps to prevent fraud 
     and abuse is amended by striking ``quarterly'' and inserting 
     ``annually''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Are there any amendments to that portion of the 
bill?
  If not, the Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 234.  Title II of division K of Public Law 110-161 is 
     amended by striking the item related to ``Flexible Subsidy 
     Fund''.


                  Amendment Offered by Mr. LaTourette

  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 134, after line 14, insert the following new section:
       Sec. 235.  Notwithstanding the 13th proviso of the second 
     undesignated paragraph under the heading ``Community Planning 
     and Development--Community Development Fund'' in title XII of 
     division A of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 
     2009 (Public Law 111-5; 123 Stat. 218) and section 1497(a) of 
     the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 
     (Public Law 111-203; 124 Stat. 2209), a State or unit of 
     general local government in a State may use not more than 75 
     percent of any amounts made available from a grant under such 
     second undesignated paragraph or under such section 1497 for 
     the purpose set forth in section 2301(c)(4)(D) of the Housing 
     and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (42 U.S.C. 5301 note), at 
     the sole discretion of the State or unit of general local 
     government.

  Mr. LaTOURETTE (during the reading.) I ask unanimous consent to 
dispense with the reading.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman form Ohio is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the gentleman for reserving the point of 
order. I think when I'm done consuming my 5 minutes, he will perhaps 
relent and think that that's a bad idea.
  The Neighborhood Stabilization Fund has been a valuable tool all 
across America in helping to revitalize neighborhoods. I would suggest 
it has one fatal flaw. There are some homes in every community in 
America, whether it's Detroit, Los Angeles, Cleveland, where I'm from, 
where some homes just aren't coming back, and you can't revitalize the 
neighborhoods until you tear those houses down and start afresh.
  One of the difficulties with the Neighborhood Stabilization Fund is 
it restricts the ability for a local community to use those funds to 
demolish homes. I will tell you from touring a number of these 
properties in my good friend Marcia Fudge's district on the east side 
of Cleveland, these are firetraps, these are rattraps. The last two 
Cleveland police officers who have been injured in the line of duty 
have been injured as they entered a dilapidated home. We toured one 
home in fact where the expression ``everything but the kitchen sink'' 
didn't apply because people had actually taken the kitchen sink, the 
toilet, the wiring, the gutters, and all of the copper.
  Cities are stepping up all across the country to take care of this 
problem. In the State of Ohio, our Attorney General has devoted $75 
million from the settlement with the top five big banks to this 
purpose. Mayor Jackson in Cleveland has expended a considerable amount 
of money. And Ms. Fudge and I have introduced legislation that would 
authorize bonds through the Department of Treasury to supplement the 
great work that land banks all across this country are doing.
  But because that bill languishes in the Ways and Means Committee, 
this simple amendment would give increased flexibility to communities 
that want to take grants that they've received from the Federal 
Government to stabilize their neighborhoods to give them the 
opportunity to use them for demolition if they reach the conclusion 
that in order to protect the neighbors in that neighborhood who are 
paying their taxes or keeping up their house, who are paying their 
mortgage but whose property values continue to plummet because they 
have this eyesore next door, that if the mayor of Cleveland or the 
mayor of Toledo or the mayor of Los Angeles reaches the conclusion that 
it's better in that instance to rip that house down and start over and 
work with the land banks that are popping up all across the country, 
they do that.
  So, Mr. Chairman, I would respectfully ask for passage of this 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1500

  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve my point of order, 
but I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I just want to tell the gentleman from Ohio 
that I have really no problem with the intent of his amendment, that I 
think he is talking about something that is very real to a lot of 
folks.
  My understanding is that waivers that have been asked for have all 
been accepted in the past, and the Secretary has said that if there's a 
waiver needed, that they would be glad to oblige. But having said that, 
I just want the gentleman to know that the reason why I must insist on 
the point of order is simply for consistency on the bill. We have 
struck on point of order every other authorizing language that has come 
before the subcommittee or to the floor today. So with that, while I 
share his concerns that he has stated, I must insist on my point of 
order.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes 
legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of 
rule XXI.
  The rule states in pertinent part:
  ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order 
if changing existing law.''
  The amendment waives existing law.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I do, Mr. Chairman.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized on the point 
of order.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I thank my great friend from Iowa for 
those kind words. I know his heart is in the right place, even if his 
legislative initiatives at this moment are not.

[[Page 10145]]

  A lot of people don't realize the history of rule XXI. I've had great 
conversations in the past with the prior Parliamentarians, the last 
two, Mr. Sullivan and Charlie--I can't remember Charlie's last name. We 
talked about the notion of equity. We're not only bound by the rules of 
the House, but just like in courts all across the country, the Chair 
has the power of equity in his possession.
  Rule XXI has its origins in 1844 when John Quincy Adams, the only 
President of the United States to come back and serve in the House of 
Representatives, decided that the appropriations process was bogging 
down and, therefore, we should have rule XXI to prohibit authorizing on 
appropriations bills. It was designed to keep the appropriators from 
poaching on the territory of the authorizing committees.
  We don't have that here. The chairman of the authorizing committee 
was just here, Mr. Bachus. He doesn't have any problem with this. The 
only person who is raising the point of order and has a problem with 
this is the distinguished subcommittee chair of the Appropriations 
Committee. So that's my first argument on equity.
  Secondly, because I had some spare time today, I also looked at the 
precedents of the House, and I would suggest to the Chair that this is 
a matter of first impression. The last time that this came to the 
attention of the Parliamentarian was in 2006. And, sadly, there is a 
big problem with getting the Congressional Record online, but we did 
get the previous one, which was in 1995 when the gentlelady from 
Missouri at the time, Ms. Danner, whom many of us remember, was 
attempting to make a provision in order on the Transportation, it 
wasn't Transportation-HUD at that time, it was the Transportation 
appropriations bill. And in construing the context of clause 2, rule 
XXI, the Chair at that time indicated that what she was attempting to 
do is--we have out of the highway trust fund, 2.8 cents goes to 
transit. That yields a certain amount of money, and she was attempting 
to wall off $26 million to go specifically to additional transit 
projects. The Chair in that instance specifically, and I think 
correctly, found that you cannot mandate or limit the discretion of the 
Secretary or another Federal official, nor can you mandate that money 
be used in a certain way that's not contemplated by the law. As a 
matter of fact, in section 1057 of the House manual that we all revere 
here very much, it cites the indications where this has been considered 
before.
  The common theme with all of them is that the person offering the 
amendment or the Appropriations Committee attempting to implement the 
policy was attempting to mandate action on the part of a Federal 
official or mandate that money be spent in a certain way.
  I brought up the June 9, 2006, ruling by the Chair, which occurs on 
page 10673, for those who may be following this at home, and in that 
instance the offending language was that the statement could not say 
that not less than a certain sum would be expended on that particular 
purpose.
  This amendment was very carefully crafted. As the Chair, I know being 
a student of the law and parliamentary procedure, will note that we 
don't have the words ``not less than,'' it's ``not more than.'' Already 
the existing legislation, the Dodd-Frank Act, contemplates that States 
who receive--so there's no change in the Federal appropriation. If the 
city of Cleveland gets a $100,000 neighborhood stabilization fund, they 
get to spend it. It doesn't change. There's no Federal involvement 
after that. It's then up to Mayor Jackson to figure out how to expend 
it.
  This expands the contemplated purpose of that that says a portion is 
already permitted to be used for demolition. This just says ``not more 
than.'' It's not a limitation. It just is increased flexibility for the 
communities that have received these grants. And honest to gosh, you 
know, with all of the problems that we have around this place, to go 
back and violate the spirit of John Quincy Adams' understanding of why 
we needed rule XXI, to prevent State and local communities from having 
the flexibility to demolish homes where fires are occurring, where 
people are selling drugs, where people are being murdered, is really 
beyond me.
  So I appeal to the Chair not only based upon the precedents of the 
House, but upon the inherent authority of the Chair to exercise equity 
and understand that there might be a ``t'' not crossed or an ``i'' not 
dotted in this particular instance, but the equitable arguments are on 
the side of this amendment, and I respectfully ask the Chair to 
overrule the point of order.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I wish to speak to the point of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Ohio is recognized.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Normally I enjoy working on a bipartisan basis, 
especially with our good colleague from eastern Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) 
and so in a way I reluctantly rise in opposition to his proposal.
  Let me mention that in a way we're into quite a 200-year extensive 
history of the rules of the House, but in essence the legislation as 
enacted works. Every single community that I represent that has ever 
asked HUD for any type of waiver, if the percentage was operating in 
there to their detriment, it has been granted. And so I think the 
legislation as is works. It keeps the focus on reinvestment. But if a 
mayor or if a council wants to use more of their funds for demolition, 
they merely ask HUD. And, quite frankly, HUD acts in quite an 
expeditious manner. So I think in a way this is a solution in search of 
a problem.
  I think the gentleman, we welcome his concern about the neighborhoods 
of this country that have been devastated by the Wall Street-induced 
housing crisis and lack of regulation here in Washington, but I really 
don't think it is necessary, and I would support the subcommittee chair 
and ranking member in their concern by raising a point of order here.
  I've expressed my interest in working with the gentleman on any 
community that you may represent that's facing this situation because 
every single one that we've had come to us, we have resolved with HUD's 
full cooperation. So I would support the subcommittee chair's invoking 
of a point of order on this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair is prepared to rule.
  The Chair finds that this amendment explicitly supersedes existing 
law, namely, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The 
amendment therefore constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of 
rule XXI. The point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in 
order.


            Amendment Offered by Mr. Price of North Carolina

  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Bass of New Hampshire). The Clerk will report 
the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 134, after line 14, insert the following new section:
       Sec. 235.  Notwithstanding any other provision of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f et seq.), 
     any amounts made available under this title under the heading 
     ``Public Housing Operating Fund'' and allocated to a public 
     housing agency for activities under section 9(e)(1) of the 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1437g(e)(1)), and any public housing operating 
     reserve amounts for a public housing agency, may be used by 
     such agency for any eligible activities under section 
     9(d)(1), in addition to the other purposes for which the 
     amounts may be used under such heading: Provided, That an 
     activity funded pursuant to this section shall be subject to 
     the requirements otherwise governing activities under such 
     section 9(d)(1).

  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask 
unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from North Carolina?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an 
amendment that is of great importance to some of

[[Page 10146]]

the strongest and best-managed housing authorities in our country.
  Currently, housing authorities in our districts receive Federal funds 
through two distinct streams. One funds day-to-day operations, and the 
other provides capital funds for construction projects and important 
modernizations to our Nation's housing stock. Both streams are 
currently underfunded, not only in this bill but also in the fiscal 
2013 administration request.

                              {time}  1510

  Now, I believe it's prudent to maintain these two distinct funding 
streams, but some of our housing authorities do need additional 
flexibility in tough funding years. Currently, some well-performing 
housing authorities, like the Raleigh Housing Authority in my district, 
have created efficiencies in their operating budget and pinched pennies 
in every way imaginable.
  Unfortunately, in order to reallocate these operations savings to 
urgent capital needs, they have to go through a very cumbersome and 
cost-ineffective program, that is, HUD's Operating Fund Financing 
Program. This program requires authorities to go through a financial 
middleman rather than just letting authorities use their operating 
funds and savings directly. This process costs unneeded interest 
payments and it adds unnecessary red tape.
  While I hope that our authorizers will be able to improve and 
streamline this process, I propose that this committee allow housing 
authorities to use unused operating funds for capital projects directly 
without having to go through the Operating Fund Financing Program.
  My amendment is narrow in scope as it's targeted to 2013 funds and 
existing reserves only. It's not prospective.
  This stopgap solution would provide flexibility for housing 
authorities, incentivize the wise spending of operating dollars, and 
help clear up the public housing capital improvement backlog at a time 
when the construction industry is still reeling from the recession. 
This amendment would be a win for Americans who need public housing and 
a win for Americans who are looking for jobs.
  This is not a new endeavor for the Transportation and Housing 
Appropriations bill; indeed, it's a continuation of the public housing 
operating fund offset discussion that we held last year.
  However, I understand that there is a point of order. So I will 
register the hope that the authorizers can conclude their work to 
address this issue before the end of the year.
  I yield back the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman will state his point of order.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes 
legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of 
rule XXI.
  The rule states in pertinent part:
  ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order 
if changing existing law.''
  The amendment waives existing law.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order? Seeing none, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  The Chair finds that this amendment explicitly supersedes existing 
law. The amendment therefore constitutes legislation in violation of 
clause 2 of rule XXI.
  The point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman and Members, I rise in opposition to this 
underlying bill, the Republican Transportation, Housing and Urban 
Development appropriations bill for the coming fiscal year, commonly 
referred to as THUD. This bill drastically underfunds critical 
transportation, infrastructure, and housing programs.
  First, on transportation, the American Society of Civil Engineers' 
2009 report for America's infrastructure estimated that there is a 
$549.5 billion shortfall in investments in roads and bridges, and an 
additional $190.1 billion shortfall in investments in transit. Yet this 
bill provides no funds for the Transportation Investment Generating 
Economic Recovery program, better known as TIGER.
  Now, TIGER would finance a wide variety of innovative highway, 
bridge, and transit projects in urban and rural communities across the 
country, provided there is sufficient funding. One such project is the 
Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor in Los Angeles County, a light-rail 
project that will run through my district. TIGER grants could be used 
to finance stations along this corridor in the communities of Leimert 
Park and Westchester, thereby ensuring that these communities have 
access to light-rail.
  Last week, I introduced H.R. 5976, the TIGER Grants for Job Creation 
Act, which would provide a supplemental emergency appropriation of $1 
billion over the next 2 years for the TIGER program, and 48 of my 
colleagues have already cosponsored the bill.
  Last night, I offered an amendment to fully fund TIGER at the 
requested level, without cutting funding for other programs. 
Representatives Betty McCollum, Barbara Lee, Emanuel Cleaver, Karen 
Bass, Laura Richardson, Bobby Rush, and Doris Matsui joined me in 
offering this amendment. The Republicans objected to this amendment to 
their appropriations bill because it was not in order under their rule. 
So this bill has no funding for this critical program to create jobs by 
rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure.
  Why did we have so much support on this legislation? Why do we have 
so many people who are signing on to basically beg for TIGER funding? 
It is because TIGER funding will create millions of jobs. It's because 
jobs are needed so desperately in this economy. It is because not only 
will we create millions of jobs, our infrastructure is in great 
disrepair. We have bridges that have been designated as unsafe. We have 
roads, we have water projects, we have all kinds of infrastructure 
needs that are unmet. This is the least that the American public could 
expect.
  This transportation bill has been waited on in many communities 
across this country. People thought when we passed this bill that we 
truly were going to expand job opportunities, that we truly were going 
to repair the infrastructure, but we find that this bill does not do 
this.
  But in addition to the disappointment that we are all experiencing 
because of the objection to repair of the infrastructure and job 
creation, we find that the same thing is happening in housing. We 
bemoan the fact that our veterans are homeless and they are on the 
streets, and that our shelters are all full, and that when we go into 
many of these communities--not only in our inner cities, but in our 
rural areas also--we find that people are not only sleeping on the 
streets, but under these bridges that are in great disrepair.
  This legislation cuts money from the homeless program. This will cut 
$231 million in homeless assistance grants compared to the President's 
budget request. At this level, HUD would be unable to fund all renewals 
of existing grants, jeopardizing assistance to approximately 25,000 of 
our most vulnerable citizens.
  This bill provides less than $2 billion for the Public Housing 
Capital Fund, despite a $30 million backlog of needed repairs. This is 
a huge cut, even when compared to funding during the Bush 
administration. In fact, in fiscal year 2008, the capital account 
received $2.4 billion in funding. This underfunding means that we will 
continue to lose public housing units as they fall into disrepair and 
long-term capital needs are neglected.
  The people who are serviced by this account are vulnerable, and so I 
would simply ask that this be given some real consideration and yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

[[Page 10147]]


  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, Americans need to know that Tea 
Party Republican obstructionism has brought us to the brink of yet 
another manufactured crisis.
  We have less than 2 days to pass critical highway and student loan 
bills that will keep Americans on the job and prevent student loan 
rates from doubling. Yet Tea Party Republicans are wasting time on 
frivolous amendments and on a purely meritless, political, and partisan 
vote to hold the Attorney General in contempt.
  Reports indicate that bipartisan Senate leadership has reached a deal 
on student loans and the highway bill as well, a deal which is now 
being blocked in the House by the Tea Party Republicans. This is not 
governing, ladies and gentlemen; it's Tea Party gridlock.
  Americans long for a Congress that is capable of honest debate and 
compromise in solving the important issues of the day. That's what the 
Founders and the Framers intended of us.
  It's been over 100 days since the Senate passed a bipartisan highway 
bill with 74 votes. While the House Tea Party Republicans quibble, they 
put 1.9 million jobs at risk.

                              {time}  1520

  Mr. Chairman, if the Tea Party Republicans prevent a deal on student 
loans, over 7.4 million students will see their interest rates double, 
costing students $6 billion.
  They brought us to the brink of a government shut down in February of 
2011. Last summer they brought the country to the brink of default and 
caused the first downgrade in the history of the United States of our 
credit rating. This year, they opposed the middle class tax cut, and 
they have successfully ignored and blocked the President's job act.
  Mr. Chairman, we should listen to the American people, not the big-
dollar corporate backers of the Tea Party. I, myself, never knew that 
any of the real Tea Partyers of 1776 were millionaires or even wealthy. 
They were people like the working people of today. We call them the 
middle class.
  Today, we are debating cut after draconian cut to our Nation's 
transportation and housing programs, which impact and hurt the middle 
class. These cuts put good, middle class jobs at risk. They make it 
harder for small businesses to operate, and they cause harm to low-
income Americans who are struggling to put food on the table and a roof 
over their heads.
  The Tea Party-millionaire Republicans will spend all week circling 
the toilet bowl drain and debating these amendments that have no chance 
of becoming law, when we should be lowering student loan rates and 
passing a long-term highway bill.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a great country, but how long can we withstand 
the best efforts of this millionaire Tea Party Republican Congress to 
bring America to its knees?
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARSON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Indiana is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARSON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, it is no secret to anyone in 
this Chamber that the American people are unhappy with Congress. In 
fact, our approval ratings could only be described as terrible. As much 
as television personalities might like to analyze why, I don't think 
it's difficult to understand. Time and time again, Mr. Chairman, our 
work ignores their priorities.
  Now, under Republican leadership, we have spent months arguing over 
eliminating regulations, shrinking government, and crippling the Obama 
administration. Yet since the lowest point of economic downturn in 
2008, the American people have cared mostly about two things: good jobs 
and stable housing. These are issues that have hit the African American 
community especially hard, which is why I come to the floor today with 
several of my colleagues from the Congressional Black Caucus.
  Today, Mr. Chairman, unemployment among African Americans is above 13 
percent, much higher than the national average. Concerns about stable 
housing are really nothing new, but they have been especially difficult 
since the start of our recession. In fact, 42 percent of homeless 
families with children are African American. So we were all glad to see 
the House take up the Transportation-HUD bill this week. We hoped to 
see some relief for our struggling communities.
  But sadly, this bill falls short. It fails to adequately fund 
project-based section 8 rental assistance for low-income families. That 
means over 1.2 million families, Mr. Chairman, would be at risk of 
losing their homes. These are primarily seniors, families with 
children, and people with disabilities, including many who are in the 
great Hoosier State in my district.
  The bill cuts homeless assistance grants, leaving an estimated 25,000 
people without the assistance they need to get back on their feet. It 
entirely eliminates the Choice Neighborhoods program. In Indianapolis, 
we need these funds to rebuild blighted public housing projects, 
improve economic development and job opportunities in surrounding 
neighborhoods for low-income families.
  It also eliminates the Sustainable Communities, which coordinates 
Federal, State and local public housing investments, helping 
communities make the best with limited funding.
  I also want to add that I plan to strongly oppose any amendment that 
makes it harder to enforce the Fair Housing Act. Congress should not 
restrict HUD's work to end housing discrimination, intentional or 
unintentional.
  These cuts, Mr. Chairman, strike at the very heart of what my 
constituents care about, having a stable place for their families to 
live and stay.
  Over the last several months, Mr. Chairman, there has been one topic 
we have all agreed on, transportation projects equal jobs. Now, sadly, 
this bill defunds some of our most important job-creating programs. It 
eliminates funding for TIGER grants, which have put thousands of people 
to work across this country. My district received one of these grants 
to construct our great cultural trail. Many of my constituents worked 
to construct this trail, and today it is absolutely revitalizing 
neighborhoods and growing businesses and creating long-term job 
opportunities.
  This bill also eliminates funding for high-speed rail, which early 
estimates predict could have created thousands of jobs in the great 
Hoosier State. Now, of course, there are other issues; but there are 
too many to name at this time.
  But in talking today, Mr. Chairman, I simply want to express my 
disappointment. This week we are finally considering the one bill each 
year that must address top priorities for all Americans, jobs and 
housing. Instead, we're cutting programs.
  My question to these people is, Mr. Chairman, and those 
obstructionists, what are you expecting our communities to do?
  These are programs that work. They employ our constituents, Mr. 
Chairman, and they also improve our society.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Chairman, here we are once again. We find 
ourselves debating a bill that is under veto threat due to the 
Republicans my-way-or-the-highway posture.
  Mr. Chairman, last month saw the largest drop in construction jobs in 
2 years, workers who joined the more than 2.2 million construction 
workers who are out of work.
  However, instead of providing certainty to our Nation's construction 
workers by investing in the TIGER program and light-speed rail, the 
Republican majority has actually zeroed these programs out completely. 
Apparently, the majority seems to only believe in certainty when it 
means historically low tax rates for multi-millionaires and 
billionaires.
  Mr. Chairman, the majority's lack of investment in our Nation's 
infrastructure is bad enough. Unfortunately, it

[[Page 10148]]

gets even worse. At a time when the need for HUD programs is growing, 
this bill drastically undercuts homeless assistance grants, putting 
25,000 Americans at risk of losing assistance. It jeopardizes 
assistance to homeowners attempting to stay in their homes and actually 
zeroes out the Choice Neighborhoods program. Why?
  Mr. Chairman, why we would essentially eliminate a program that 
improves economic development and viability and job opportunities for 
our Nation's most vulnerable is beyond my ability to comprehend.
  Mr. Chairman, the American people have made it abundantly clear that 
the number one priority of the 112th Congress ought to be job creation.

                              {time}  1530

  By bringing this bill to the floor, the majority is saying to the 
American people, not only doesn't their unemployed status or opinions 
matter, but don't expect any relief from this Republican-led Congress 
as our Nation struggles to cope with the worst economic downturn since 
the Great Depression.
  Mr. Chairman, this is just totally unbelievable. I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       This title may be cited as the ``Department of Housing and 
     Urban Development Appropriations Act, 2013''.

                      TITLE III--RELATED AGENCIES

                              Access Board

                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses necessary for the Access Board, as authorized 
     by section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 
     $7,400,000: Provided, That, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, there may be credited to this appropriation 
     funds received for publications and training expenses.

                      Federal Maritime Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Maritime Commission 
     as authorized by section 201(d) of the Merchant Marine Act, 
     1936, as amended (46 U.S.C. 307), including services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; hire of passenger motor vehicles 
     as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343(b); and uniforms or 
     allowances therefore, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902, 
     $25,000,000: Provided, That not to exceed $2,000 shall be 
     available for official reception and representation expenses.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 135, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $900,000)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $900,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would reduce the 
proposed funding for salaries and expenses for the Federal Maritime 
Commission by $900,000. This is not a cut. This is just to keep those 
salaries at what they are, to cap it at the 2012 levels. This is one of 
13 offices that would receive increases for salaries or administrative 
expenses in the underlying bill.
  I urge the support of my amendment, which would just freeze these 
salaries.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LATHAM. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, the Federal Maritime Commission is 
responsible for resolving disputes between shippers--both foreign and 
domestic--and the public, protecting consumers from unfair business 
practices, and monitoring ocean transportation and trade.
  The increase in this account has to do with the annualization of 
already onboard personnel and of the increases in the claims and the 
workload of the Federal Maritime Commission. To reduce this account, 
you will affect the backlog of cases and claims, thus costing 
businesses, exporters, and ports time and money while they wait for the 
FMC to adjudicate their claims.
  Usually, we are in the business of trying to reduce backlogs and 
delays in doing business. With that, I would urge a ``no'' vote on this 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. I will be very brief.
  I merely want to concur in the position of the chairman of the 
subcommittee, and I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. 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 Georgia will 
be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

  National Railroad Passenger Corporation Office of Inspector General

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation to carry out 
     the provisions of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as 
     amended, $25,000,000: Provided, That the Inspector General 
     shall have all necessary authority, in carrying out the 
     duties specified in the Inspector General Act, as amended (5 
     U.S.C. App. 3), to investigate allegations of fraud, 
     including false statements to the government (18 U.S.C. 
     1001), by any person or entity that is subject to regulation 
     by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation: Provided 
     further, That the Inspector General may enter into contracts 
     and other arrangements for audits, studies, analyses, and 
     other services with public agencies and with private persons, 
     subject to the applicable laws and regulations that govern 
     the obtaining of such services within the National Railroad 
     Passenger Corporation: Provided further, That the Inspector 
     General may select, appoint, and employ such officers and 
     employees as may be necessary for carrying out the functions, 
     powers, and duties of the Office of Inspector General, 
     subject to the applicable laws and regulations that govern 
     such selections, appointments, and employment within Amtrak: 
     Provided further, That concurrent with the President's budget 
     request for fiscal year 2014, the Inspector General shall 
     submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a 
     budget request for fiscal year 2014 in similar format and 
     substance to those submitted by executive agencies of the 
     Federal Government.

                  National Transportation Safety Board

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the National Transportation 
     Safety Board, including hire of passenger motor vehicles and 
     aircraft; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at 
     rates for individuals not to exceed the per diem rate 
     equivalent to the rate for a GS-15; uniforms, or allowances 
     therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-5902), 
     $102,400,000, of which not to exceed $2,000 may be used for 
     official reception and representation expenses. The amounts 
     made available to the National Transportation Safety Board in 
     this Act include amounts necessary to make lease payments on 
     an obligation incurred in fiscal year 2001 for a capital 
     lease.

                 Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation

          payment to the neighborhood reinvestment corporation

       For payment to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation 
     for use in neighborhood reinvestment activities, as 
     authorized by the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 8101-8107), $145,300,000: Provided, That in 
     addition, $80,000,000 shall be made available until expended 
     to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation for mortgage 
     foreclosure mitigation activities, under the following terms 
     and conditions:
       (1) The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation (``NRC'') 
     shall make grants to counseling intermediaries approved by 
     the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (with 
     match to be determined by the NRC based on affordability and 
     the economic conditions of an area; a match also may be 
     waived by the NRC based on the aforementioned conditions) to 
     provide mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance primarily 
     to States and areas with high rates of defaults and 
     foreclosures to help eliminate the default and foreclosure of 
     mortgages of owner-occupied single-family homes that are at 
     risk of such foreclosure. Other than areas with high rates of 
     defaults and foreclosures, grants may also be provided to 
     approved counseling intermediaries based on a geographic 
     analysis of the Nation by the NRC which determines where 
     there is a prevalence of mortgages that are risky and likely 
     to fail, including any trends for mortgages that are likely 
     to default and face foreclosure. A State Housing Finance 
     Agency may also be eligible where the State Housing

[[Page 10149]]

     Finance Agency meets all the requirements under this 
     paragraph. A HUD-approved counseling intermediary shall meet 
     certain mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance counseling 
     requirements, as determined by the NRC, and shall be approved 
     by HUD or the NRC as meeting these requirements.
       (2) Mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance shall only 
     be made available to homeowners of owner-occupied homes with 
     mortgages in default or in danger of default. These mortgages 
     shall likely be subject to a foreclosure action and 
     homeowners will be provided such assistance that shall 
     consist of activities that are likely to prevent foreclosures 
     and result in the long-term affordability of the mortgage 
     retained pursuant to such activity or another positive 
     outcome for the homeowner. No funds made available under this 
     paragraph may be provided directly to lenders or homeowners 
     to discharge outstanding mortgage balances or for any other 
     direct debt reduction payments.
       (3) The use of Mortgage Foreclosure Mitigation Assistance 
     by approved counseling intermediaries and State Housing 
     Finance Agencies shall involve a reasonable analysis of the 
     borrower's financial situation, an evaluation of the current 
     value of the property that is subject to the mortgage, 
     counseling regarding the assumption of the mortgage by 
     another non-Federal party, counseling regarding the possible 
     purchase of the mortgage by a non-Federal third party, 
     counseling and advice of all likely restructuring and 
     refinancing strategies or the approval of a work-out strategy 
     by all interested parties.
       (4) NRC may provide up to 15 percent of the total funds 
     under this paragraph to its own charter members with 
     expertise in foreclosure prevention counseling, subject to a 
     certification by the NRC that the procedures for selection do 
     not consist of any procedures or activities that could be 
     construed as an unacceptable conflict of interest or have the 
     appearance of impropriety.
       (5) HUD-approved counseling entities and State Housing 
     Finance Agencies receiving funds under this paragraph shall 
     have demonstrated experience in successfully working with 
     financial institutions as well as borrowers facing default, 
     delinquency and foreclosure as well as documented counseling 
     capacity, outreach capacity, past successful performance and 
     positive outcomes with documented counseling plans (including 
     post mortgage foreclosure mitigation counseling), loan 
     workout agreements and loan modification agreements. NRC may 
     use other criteria to demonstrate capacity in underserved 
     areas.
       (6) Of the total amount made available under this 
     paragraph, up to $3,000,000 may be made available to build 
     the mortgage foreclosure and default mitigation counseling 
     capacity of counseling intermediaries through NRC training 
     courses with HUD-approved counseling intermediaries and their 
     partners, except that private financial institutions that 
     participate in NRC training shall pay market rates for such 
     training.
       (7) Of the total amount made available under this 
     paragraph, up to 5 percent may be used for associated 
     administrative expenses for the NRC to carry out activities 
     provided under this section.
       (8) Mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance grants may 
     include a budget for outreach and advertising, and training, 
     as determined by the NRC.
       (9) The NRC shall continue to report bi-annually to the 
     House and Senate Committees on Appropriations as well as the 
     Senate Banking Committee and House Financial Services 
     Committee on its efforts to mitigate mortgage default.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 137, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $12,300,000)''.
       Page 150, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $12,300,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Funding for the Neighborhood Reinvestment 
Corporation is over $12 million higher than what the President's budget 
request was. Now, the President and I don't typically see eye to eye on 
most spending issues, but I am proud to support his requested level of 
funding for the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation.
  By supporting my amendment, why don't we show the American people 
that we are serious about our Nation's fiscal crisis and that both 
parties are capable of working together by setting the funding back to 
the President's requested funding level for the Neighborhood 
Reinvestment Corporation, which would save the American taxpayers over 
$12 million.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. OLVER. This is one of those cases in which we've gone back and 
forth here today with the gentleman from California. This must be the 
eighth or ninth of these, and it's hard to find ways of being very 
creative or original about what you're saying.
  The interesting thing here is that, for some of the time, the 
gentleman has been going back to whatever we had done several years 
ago, going back arbitrarily to some point in the past. Here, of course, 
he is supporting the President's position. I was not aware that the 
gentleman from California supported the President's position in much of 
anything.
  Mr. LATHAM. If the gentleman would yield, the gentleman is from 
Georgia.
  Mr. OLVER. Excuse me. Thank you very much.
  Please forgive me. You don't even look alike. I think I was mistaking 
you for a different member of the California delegation.
  I thank the gentleman from Iowa for correcting me.
  In any case, I rise in opposition to this amendment. The gentleman's 
amendment would take the position of this subcommittee down by $12.3 
million. Basically, the position of the subcommittee has been that we 
are providing a little bit more for the NeighborWorks program than the 
President requested and that we are providing a little bit less for the 
HUD Counseling program than the President requested. Together, though, 
they would be about the same.
  NeighborWorks, which is what the Neighborhood Reinvestment 
Corporation's common name is, is a major nonprofit organization that 
operates all over the country. It has affiliates in 50 States, and I'm 
sure it has an affiliate somewhere in the gentleman's district. The 
NeighborWorks program is a group that we relied on very heavily to do 
counseling during the very height of the foreclosure crisis 3 or 4 
years ago. We relied on it to go out there and actually contract with 
and manage the process of providing counseling to hundreds of thousands 
of people who were engaged in or who were subject to foreclosure.
  So we on our side, on this side--in this branch at least--have felt 
that NeighborWorks has been a very good organization, which is in large 
part why we have given them a little bit more and why we have given a 
little bit less to the HUD program.
  We argued the HUD program last night. They leverage something close 
to $4 billion in direct investments to serve low- and moderate-income 
families through all of their affiliates in all the work that they do. 
It's a very, very good and reliable organization that we've come to 
value very highly.
  They also administered this Foreclosure Mitigation Counseling 
program, which gives targeted assistance to families at risk of losing 
their homes. The gentleman seems to cut this account because it is 
above the President's request, but I think I have explained that we're 
slightly above on this one and slightly below on the other one.
  Again, I would say I was not aware that the gentleman from Georgia--I 
went to California again, didn't I?--was such a fan of the President's 
request numbers, that he valued them so highly. I believe--and I think 
that my chairman believes--that NeighborWorks is deserving of this 
small increase, and I believe that Chairman Latham has thoughtfully 
targeted resources in this area. I hope the amendment will be defeated, 
and I urge the Members to vote ``no.''
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1540

  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  NeighborWorks really is a program that has some metrics in place to 
make

[[Page 10150]]

sure that the dollars are used correctly in a proper way. In Iowa and 
across the country, about every dollar that goes through NeighborWorks 
leverages $48 in non-Federal direct investment because of it.
  I just want to reiterate that we've gone through every line in this 
appropriations bill, tried to make decisions that would increase 
growth, job creation, tried to do the very best job we could. We've 
looked at every area. There are some priorities of things that actually 
work that we've tried to sustain funding for.
  I just don't want folks to forget overall in this bill, we are nearly 
$4 billion below last year's funding level. That's a cut of $4 billion. 
It's $2 billion below the President's request. I think, as one 
gentleman here today stated, this is the largest percentage reduction 
of any appropriation bill yet to come to the floor. We're trying to be 
fiscally responsible, to actually prioritize spending in this bill to 
things that actually work.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I would urge a ``no'' vote on this 
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Ohio is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I would like to rise in opposition to this 
amendment and to say to the gentleman from Georgia that I don't really 
know where you might live in Georgia, but imagine neighborhoods in our 
country where there is no private lender with competitive rates; 
imagine neighborhoods that are crammed at the edges with payday lenders 
who are more than willing to bilk people who have checks to cash, maybe 
even Social Security checks, and they charge them royally for that; 
imagine a neighborhood where there is no church-run credit union, maybe 
a multilingual neighborhood with no lending arm of any reputable 
institution. If there is somebody in the neighborhood willing to make a 
loan, such as a loan shark, they charge fees. Imagine the trouble that 
a family can get into. Imagine how difficult it is in those 
neighborhoods to accumulate capital to make a loan because everything 
is being taken out by predatory practices and nothing is put back in.
  NeighborWorks is one of the few institutions in this country that has 
proven itself and works in exactly those kinds of neighborhood. 
NeighborWorks tries to save families and give them a chance to get on 
the ladder up to opportunity. Particularly during this time, when we 
know we've had the largest transfer of wealth in American history from 
Main Street to Wall Street. NeighborWorks is a lifeline. People have 
had their equity taken away, including in neighborhoods like I'm 
talking about, where people were beginning to own their own homes for 
the first time, where they needed financial counseling, mortgage 
counseling, advice on if you're going to buy a home, what a reasonable 
down payment is, based on how much do they earn. People need sound 
advice on mortgages--that you shouldn't pay more than this out of your 
check so you don't get in trouble. People need advice as they try to 
find reputable people to repair their homes so they get a decent price 
on their roof and gutters--it all seems so simple if you live in the 
suburbs, and you've got enough money, and the region is not 
disinvested, and you're not living at the edge.
  NeighborWorks is one of those programs that is needed, particularly 
at this time in our country with the housing market being in the 
condition that it is. With the enormous challenges facing built 
communities in the built environment in city after city, NeighborWorks 
serves community after community, both urban and rural. It's amazing 
what's happened even to rural small towns in this country and their 
emptying out that is really historic in nature.
  A program like NeighborWorks has proven itself time and again. It 
pays back to the American people their equity not being lost, in 
helping capital accumulate in some of the most forgotten corners of 
this country, and with their staff that are highly trained and highly 
reputable.
  I would not want to be without NeighborWorks in Ohio, not in the 
housing situation that we're facing today. I'm not sure about Georgia. 
But I would bet in Atlanta they value NeighborWorks if they have one, 
and I assume that they do. But you have to imagine yourself living in a 
place like you may not know. And for the American Dream to happen, 
organizations like NeighborWorks are absolutely essential.
  I oppose the gentleman's amendment. I think it may be well 
intentioned, but I think it's going to achieve exactly the wrong 
result. I think Chairman Latham of the full committee and Ranking 
Member Olver have reached an accommodation here to help our housing 
market recover in some of the most forgotten places and not to have any 
more hemorrhaging of equity and investment capital across this country. 
I urge a no vote on the Broun Amendment.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chair, 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 Georgia will 
be postponed.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I was on the floor about a half an hour 
ago and went back to my office stunned by the defeat at the hands of 
Mr. Latham and his point of order and the ruling of the Parliamentarian 
and the Chair at the time and the interesting comments from my friend 
from western Ohio, who I trust, after she has the opportunity to meet 
with Mr. Rokakis and Mr. Kildee in Michigan and Cleveland, will have a 
different view on whether or not the Neighborhood Stabilization fund, 
without additional resources to demolish homes, is working well.
  When I got back to the office, I turned on the television and I saw--
I like a good Republican bashing as much as other folks, but a string 
of speakers came to the microphone and just bashed the lack of a 
Republican plan on transportation.
  I'm not going to go back to 1844, but I am going to go back to 
September of 2009, the last bill, SAFETEA-LU, expired in September of 
2009. In September of 2009--people who know the answer, you can shout 
it out--the President of the United States was a Democrat, Barack 
Obama, who is currently the President today. The majority leader in the 
United States Senate--shout it out if you know it--was Harry Reid, a 
Democrat of Nevada. The Speaker of the House was the first woman-
elected Speaker in the history of the United States, Nancy Pelosi of 
California.
  The Democratic Party controlled all three levers of the Federal 
Government. They had in position as the chairman of the Transportation 
Infrastructure Committee a gentleman who has forgotten more about 
transportation than most of us will ever learn, Jim Oberstar of 
Minnesota. Mr. Oberstar prepared a 6-year fully funded, robust Federal 
transportation 6-year reauthorization. He was not allowed by the 
leadership within the Democratic Party to bring that bill forward.
  So for people to come to the floor and say that Mr. Latham is not 
doing his job, this negotiation that is going on on the transportation 
authorization currently is somehow a failure of Republican leadership, 
I say get up and look in the mirror. You have to take a look at the 
fact that everybody is responsible for this mess, and everybody knows 
that you don't fix the Nation's infrastructure unless you provide the 
necessary resources to fund the trust fund. Both parties are guilty of 
being absent without leave, but to blame it

[[Page 10151]]

and to hang it on the Republican Party is worse than nonsense. It 
completely ignores historical fact.
  One other factoid about the President of the United States, President 
Obama. He has become the first President since Dwight Eisenhower to not 
send up his vision of a comprehensive transportation reauthorization 
bill. A lot of people in this House weren't even born when Dwight 
Eisenhower was the President of the United States, but he became the 
first President. And our good friend and former colleague, Mr. LaHood, 
who is the Secretary of Transportation, he would come before the 
subcommittee year after year after year and had no ideas, no gas tax, 
no vehicle miles traveled, no idea how we're going to replenish the 
highway trust fund until this year. Until this year, he came and said: 
I've got this brainy idea. We're going to fund it with OCO, the 
overseas contingency account, that the United States has used to 
support our troops in conflicts around the world.
  It was worse than fiction; it was a fantasy. And he knew it, but he 
delivered it with a straight face. I give him a lot of credit for that. 
But to come to the floor and attempt to hang this around the 
Republicans for failing to lead on transportation is laughable. Ours is 
the party of Teddy Roosevelt and the Panama Canal, Abraham Lincoln and 
the transcontinental railroad, Dwight Eisenhower and the interstate 
highway system. Ronald Reagan and George Bush all supported working 
wages to build our infrastructure.

                              {time}  1550

  We will not take a back seat, nor will we be criticized by a party 
that completely failed in its mandate given to them in the election of 
2008 to do a single thing, to employ people in the transportation 
sector and to move this country forward.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

           United States Interagency Council on Homelessness

                           operating expenses

       For necessary expenses (including payment of salaries, 
     authorized travel, hire of passenger motor vehicles, the 
     rental of conference rooms, and the employment of experts and 
     consultants under section 3109 of title 5, United States 
     Code) of the United States Interagency Council on 
     Homelessness in carrying out the functions pursuant to title 
     II of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, as amended, 
     $3,300,000.

                                TITLE IV

                      GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT

       Sec. 401.  Such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 
     2013 pay raises for programs funded in this Act shall be 
     absorbed within the levels appropriated in this Act or 
     previous appropriations Acts.
       Sec. 402.  None of the funds in this Act shall be used for 
     the planning or execution of any program to pay the expenses 
     of, or otherwise compensate, non-Federal parties intervening 
     in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act.
       Sec. 403.  None of the funds appropriated in this Act shall 
     remain available for obligation beyond the current fiscal 
     year, nor may any be transferred to other appropriations, 
     unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 404.  The expenditure of any appropriation under this 
     Act for any consulting service through procurement contract 
     pursuant to section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, 
     shall be limited to those contracts where such expenditures 
     are a matter of public record and available for public 
     inspection, except where otherwise provided under existing 
     law, or under existing Executive order issued pursuant to 
     existing law.
       Sec. 405.  Except as otherwise provided in this Act, none 
     of the funds provided in this Act, provided by previous 
     appropriations Acts to the agencies or entities funded in 
     this Act that remain available for obligation or expenditure 
     in fiscal year 2013, or provided from any accounts in the 
     Treasury derived by the collection of fees and available to 
     the agencies funded by this Act, shall be available for 
     obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds 
     that:
       (1) creates a new program;
       (2) eliminates a program, project, or activity;
       (3) increases funds or personnel for any program, project, 
     or activity for which funds have been denied or restricted by 
     the Congress;
       (4) proposes to use funds directed for a specific activity 
     by either the House or Senate Committees on Appropriations 
     for a different purpose;
       (5) augments existing programs, projects, or activities in 
     excess of $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less;
       (6) reduces existing programs, projects, or activities by 
     $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; or
       (7) creates, reorganizes, or restructures a branch, 
     division, office, bureau, board, commission, agency, 
     administration, or department different from the budget 
     justifications submitted to the Committees on Appropriations 
     or the table accompanying the explanatory statement 
     accompanying this Act, whichever is more detailed, unless 
     prior approval is received from the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations: Provided, That not later than 
     60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, each agency 
     funded by this Act shall submit a report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and of the House of 
     Representatives to establish the baseline for application of 
     reprogramming and transfer authorities for the current fiscal 
     year: Provided further, That the report shall include:
       (A) a table for each appropriation with a separate column 
     to display the President's budget request, adjustments made 
     by Congress, adjustments due to enacted rescissions, if 
     appropriate, and the fiscal year enacted level;
       (B) a delineation in the table for each appropriation both 
     by object class and program, project, and activity as 
     detailed in the budget appendix for the respective 
     appropriation; and
       (C) an identification of items of special congressional 
     interest: Provided further, That the amount appropriated or 
     limited for salaries and expenses for an agency shall be 
     reduced by $100,000 per day for each day after the required 
     date that the report has not been submitted to the Congress.
       Sec. 406.  Except as otherwise specifically provided by 
     law, not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances 
     remaining available at the end of fiscal year 2013 from 
     appropriations made available for salaries and expenses for 
     fiscal year 2013 in this Act, shall remain available through 
     September 30, 2014, for each such account for the purposes 
     authorized: Provided, That a request shall be submitted to 
     the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations for 
     approval prior to the expenditure of such funds: Provided 
     further, That these requests shall be made in compliance with 
     reprogramming guidelines under section 405 of this Act.
       Sec. 407.  All Federal agencies and departments that are 
     funded under this Act shall issue a report to the House and 
     Senate Committees on Appropriations on all sole-source 
     contracts by no later than July 30, 2013. Such report shall 
     include the contractor, the amount of the contract and the 
     rationale for using a sole-source contract.
       Sec. 408. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act 
     may be obligated or expended for any employee training that--
       (1) does not meet identified needs for knowledge, skills, 
     and abilities bearing directly upon the performance of 
     official duties;
       (2) contains elements likely to induce high levels of 
     emotional response or psychological stress in some 
     participants;
       (3) does not require prior employee notification of the 
     content and methods to be used in the training and written 
     end of course evaluation;
       (4) contains any methods or content associated with 
     religious or quasi-religious belief systems or ``new age'' 
     belief systems as defined in Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission Notice N-915.022, dated September 2, 1988; or
       (5) is offensive to, or designed to change, participants' 
     personal values or lifestyle outside the workplace.
       (b) Nothing in this section shall prohibit, restrict, or 
     otherwise preclude an agency from conducting training bearing 
     directly upon the performance of official duties.
       Sec. 409.  No funds in this Act may be used to support any 
     Federal, State, or local projects that seek to use the power 
     of eminent domain, unless eminent domain is employed only for 
     a public use: Provided, That for purposes of this section, 
     public use shall not be construed to include economic 
     development that primarily benefits private entities: 
     Provided further, That any use of funds for mass transit, 
     railroad, airport, seaport or highway projects as well as 
     utility projects which benefit or serve the general public 
     (including energy-related, communication-related, water-
     related and wastewater-related infrastructure), other 
     structures designated for use by the general public or which 
     have other common-carrier or public-utility functions that 
     serve the general public and are subject to regulation and 
     oversight by the government, and projects for the removal of 
     an immediate threat to public health and safety or 
     brownfields as defined in the Small Business Liability Relief 
     and Brownfields Revitalization Act (Public Law 107-118) shall 
     be considered a public use for purposes of eminent domain.
       Sec. 410.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality 
     of the United States Government, except pursuant to a 
     transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act 
     or any other appropriations Act.
       Sec. 411.  No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall be available to pay

[[Page 10152]]

     the salary for any person filling a position, other than a 
     temporary position, formerly held by an employee who has left 
     to enter the Armed Forces of the United States and has 
     satisfactorily completed his period of active military or 
     naval service, and has within 90 days after his release from 
     such service or from hospitalization continuing after 
     discharge for a period of not more than 1 year, made 
     application for restoration to his former position and has 
     been certified by the Office of Personnel Management as still 
     qualified to perform the duties of his former position and 
     has not been restored thereto.
       Sec. 412.  No funds appropriated pursuant to this Act may 
     be expended by an entity unless the entity agrees that in 
     expending the assistance the entity will comply with sections 
     2 through 4 of the Act of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c, 
     popularly known as the ``Buy American Act'').


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Garamendi

  Mr. GARAMENDI. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 148, line 11, after ``entity will'', insert ``ensure 
     that domestic content makes up 85 percent of all steel, iron, 
     and manufactured goods, including rolling stock, and''.

  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa reserves a point of order.
  The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, we just heard a rather strong plea from 
one of my Republican colleagues about the transportation program and 
whether Democrats and Republicans should continue to fight about who 
did what when or didn't do it.
  This amendment is something that we all ought to agree to. This 
amendment is something that both Democrats and Republicans should be 
supporting. This amendment is about American jobs--not foreign jobs, 
not about shifting our jobs overseas, but rather about bringing those 
jobs back home. This amendment is about making it in America. This 
amendment is about no longer allowing our tax money to be spent on 
foreign-made equipment but, rather, to require that our tax money be 
spent on American-made equipment so that there will be American jobs.
  This is not a Republican or a Democratic issue. This is an all-
American issue. This is about making it in America. It simply says that 
the current 60 percent requirement is insufficient and that we ought to 
have a higher requirement of 85 percent. And I will argue strongly--and 
I think correctly--that 85 percent is achievable.
  I'll give two examples: In a recent contract for the new BART trains, 
the Bay Area Rapid Transit trains, one bidder--a French company, 
Alstom--said that they could build those trains at 95 percent. A second 
bidder--foreign, Bombardier--said they would do it at 66 percent. 
Unfortunately, BART decided to go with the 66 percent because it was a 
couple of percentage points cheaper. $1 billion in American jobs were 
lost.
  Within a month after that, Los Angeles wanted to build some new 
transit cars. Siemens said they could build those transit cars at 85 
percent American content. They lost that bid to a Korean company 
because there was a couple of percentage points difference. Again, 
millions of American jobs, millions of dollars spent overseas, and 
American jobs lost.
  It's time for us to bring the jobs home. It's time for us to onshore. 
It's time for us to make it in America. And it's time for us, as 
Democrats and Republicans, to do just that. And that's what this 
amendment does.
  I suspect it will be ruled out of order. What a shame. What a shame 
that we cannot stand here on the floor, amend a bill that's going to, 
over time, spend $60 billion, and not require that that money, our tax 
money, be spent in America.
  What's wrong with making it in America? Oh, I suppose it has to do 
with some point of order. Do you think the American public really wants 
to hear a point of order? Or do they want to hear about American-made 
equipment and American jobs? No. We'll do a point of order, which I 
will appeal and probably lose. And thousands upon thousands of American 
jobs will be lost because of a point of order rather than for this 
House to stand up and say, We're going to make it in America. We're 
going to spend our tax money on American jobs, on American-made 
equipment.
  So give me your point of order, and let's see what the American 
public has to say about your point of order.
  I yield back the balance of my time
  Mr. LATHAM. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, we had a markup this morning in 
Appropriations, and I supported an amendment about American content. 
And I believe that this is probably a very, very good amendment.
  To be consistent--and I have raised points of order against some 
things that I support today, one offered by my good friend from Ohio, 
and other amendments that I would otherwise be supportive of if they 
were not breaking precedent to the rules of the House.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes 
legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 
of rule XXI.
  The rule states in pertinent part:
  ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order 
if changing existing law.''
  The amendment requires a new determination.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to speak on the point of 
order?
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. On the point of order, I thank the chairman for his 
thoughts on the issue. But for his consistency, I cannot thank him. I 
think I understand that we seem to operate on rules, unless we don't 
want to operate on those rules.
  I understand that the chairman is interested in this issue and has 
worked, as chairman of the subcommittee, to try to raise the level of 
American-made, and I thank him for that.
  We have an opportunity here to really take this issue up and put 
aside the rules and do what's good for America. This is about billions 
and billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of jobs. We ought to 
put it aside, put aside the consistency and deal with American jobs.
  I don't know what my opportunity will be to overrule the point of 
order. But I'm going to do everything I possibly can to see that we 
have American-made jobs and that we spend our tax money on American-
made equipment.
  I do understand the chairman's position and the bind that he's in. 
But sometimes consistency doesn't lead to the right result.

                              {time}  1600

  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  As recorded in Deschler's Precedents, volume 8, chapter 26, section 
3, language in an appropriation bill that is subject to a point of 
order under clause 2 of rule XXI but is permitted to remain, such as by 
waiver in House Resolution 697, may be modified by germane amendment 
that does not contain additional legislation.
  Section 412 of the bill constitutes legislation in violation of 
clause 2 of rule XXI that has been permitted to remain. The amendment 
by the gentleman from California would expand section 412 by imposing 
on entities by the bill an additional restriction on expenditure of 
funds in the bill, to wit: that 85 percent of a certain class of goods 
be procured domestically. That expansion constitutes additional 
legislation.
  The point of order is sustained.
  Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. I have an amendment that would prohibit funds

[[Page 10153]]

from being used to enforce congressionally mandated Temporary Flight 
Restrictions, or TFRs, for sports stadiums. These permanent TFRs, to be 
quite honest with you, are impractical, they're ineffective, and they 
create serious problems for hundreds of thousands of pilots, countless 
air shows, aerial surveyors, and a whole lot of other small businesses 
and individuals that utilize aviation.
  In 2004, Congress mandated the FAA to impose permanent TFRs in the 
airspace above and around sports stadiums with a seating capacity 
greater than 30,000. Think of these as restricted airspace bubbles that 
basically extend 3,000 feet high and they have a 3\1/2\ mile-wide 
radius that is in effect 1 hour prior to the event to 1 hour just after 
the event. And in any given year, there are roughly 3,000 of these 
stadium TFRs.
  Now, proponents of these claim that they bolster national security 
and mitigate an aerial threat. I can't help but absolutely laugh at 
that assertion. First, there's absolutely no realtime mechanism or 
capability to prevent an aerial attack originating within or outside 
the 3\1/2\ miles at 3,000 feet above ground level, and the logic would 
apply even if the restrictions were expanded exponentially. In fact, if 
you take a jet traveling at 500 miles an hour, it's just going to take 
a few seconds to penetrate that TFR to reach that stadium. It's also 
very convenient that the proponents of these TFRs are exempt from the 
restrictions that they successfully sought after.
  The bottom line is the FAA doesn't want or need these congressionally 
mandated TFRs. In fact, the FAA publicly stated they would not issue 
these TFRs absent the congressional mandate, but, rather, they would 
use their existing authority to coordinate with local law enforcement 
to issue them on a case-by-case basis. That's what we're trying to get 
at.
  Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to reiterate these stadium TFRs do 
nothing to improve security. And I would yield time to anybody out 
there, any Member, that would like to try and make the argument while 
keeping a straight face that they do improve security.
  These TFRs are about banner towers, which is to prevent what sports 
groups call ``guerilla advertisers,'' from operating within the 
airspace around these stadiums. That's all this is about. And what was 
Congress's solution? We simply gave complete control of the airspace to 
sports teams and exempted them from their own restrictions. And I think 
that's wrong.
  In light of the fact that I would like to solve this issue eventually 
instead of trying to ram an issue through or try to push something 
through that could fail or be passed, I'd rather come up with a good 
piece of legislation that actually solves the problem and addresses 
some of the concerns. That's basically what I was trying to do.
  Mr. LATHAM. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. LATHAM. I thank the gentleman for his comments today. He has been 
a tremendous advocate for this position. We have talked on many 
occasions about this particular subject. He is working very hard to 
resolve the issue.
  I would hope that we could have some public hearings and actually get 
input to make sure that we make the right decisions, and I certainly 
would want to work with the gentleman to make sure that we do get a 
full hearing on this issue, that everything can be brought to light, 
and we're all concerned about homeland security, safety issues, all 
those things. I think the gentleman makes a very, very good point, and 
would just offer to do everything we can to work with him.
  Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. I want to thank the chairman for the comments 
and look forward to working on this. I think this is an issue that we 
can solve and an issue that we can fix ultimately for all those pilots 
out there and the folks that are concerned.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 413.  No funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available under this Act shall be made available to any 
     person or entity that has been convicted of violating the Buy 
     American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c).
       Sec. 414.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used for first-class airline accommodations in 
     contravention of sections 301-10.122 and 301-10.123 of title 
     41, Code of Federal Regulations.
       Sec. 415.  None of the funds made available under this Act 
     or any prior Act may be provided to the Association of 
     Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), or any of its 
     affiliates, subsidiaries, or allied organizations.
       Sec. 416.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of 
     understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant 
     to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to any corporation 
     that was convicted (or had an officer or agent of such 
     corporation acting on behalf of the corporation convicted) of 
     a felony criminal violation under any Federal law within the 
     preceding 24 months, where the awarding agency is aware of 
     the conviction, unless the agency has considered suspension 
     or debarment of the corporation, or such officer or agent, 
     and made a determination that this further action is not 
     necessary to protect the interests of the Government.
       Sec. 417.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of 
     understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant 
     to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation 
     that any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, 
     for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been 
     exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a 
     timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority 
     responsible for collecting the tax liability, where the 
     awarding agency is aware of the unpaid tax liability, unless 
     the agency has considered suspension or debarment of the 
     corporation and made a determination that this further action 
     is not necessary to protect the interests of the Government.

                       SPENDING REDUCTION ACCOUNT

       Sec. 418.  The amount by which the applicable allocation of 
     new budget authority made by the Committee on Appropriations 
     of the House of Representatives under section 302(b) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 exceeds the amount of 
     proposed new budget authority is $0.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were 
postponed, in the following order:
  Sixth amendment by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
  Seventh amendment by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
  Eighth amendment by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
  Ninth amendment by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
  Tenth amendment by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
  Eleventh amendment by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
  Twelfth amendment by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
  Thirteenth amendment by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
  Fourteenth amendment by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
  An amendment by Mr. Chaffetz of Utah.
  Second amendment by Mr. McClintock of California.
  Amendment No. 11 by Mr. McClintock of California.
  An amendment by Mr. Flake of Arizona.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the sixth amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Broun) 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 168, 
noes 256, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 424]

                               AYES--168

     Adams
     Akin
     Amash
     Bachmann
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Bilbray

[[Page 10154]]


     Bilirakis
     Black
     Blackburn
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Culberson
     Denham
     DesJarlais
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--256

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amodei
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman (CO)
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Noem
     Nunes
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     West
     Wilson (FL)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Engel
     Gohmert
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     Stivers
     Thompson (MS)

                              {time}  1636

  Ms. SEWELL, Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California, Mr. PERLMUTTER, Mrs. 
NAPOLITANO, Messrs. CARTER, CRENSHAW, COFFMAN of Colorado, Mrs. BONO 
MACK, and Messrs. ELLISON and HUNTER changed their vote from ``aye'' to 
``no.''
  Messrs. TERRY and ISSA changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the seventh amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Broun) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 178, 
noes 240, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 425]

                               AYES--178

     Adams
     Akin
     Amash
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Conaway
     Culberson
     Denham
     DesJarlais
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--240

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Eshoo
     Farr

[[Page 10155]]


     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gonzalez
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nunes
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Andrews
     Bass (CA)
     Cantor
     Engel
     Gohmert
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     Pence
     Schrader
     Stivers
     Sullivan
     Thompson (MS)

                              {time}  1640

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


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the eighth amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Broun) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 174, 
noes 248, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 426]

                               AYES--174

     Adams
     Akin
     Amash
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Conaway
     Culberson
     Denham
     DesJarlais
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--248

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nunes
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stark
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Andrews
     Conyers
     Gohmert
     Hall
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     Stivers
     Thompson (MS)

                              {time}  1644

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


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the ninth amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Broun) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 193, 
noes 229, not voting 10, as follows:

[[Page 10156]]



                             [Roll No. 427]

                               AYES--193

     Adams
     Akin
     Amash
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Culberson
     DeFazio
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--229

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKeon
     McKinley
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nunes
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pelosi
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Burton (IN)
     Gohmert
     Hall
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     Schmidt
     Stivers
     Thompson (MS)

                              {time}  1648

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


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the tenth amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Broun) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 178, 
noes 247, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 428]

                               AYES--178

     Adams
     Akin
     Amash
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Culberson
     Denham
     DesJarlais
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--247

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman (CO)
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gerlach

[[Page 10157]]


     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nunes
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Gohmert
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     Stivers
     Thompson (MS)

                              {time}  1652

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


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the eleventh amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Broun) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 169, 
noes 250, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 429]

                               AYES--169

     Adams
     Akin
     Amash
     Amodei
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Culberson
     Denham
     DesJarlais
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latta
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walberg
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--250

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman (CO)
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibson
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nunes
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watt
     Waxman
     Webster
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Bass (CA)
     Conyers
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     Meeks
     Schakowsky
     Stivers
     Thompson (MS)
     Waters

                              {time}  1655

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 429, had I been present, I 
would have voted ``no.''


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the twelfth amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Broun) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.

[[Page 10158]]

  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 160, 
noes 264, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 430]

                               AYES--160

     Adams
     Akin
     Amash
     Bachmann
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Bilbray
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Conaway
     Culberson
     Denham
     DesJarlais
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latta
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walsh (IL)
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--264

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amodei
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Bucshon
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman (CO)
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nunes
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pelosi
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Webster
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Gohmert
     Harris
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     Stivers
     Thompson (MS)

                              {time}  1658

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


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the thirteenth amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Broun) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 172, 
noes 249, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 431]

                               AYES--172

     Adams
     Amash
     Amodei
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Conaway
     Culberson
     Denham
     DesJarlais
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Hartzler
     Heck
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--249

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carter
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Forbes

[[Page 10159]]


     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Harper
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nunes
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     West
     Wilson (FL)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Akin
     Carson (IN)
     DeFazio
     Gohmert
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     McCarthy (NY)
     Stivers
     Thompson (MS)

                              {time}  1702

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


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the fourteenth amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Broun) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 172, 
noes 250, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 432]

                               AYES--172

     Adams
     Akin
     Amash
     Amodei
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Benishek
     Bilbray
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Culberson
     Denham
     DesJarlais
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latta
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--250

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fortenberry
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nunes
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Webster
     Welch
     West
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Bilirakis
     Frank (MA)
     Gohmert
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     Stivers
     Thompson (MS)

                              {time}  1705

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


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Chaffetz

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Utah (Mr. 
Chaffetz) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 157, 
noes 267, not voting 8, as follows:

[[Page 10160]]



                             [Roll No. 433]

                               AYES--157

     Adams
     Akin
     Amash
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Bilbray
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Conaway
     Culberson
     Denham
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roby
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--267

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Noem
     Nugent
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     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
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     West
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Frank (MA)
     Gohmert
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     Stivers
     Thompson (MS)

                              {time}  1710

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


                  Amendment Offered by Mr. McClintock

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the second amendment offered by the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McClintock) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 80, 
noes 342, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 434]

                                AYES--80

     Akin
     Amash
     Bachmann
     Bartlett
     Black
     Blackburn
     Broun (GA)
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Conaway
     Culberson
     Denham
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Harris
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hunter
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Landry
     Long
     Lummis
     Manzullo
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     Mulvaney
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Paul
     Pence
     Petri
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Royce
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Woodall
     Yoder

                               NOES--342

     Ackerman
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amodei
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brooks
     Brown (FL)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canseco
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman (CO)
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     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
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gardner
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hahn
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hartzler
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hultgren
     Hurt
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Kucinich
     Lance
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack

[[Page 10161]]


     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Marchant
     Marino
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCotter
     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)
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Noem
     Nugent
     Olver
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Reyes
     Ribble
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     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
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     West
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Frank (MA)
     Gohmert
     Gutierrez
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     Miller (FL)
     Stivers
     Thompson (MS)

                              {time}  1713

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 434, had I been 
present, I would have voted ``aye.''


               Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. McClintock

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
(Mr. McClintock) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 123, 
noes 300, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 435]

                               AYES--123

     Adams
     Akin
     Amash
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Conaway
     Culberson
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Emerson
     Fincher
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Hall
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Long
     Lummis
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Paul
     Pence
     Petri
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--300

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Bucshon
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canseco
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellmers
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Marino
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Noem
     Nugent
     Olver
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     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
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stark
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     West
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Bass (CA)
     Frank (MA)
     Gohmert
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     Stivers
     Thompson (MS)

                              {time}  1717

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


                     Amendment 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 Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 178, 
noes 242, not voting 12, as follows:

[[Page 10162]]



                             [Roll No. 436]

                               AYES--178

     Adams
     Akin
     Amash
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Benishek
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Culberson
     Denham
     DesJarlais
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Hochul
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latta
     Lipinski
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--242

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gerlach
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rivera
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     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
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Berg
     Bucshon
     Frank (MA)
     Gohmert
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lewis (CA)
     Mack
     Paul
     Rehberg
     Stivers
     Thompson (MS)

                              {time}  1720

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Woodall) having assumed the chair, Mr. Bass of New Hampshire, 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. 5972) making appropriations for the Departments of 
Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013, and for other purposes, 
had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________