[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 15199-15209]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN 
               CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION, 2014

  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 371, I call 
up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 75) making continuing appropriations 
for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and 
Children for fiscal year 2014, and for other purposes, and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 371, the joint 
resolution is considered read.
  The text of the joint resolution is as follows:

                              H.J. Res. 75

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are hereby appropriated, out of any money in 
     the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, and out of 
     applicable corporate or other revenues, receipts, and funds, 
     for the Department of Agriculture for fiscal year 2014, and 
     for other purposes, namely:
       Sec. 101. (a) Such amounts as may be necessary, at a rate 
     for operations as provided in the Agriculture, Rural 
     Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 2013 (division A of Public Law 
     113-6) and under the authority and conditions provided in 
     such Act, for continuing projects or activities (including 
     the costs of direct loans and loan guarantees) that are not 
     otherwise specifically provided for in this joint resolution, 
     that were conducted in fiscal year 2013, and for which 
     appropriations, funds, or other authority were made available 
     by such Act under the heading ``Department of Agriculture--
     Domestic Food Programs--Special Supplemental Nutrition 
     Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)''.
       (b) The rate for operations provided by subsection (a) for 
     each account shall be calculated to reflect the full amount 
     of any reduction required in fiscal year 2013 pursuant to--
       (1) any provision of division G of the Consolidated and 
     Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (Public Law 113-
     6), including section 3004; and
       (2) the Presidential sequestration order dated March 1, 
     2013, except as attributable to budget authority made 
     available by the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013 
     (Public Law 113-2).
       Sec. 102.  Appropriations made by section 101 shall be 
     available to the extent and in the manner that would be 
     provided by the pertinent appropriations Act.
       Sec. 103.  Unless otherwise provided for in this joint 
     resolution or in the applicable appropriations Act for fiscal 
     year 2014, appropriations and funds made available and 
     authority granted pursuant to this joint resolution shall be 
     available until whichever of the following first occurs: (1) 
     the enactment into law of an appropriation for any project or 
     activity provided for in this joint resolution; (2) the 
     enactment into law of the applicable appropriations Act for 
     fiscal year 2014 without any provision for such project or 
     activity; or (3) December 15, 2013.
       Sec. 104.  Expenditures made pursuant to this joint 
     resolution shall be charged to the applicable appropriation, 
     fund, or authorization whenever a bill in which such 
     applicable appropriation, fund, or authorization is contained 
     is enacted into law.
       Sec. 105.  This joint resolution shall be implemented so 
     that only the most limited funding action of that permitted 
     in the joint resolution shall be taken in order to provide 
     for continuation of projects and activities.
       Sec. 106.  Amounts made available under section 101 for 
     civilian personnel compensation and benefits in each 
     department and agency may be apportioned up to the rate for 
     operations necessary to avoid furloughs within such 
     department or agency, consistent with the applicable 
     appropriations Act for fiscal year 2013, except that such 
     authority provided under this section shall not be used until 
     after the department or agency has taken all necessary 
     actions to reduce or defer non-personnel-related 
     administrative expenses.
       Sec. 107.  It is the sense of the Congress that this joint 
     resolution may also be referred to as the ``Nutrition 
     Assistance for Low-Income Women and Children Act''.
        This joint resolution may be cited as the ``Special 
     Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and 
     Children Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2014''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The joint resolution shall be debatable for 
40 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations.
  The gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt) and the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Farr) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama.


                             General Leave

  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include any extraneous material on H.J. Res. 75, and that I may 
include tabular material on the same.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Alabama?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise this afternoon in support of H.J. Res. 75, 
which would continue funding for the Special Supplemental Nutrition 
Program for Women, Infants, and Children, or commonly known as the WIC 
program.
  The fiscal year 2013 Agriculture appropriations bill provided 
sufficient funding, even after sequestration, totaling $6.5 billion, to 
ensure that all participants receive both nutritious food and the 
nutrition services that are necessary for their health and their well-
being.
  Before the United States Department of Agriculture completely shut 
down its Web site, information could be found on their Web site stating 
that short-term funding was available for WIC through the contingency 
reserve fund, carryover funds, and other available resources.
  While some States have indicated they have sufficient funds to at 
least work several more weeks, other States are not so fortunate. Many 
of us have seen headlines, perhaps received phone calls into our 
offices from constituents who have reported that their appointment at 
their local WIC clinic has been canceled or that clinics are being 
closed. Numerous times we have heard our colleagues across the aisle 
mention that WIC cannot continue without an appropriation for fiscal 
year 2014, and this will leave millions of women, infants, and children 
without proper nutrition.
  Now is a chance, Madam Speaker, for my colleagues to join us in 
keeping this important program fully functioning and operational. By 
passing the resolution that we have on the floor this afternoon, we 
will help 8.7 million low-income women, infants, and children who are 
nutritionally at risk to continue to receive the nutrition they need. 
This resolution will keep WIC clinics across the Nation open. No more 
appointments will have to be canceled.
  I believe that every Member of this House of Representatives believes 
that WIC participants need and should get the participation they need, 
and I would ask my colleagues to support this resolution, that we 
supply adequate nutrition for women, infants, and children as we move 
forward.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise in opposition to this piecemeal approach of funding our 
government. I am the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Agriculture, 
Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies.
  The bill dealing with all of those issues is on the House floor. We 
did our job, as the chairman so eloquently spoke about. The committee 
fulfilled its commitment to review the whole budget. We passed H.R. 
2410 out of committee and even adopted a rule to bring

[[Page 15200]]

it to the floor in June, but we didn't move the bill because the timing 
with the now-expired farm bill wanted to hold everything off.
  I'm just wondering, Madam Speaker, when is the House going to 
announce its conferees on the farm bill? The Senate has done it not 
once, but twice. If we had a conference, we could be bringing up the 
full bill and not just this piecemeal--let's take a little bit of this 
that we like and that that we like and do what I call this menu of 
choice, which, if you're not on that menu, everything is out.
  Nobody can challenge my support on WIC. I mean, I am a returning 
Peace Corps volunteer. If there's anybody that got training on the need 
for feeding women, infants, and children in this Congress, it's my 
experience in living in a poor barrio in South America.
  But this does nothing for the 48 million people who currently need 
food stamps, what we call the SNAP program. This does nothing for the 
rest of the kids and the family who may be hungry, going to school and 
can't get access to school lunch. This does nothing to open the door 
for Federal workers who help people in rural agriculture to produce the 
food. This bill does nothing to provide a remedy for rural areas like 
Colorado and California, who were just ravaged by floods and fires, to 
do the post-op cleanup and restoration to prevent floods from coming 
this winter. This does nothing for the farm service agency loan 
borrowers to help those that are needing loans to put their livestock 
or their grain or other commodities into the program that is going to 
be feeding the women, infants, and children. So just one little piece 
that they carve out and suggest that: Oh, Congress, do this.
  I want you all to listen to this. Since I've been here since 1993, 
we've passed 111 CRs. Not one of them had this battle, had this 
conditionality, had this shutdown of government--none of them. Why now? 
What's different? You want to take away the President's health care 
bill. That was enacted 3\1/2\ years ago. You passed a CR the year it 
was adopted. You passed a CR after it was adopted. You passed a CR 
after that. What is it?
  Let's stop being so mean and so broken about the ability to keep our 
government open.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the chairman of the 
full Committee on Appropriations, Chairman Rogers.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for 
yielding me this time.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in full support of H.J. Res. 75. This bill 
ensures that the nearly 8.7 million women, infants, and children who 
rely on the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, 
and Children will continue to receive critical nutrition assistance 
without interruption.

                              {time}  1645

  This bill provides funding for WIC at the fiscal year 2013 post-
sequester rate of $6.5 billion until December 15, or until we can enact 
full-year appropriations legislation. That is the ultimate goal of this 
bill, Madam Speaker, to move us closer to ending this government 
shutdown by providing regular appropriations for all government 
programs. To achieve that, we've got to have an adult conversation 
about what this might entail and how we can get there.
  And I've got a great suggestion, Madam Speaker. Monday night, the 
House passed an amendment to the CR over to the Senate and asked for a 
conference with the Senate. Then the Speaker named House conferees.
  Now the normal traditions of this body, as all of us know, is that 
when the House and the Senate pass differing versions of the same bill, 
how do we resolve the difference? Well, we appoint conferees. We have 
some House Members and some Senate Members that are selected by their 
respective leaders. And they go up, and they argue and debate and 
amend. And they come up with an agreement that they then bring back to 
each body for approval, and that becomes the law.
  That procedure is in play right now. I mean, the House has appointed 
conferees. We've got a table arranged downstairs for the Senators to 
join us in resolving the shutdown. And what does the Senate do? What do 
we hear from the Senate? A big loud snore, that they're not willing to 
come to the table and talk. Just talk. We may not be able to agree. But 
we can talk and try to work it out for the American people.
  And as we work this out, we've got to be sure that our most 
vulnerable citizens don't fall victim to politics. This bill will take 
care of those who count on WIC to meet their nutritional needs--our 
women, our infants, our children. Because this language was essentially 
included in my original initial clean continuing resolution, I endorse 
it today. This House, I think, should support it today.
  But our colleagues in the Senate should also support it. This would 
be the seventh bill we've sent them to help reopen the Federal 
Government in the last 3 days. The seventh bill. We've heard nothing 
from them. Altogether, these bills provide nearly a third of the 
discretionary funding that's needed to operate the entire Federal 
Government. So in the last 3 days, we've passed bills to fund a third 
of the government.
  The Senate keeps demanding from us, and yet they won't vote on these 
bills that would be a part of that clean CR. The math just doesn't add 
up, Madam Speaker.
  Though this piecemeal funding approach is not my preferred mechanism 
to move forward, it does move us incrementally forward. I would rather 
we fund the government with regular appropriations bills, so-called 
regular order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. I yield the chairman an additional 1 minute.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. This House passed four of those regular bills 
this year. Unfortunately, our colleagues on the other side of the 
Capitol passed none. For all of their talk on the other side of the 
Capitol about returning to regular order, it seems the Senate has made 
very little action to achieve that goal. We're in this mess today in 
part because of that. But passing this bill will help us get out of it.
  So I urge my colleagues to support an end to this shutdown with this 
WIC program, support this bill, and pass it today.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from New York, Mrs. Nita Lowey, the ranking member of the House 
Appropriations Committee.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the 
reckless Republican shutdown.
  WIC services are vital to new mothers and their children, and 
Democrats have long been strong supporters. In fact, it is puzzling to 
me that Republicans today claim to be so supportive of WIC when, just 4 
months ago, they proposed to deprive over 200,000 women and infants WIC 
benefits.
  Funding one budget item at a time, even one as important as the WIC 
program, does nothing to help children get immunizations or help 
working families find child care. Republicans are just disconnected 
from reality.
  This bill is nothing more than a Republican ploy. Madam Speaker, as 
my friends know very well, we could end the Republican shutdown today 
if the majority would only allow a vote on the Senate-passed bill, 
which includes the funding levels that Republicans wrote, the funding 
levels of the Republicans. That was the negotiation. That was the 
discussion. The Democrats agreed to the Republican funding levels. And 
that would be signed by the President.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. FARR. I yield the gentlewoman from New York an additional 20 
seconds.
  Mrs. LOWEY. If you really care about the mothers and infants who 
benefit from this program, you should vote ``no'' on this bill and 
demand that the Republican leadership allow the House to vote on the 
Senate bill to immediately end this reckless Republican shutdown.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Valadao),

[[Page 15201]]

one of the members of our Subcommittee on Agriculture Appropriations.
  Mr. VALADAO. Madam Speaker, today I rise in support of House Joint 
Resolution 75, the Nutrition Assistance for Low-Income Women and 
Children Act.
  This bill would continue funding until December for the Special 
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, 
commonly referred to as WIC. Across the country, over 8.9 million moms 
and kids under the age of 5 are living near or below the poverty line 
and depend on supplemental vouchers by the WIC program to purchase 
healthy food.
  The WIC program is especially important to my constituents in the 
Central Valley of California. My district suffers from 14 percent 
unemployment. That's almost double the national average. Some regions 
of my district are suffering from more than 30 percent unemployment, 
making it nearly impossible for many mothers to find work, despite 
their best efforts, so that they may provide for their families.
  Congress must put aside partisan politics and come together, working 
across party lines to pass this critical legislation so that mothers in 
California's Central Valley and across the entire country can continue 
to feed their children.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the congressman 
from California (Mr. George Miller), ranking member of the Education & 
the Workforce Committee.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I thank the gentleman.
  Madam Speaker, Congress should reopen the Federal Government in its 
entirety and not continue to hold the Federal Government and the 
American people hostage. The fact is, by closing the Federal 
Government, Republicans in the House are jeopardizing critical services 
for mothers and their children. They should have realized this when 
they shut down the entire Federal Government.
  It is not enough just to restore one set of services for women, 
infants, and children, like the WIC program, but not to fund food 
stamps or income assistance or housing vouchers, for example, which the 
same mothers and children rely on to hold their families together. This 
is literally taking food out of the mouths of children.
  Republicans are taking a lot of heat for closing down the government, 
so they want to open up one part or another to relieve the pressure 
under them. But this doesn't help these families. This doesn't help 
these families because they're cutting other resources and services to 
these families.
  Republicans should allow the House to vote on a bill to open up the 
whole Federal Government, and then we can sit down and talk about what 
the budget will look like for the rest of the year.
  They should stop trying to kill the new health care law that will 
help some of these very same families that depend upon WIC. And they 
should stop picking winners and losers based upon the political 
realities out there that the American public is getting angrier and 
angrier at how they're treating the recipients of Federal assistance in 
this country today.
  I urge people to vote against this legislation.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller), the chair of the House 
Administration Committee.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I certainly thank my 
colleague for yielding the time.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in very, very strong support of the 
Nutrition Assistance for Low-Income Women and Children Act.
  You know, much of the controversy that's been surrounding this 
government shutdown has really been focused on ObamaCare. We keep 
talking about ObamaCare, et cetera. But this bill that we are 
considering right now has absolutely nothing to do with ObamaCare. 
Nothing. The only thing at issue in this bill is will we help provide 
supplemental nutrition programs for American mothers, their babies, and 
their children, period. That is the issue before us today.
  Now I know that many of my friends on the other side, Madam Speaker, 
are going to say that they oppose this legislation because they need to 
have an entire government funding bill or nothing at all. And I would 
just note, when they say that each and every time, they then accuse us 
of being absolutists. But they will not accept anything, except an 
entire government funding bill. I also know that many on the other side 
of the aisle will look to their hearts and will support this bill. And 
we will pass this bill with very strong bipartisan support.
  I certainly hope that the leaders in the Senate will look as well at 
the very broad bipartisan support that we will have for this bill and 
that they will take it to heart as well and take it up.
  Madam Speaker, more than half the babies that are born in my great 
State of Michigan are enrolled in the WIC program, and currently, the 
State of Michigan is only able to sustain this program for the next few 
weeks.
  I would ask my colleagues, again, to look to your heart, look to your 
heart. We're not talking about defunding ObamaCare or anything like 
that. We are talking about women and their children and their babies. I 
would hope that we can join together today across the aisle, pass this 
bill, and see to it that mothers and infants and children in Michigan 
and all across America get the support that they need.
  Mr. FARR. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. 
DeLauro), the former ranking member of the Ag Appropriations Committee 
and now the ranking member of the Health and Human Services 
Subcommittee.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this cruel 
political game the majority is playing this afternoon. Since they took 
office, this Republican majority has repeatedly tried to slash the 
women, infants, and children feeding program--2011, 2012, 2013.
  I sit on the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee. This past 
summer, on a party-line vote, the Republican members on the committee 
who have just gotten up to speak to you voted to slash the WIC program 
and take nutritious food from over 200,000 pregnant mothers and 
infants. I introduced an amendment to restore this critical funding, 
and the Republican majority shut it down.
  When it mattered, when we all voted, the Republican majority cut this 
funding. And now they're trying to use low-income families for a 
political message. This is disingenuous, this is duplicitous, and it is 
shameful.
  Last month, on a party-line vote, they took food stamps from over 4 
million low-income families, seniors, veterans, and children.

                              {time}  1700

  Are we meant to believe that today they have come to Jesus?
  Or is it just politics?
  I have strongly supported the Women, Infants and Children feeding 
program my entire career; and when I served as chair of the Ag 
Appropriations Subcommittee, the Democrats funded WIC at record levels, 
expanded it as the need arose during a recession.
  We are talking about people's lives. This majority chose to shut the 
government down, and families all across this country are being 
affected. Furloughed workers, small businesses, and families cannot get 
loans. Biomedical and scientific research has stopped.
  Food safety, food banks, flu tracking, Federal economic reports, 
immunizations--they have been stopped because of what the Republican 
majority is doing here.
  The gamesmanship is heartless; it's offensive. The government has 
been shut down now for 4 days.
  Do not use hungry families as political pawns. It's time to stop 
these bills, fund the government, reopen it. And I urge my colleagues 
to oppose this resolution.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will remind all persons in the 
gallery that they are here as guests of the House and that any 
manifestation of approval or disapproval of proceedings is in violation 
of the rules of the House.

[[Page 15202]]


  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy).
  Mr. DUFFY. Madam Speaker, I've got to tell you, this is remarkable. I 
hear a passionate speech from the gentlelady from Connecticut, and I 
hear my friends across the aisle applauding?
  We're here to provide funding for 9 million women and children 
because we're here to provide funding for people who are in need of 
help and aid. And when we're here to do the work of the people, that 
you applaud and say, no, I don't want that money to go to them? That's 
wrong.
  We may not agree on a lot of things, but there are things that we 
agree on, and this is one of them. And to applaud and say that we don't 
want to provide this funding for women and children?
  I have six kids of my own. There are people in need in my community. 
And for my friends to say no to that and applaud a speech saying do not 
vote to help our women and children in America, that's wrong.
  Listen, we have a shutdown right now. Why?
  Everyone in this Chamber is in ObamaCare. In America, we are in 
ObamaCare. All we've asked for is that Barack Obama and the 
administration join America and this institution in ObamaCare. That's 
what we've asked for.
  We know that Big Business and the lobbyists came to Washington, D.C., 
and they said, give us a 1-year exemption from the tax. Give us an 
exemption. And Mr. President, he said, okay, Big Business, I'll give it 
to you.
  All we've said is, Mr. President, treat the individuals in America 
the same way you're treating Big Business--equality, fairness. If it's 
good for the American people, if it's good for this institution, it is 
good for Mr. Carney and President Barack Obama and their 
administration.
  Let's all join this together. Let's hold hands. Let's all join 
ObamaCare, but let's not treat one group of people differently than the 
rest of us.
  Join us, Mr. President.
  Let's open up this government. Let's bring the President in, and 
let's treat the individuals the same as the American people.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks 
to the Chair.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, we've passed 111 CRs without any of this 
rancor. There are no excuses. They have all been clean.
  I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-
Allard), a member of the Appropriations Committee.
  Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to yet another 
disingenuous legislative charade by my Republican colleagues to appear 
as if they are doing something about their unnecessary government 
shutdown.
  The fact is, Republicans can open the government today by bringing a 
clean continuing resolution to the floor. Instead, Republicans are 
targeting the WIC program to try and fool the American people into 
believing they are concerned about the painful effects of their 
government shutdown.
  The National WIC Association sees through this charade and is urging 
Members of Congress to oppose the bill, calling it ``a cynical ploy to 
use low-income, nutritionally at-risk mothers, and young children as 
political pawns for political ends.''
  The NWA also stated it has sufficient operating funds through October 
and ``will not tolerate efforts to leverage the nutritional health and 
well-being of pregnant and breastfeeding mothers, their babies and 
young children to satisfy the political ends or strategies of 
policymakers.''
  I could not agree more. I urge my colleagues to heed their words and 
vote ``no'' on this bill.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Cotton).
  Mr. COTTON. I want to thank the gentleman from Alabama for the time.
  Madam Speaker, yesterday, I introduced legislation that would ensure 
the Women, Infants and Children nutrition program remains funded during 
a government shutdown. Today, I'm very grateful to my colleagues for 
swift action to fund this important program.
  In Arkansas, WIC benefits 42,000 kids, 24,000 infants, and 2,000 
moms. Fortunately, the Arkansas Department of Health reached an 
agreement earlier this week with the U.S. Department of Agriculture to 
fund the WIC program, though only on a week-to-week basis.
  Moms and kids shouldn't suffer because Senate Democrats have shut 
down the government to protect their special perks and political 
allies, because that is what has happened here, Madam Speaker.
  The House of Representatives, earlier this week, passed a continuing 
resolution that would fund the government, to include funding, in part, 
for ObamaCare; and we asked that the Senate Democrats only accept two 
simple principles: that the White House and Congress follow the same 
ObamaCare rules as the rest of America and that if Barack Obama is 
going to give big businesses a 1-year break from ObamaCare, then 
families and workers should get the same 1-year break.
  But Senate Democrats refused to fund the government with those simple 
terms, the terms that Congress should follow the laws they impose on 
the American people, and that workers and family should get the same 
breaks as businesses.
  Now, I know there's many important pieces of legislation in front of 
the Senate today. For instance, they earlier passed a resolution 
calling next week National Chess Week. Now, that's obviously an urgent 
matter for this country. But women and kids in need shouldn't be 
political pawns in the Senate's game.
  So I say to the Senate, let's put aside partisanship and pass this 
legislation for the kids, just as we did earlier this week for the 
troops.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Berkley, California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE of California. Madam Speaker, first I rise in strong 
opposition to this bill, but I just have to say what nerve the 
Republicans have to bring this bill to the floor.
  As a member of the Appropriations Committee, I have witnessed 
Republicans vote over and over again to cut funding for the Women, 
Infants and Children's program. In the past year alone, they have cut 
$500 million, which cuts, in my district alone, 21,000 participants. 
But let me tell you, they have refused in committee to listen, and they 
have insisted on these massive cuts.
  Now, today, they are pretending, pretending that they care about the 
WIC program with this cynical ploy. It is simply outrageous to play 
politics with pregnant women and their children. What nerve.
  Republicans are now trying to pretend that they want to reopen 
government that they shut down, using our most vulnerable as pawns. It 
is hard to believe what I'm hearing today from Republicans about their 
support for nutrition assistance for women and children, when, in the 
Appropriations Committee, they say and they vote just the opposite.
  How hypocritical can they get?
  Americans are not fooled. They want the government, the entire 
government, open.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. FARR. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.
  Ms. LEE of California. They want us to shut down the shutdown that 
the Tea Party extremists shamefully created. We can reopen the 
government today, right now, on a bipartisan basis, if Republicans 
would allow a vote on the bill that would reopen the government.
  So I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this shameful bill and 
insist on a vote to open the entire government up. The American people 
deserve that.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), a great Rules Committee member.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, there are nearly 50 million people who 
are hungry in this country. Seventeen

[[Page 15203]]

million of them are children, and because we are still emerging from 
this difficult economy, hunger is not getting better in America. The 
only reason why people aren't starving is because of the essential 
safety net programs that we have put in place.
  For months and months and months and months, we have seen the 
Republicans in this House try to gut the SNAP program, try to slash 
funding for WIC, and for school lunches and for Meals on Wheels. And 
now, today, we're supposed to believe that they are champions for 
hungry kids? Today they want us to believe that they care about poor 
people?
  Please. This charade is an insult to the intelligence of the American 
people. It is a cynical ploy that won't feed a single pregnant mother 
or won't provide formula to a single needy infant. It's going nowhere. 
It is a stunt. It's legislating by press release, and it's shameful.
  We should pass a clean CR and reject this woefully inadequate bill 
and try to end hunger in America. Do not treat poor women and children 
as political pawns. It is not right, and you know it is not right.
  We have an obligation to our most vulnerable neighbors. This fails 
that test, and it fails that test badly.
  Pass a clean CR. Do your job. This is cynical.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished doctor from Seattle, Washington (Mr. McDermott) of the 
Ways and Means Committee.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, the Republican Caucus is standing out 
here naked, and they keep bringing fig leaves out to cover themselves. 
This is another fig leaf. It is not intended to do anything.
  At the end of the Second World War, it was determined that 43 percent 
of the people who were drafted were unfit for military service because 
of nutritional deficiencies. We have, as a public policy, from that 
point onward, fed people at every level. School lunches, Head Start, 
WIC program, SNAP--they have all been designed for making this a 
healthy country.
  One of my colleagues says, well, this has nothing to do with 
ObamaCare. It has everything to do with ObamaCare. If you don't feed 
kids the proper things, they get sick. Everybody knows that, 
apparently, except the Republican caucus, Madam Speaker.
  The fact is that what we need to do is bring out a clean resolution 
and reopen the government and feed all the people. This business about 
picking one group that's entitled to a little something and leaving 
some others out is absolutely cynical beyond belief, and it should not 
happen in this place.
  We have the ability to have the most healthy people in the world. We 
produce food, we ship it everywhere, and yet you hear from my 
colleague, Mr. McGovern, how many people are hungry in this country 
because they don't have it.
  Now, somehow you think a mother's going to sit there, she's got her 
stuff from the WIC program, right? She's got a kid that's 1 year old 
and one that's 3 and one that's 7, and she's going to say to the 3- and 
the 7-year-old, you don't get anything; but I've got a little something 
for your brother Johnny?
  What kind of situation is this? Do you understand what it's like to 
be deprived in this country?
  We can do better than this. You ought to be ashamed of yourselves for 
this cynical fig leaf.
  I urge you to vote ``no.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their 
remarks to the Chair.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Nunnelee), another member of our Subcommittee on 
Agriculture for Appropriations.
  Mr. NUNNELEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding, for 
his leadership.
  To what lengths will the Democrats go in order to protect ObamaCare? 
They've already denied pay to National Guardsmen and -women and 
Reservists, ceased lifesaving medical research. They've stopped VA 
benefits. Yet these measures have passed the House of Representatives 
with bipartisan support.
  Now, will they deny food to women, infants and children?

                              {time}  1715

  The Democratic colleagues in the House that support this measure, 
maybe they can talk to their friends and get them to support it as 
well.
  This morning, a key White House official gloated and said, ``We're 
winning.'' Madam Speaker, this is not a game. Those men and women in 
the Guard and the Reserves that have been furloughed don't think this 
is a game. Those awaiting lifesaving medical research and treatment 
don't think anyone is winning. Those veterans who are waiting in line 
because they cannot apply for the benefits that they have earned don't 
think this is a game. And the women, infants, and children that are 
awaiting food under this bill know this is not a game.
  It's time to end this charade. Let's pass this bill and then invite 
our colleagues in the Senate to come to the table and talk.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, for 111 times we've voted for CRs to feed 
everybody, not just a few.
  I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Wisconsin, 
Gwen Moore.
  Ms. MOORE. Madam Speaker, today's consideration of H.J. Res. 75 is a 
sham, a masquerade, a charade, and it features this relentless drumbeat 
and parade of pretentious concern for suckling babes and lactating 
women.
  Who do you think you're fooling? You're not fooling the National WIC 
Association. After all, they have watched the Appropriations Committee 
of this majority vote out up to half a billion dollars in cuts in the 
WIC program for these 8.6 million suckling babes.
  And what of these lactating women? I breastfed my kids; and I tell 
you that when you cut $40 billion out of food stamps, women cannot 
produce milk because they won't have fresh fruits and vegetables and 
lean meats.
  And what about the siblings of these children--school-age children 
who are the 210,000 who rely on free lunch that this bill does not 
address?
  Madam Speaker, I would hope that we would not deny 859,000 children, 
elderly, and disabled. Enough of this carnival. Let's get off this 
merry-go-round and reject this chicanery.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. At this time I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).
  Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentleman.
  Madam Speaker, the word ``hypocrisy'' has been thrown around a lot 
tonight.
  I got to Congress about 3 years ago, and my understanding was if you 
were Republican, you hated women, infants, children, veterans, and 
seniors.
  This week, we have tried to address the problems of women, infants, 
children, veterans, and seniors. For some reason, our colleagues can't 
understand that because they say, You are using these people as 
political pawns.
  And the hypocrisy of it is they no longer can stand up when they say 
that they defend these folks because they have turned their backs on 
them this week; and instead of helping them, they have turned a cold 
shoulder.
  When I was a child growing up, I used to make a list every night when 
it came close to Christmas of everything that I wanted, and I'd wake up 
Christmas morning and I never got everything I wanted, but boy, was I 
glad for everything I got.
  If you're telling me tonight that you are turning your back on the 
same people that you say only your party defends, that is the height of 
hypocrisy. It's totally uncalled for on this floor.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 4\1/2\ 
minutes remaining; the gentleman from Alabama has 2 minutes remaining.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished 
Congresswoman from Florida, Kathy Castor.
  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise on behalf of 1,500 of my

[[Page 15204]]

neighbors in Tampa who have been furloughed at MacDill Air Force Base 
due to the GOP government shutdown. They were laid off on Tuesday, and 
they will not be paid.
  I'm very proud of my community. The banks, credit unions, and the 
Tampa Bay Partnership are coming together to ensure they have bridge 
loans so the families stay afloat. But it should have not come to this. 
It is so irresponsible for the GOP to shut down the government because 
they disagree with a duly enacted law.
  I also rise on behalf of small businesses in my community. They are 
stymied from their expansion plans because the GOP has shut down the 
Small Business Administration. They want to buy equipment or get 
working capital, but the Republicans have shut them down.
  I rise on behalf of the veterans in my community that were waiting 
for disability benefits; but due to the shutdown, they're going to have 
to wait longer.
  And I rise on behalf of mothers, infants, and families all across 
this country in opposition to the Republicans' continued slashing of 
the basic sustenance that they need to keep going. This is not 
consistent with our American values.
  This dysfunction is irresponsible, and it's causing real pain. I urge 
my colleagues to set aside the political gimmicks, allow a vote on the 
bill that will get people back to work, and end this GOP shutdown 
before it causes greater pain.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Barber) for a unanimous consent request.
  Mr. BARBER. Madam Speaker, enough is enough. We must end this 
reckless government shutdown.
  I ask unanimous consent that the House bring up the Senate amendment 
to the continuing appropriations resolution, H.J. Res. 59.
  We must end this blame game. We must come together and put the 
American people first. Enough is enough.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will suspend.
  As the Chair previously advised, that request cannot be entertained 
absent appropriate clearance.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Andrews) a distinguished Member with a great deal of 
seniority and probably the most knowledgeable Member in the Congress 
about all the health care issues in this country.
  Mr. ANDREWS. I thank my friend for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, the people that we're talking about here tonight in 
this debate are people who work very hard and have a couple of 
children, usually, and need some help with their nutrition when they're 
pregnant, when their children are very young. Those folks have another 
problem, too. It's lack of health insurance.
  A lot of them have worked their whole lives. They have worked for a 
small business. They made just a little bit too much money for 
Medicaid, but not nearly enough to pay $10,000 or $15,000 a year for a 
health insurance policy.
  On Tuesday, for the first time in their lives, for many of them, 
there's a chance to do something about that. A great number could 
enroll in Medicaid--their whole families. Others were able to buy 
health insurance for $10 or $15 a week to cover themselves and their 
families.
  This whole government shutdown is about shutting down that 
opportunity for them to buy health care. So all these crocodile tears 
tonight about these families, the reality is we wouldn't be having this 
debate if there wasn't a compulsion on the majority side of the aisle 
to kill the Affordable Care Act.
  You are not going to be able to.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, how much time is remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 1\3/4\ 
minutes remaining; the gentleman from Alabama has 2 minutes remaining.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. I'm the last speaker, and I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Many of us that have spoken here are appropriators. Our job is to 
bring 12 bills to this floor, 12 conference reports. We've done none. 
We've totally failed. We're not the first Congress to do that. We've 
had to pass 111 CRs in the 20 years that I've been here in Congress. 
None of them had these prerequisites that we've got to meet with the 
President, we've got to repeal something, we've got to defund 
something, we don't like this, we don't like that. In fact, as 
appropriators we know that the rules of this House don't allow us to 
legislate on appropriations bills.
  So even these requests that everybody is making of what we ought to 
do have to take a waiver by the Rules Committee--waiver to our own 
House rules--to bring all this stuff up. And in the meantime, we've 
done nothing, and so the government shuts down because we haven't been 
responsible for that oath of office that we took here.
  It didn't say just fund a part of government. Today, we have a choice 
out of 10 parts of government. It's your popular parts, your menu, your 
special. Well, I didn't come here for any Tea Party special. I came 
here for the whole government--the hundreds of thousands of parts that 
put together this incredible, wonderful government that we have the 
privilege of serving.
  But I can't go and tell my colleagues to go vote for this, vote for 
that on conditionality of this and that. All those things violate our 
procedural rules, violate our history.
  This institution is 113 sessions old. As I said, since I've been 
here, 111 times we've come to the point where we need to pass a CR. 
We've never done it like this.
  Reject this piecemeal legislation, and let's get on with the 
business. Let's open up government.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I want to address a couple of issues that have come up during our 
discussion here this afternoon.
  I've heard some of my colleagues across the aisle say they believe 
WIC has been underfunded. I do want to point out that all eligible 
participants are being served; and to my knowledge, no one has been 
turned away from the program.
  The FY 13 Ag approps conference agreement provided more than $7 
billion for the WIC program. After sequestration and rescissions, the 
total equaled $6.5 billion. At the end of FY 13, WIC had carryover 
funds, or remaining funds, totaling nearly $300 million. Even with 
sequestration, WIC has been able to serve all eligible participants and 
still have funding left over for the end of the fiscal year by $300 
million. Clearly, the program has received sufficient funding, and we 
have certainly made sure that to be the case.
  In closing today, I would hope that my colleagues would join me in 
support of this resolution. There's nothing cynical about what we're 
doing here. You can read the resolution. I have it right here. It 
simply continues to provide funding for the WIC program, and it 
provides certainty. It ensures that WIC clinics will be open, 
appointments will be kept, and food benefits will be provided.
  There's nothing, again, cynical about this. The only thing that's 
cynical about this is if you decide to politicize this bill.
  It's interesting that those who claim to be the defenders and 
supporters of this program are the very ones actually coming here this 
afternoon that are opposing the bill. My colleagues will have a chance 
to be cynical and vote ``no,'' but I hope they will not turn their 
backs on providing certainty for low-income women and children. All we 
want to do is to keep the program fully operational and fully funded.
  I urge my colleagues to support this resolution, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak on H.J. Res. 
75, a piecemeal mini-CR,'' which woefully underfunds Women-Infant-
Children Program, or WIC as it is known through the end of the year.

[[Page 15205]]

  Notwithstanding the issue of the majority refusing to allow a vote on 
a clean continuous resolution, and dealing with the deficit and the 
majority's refusal to accept Obamacare--which must be addressed--we 
cannot stop investing in children because they are the future of our 
country.
  WIC is a federal assistance program for health care and nutrition of 
low-income pregnant women, breastfeeding women, and infants and 
children under the age of 5.
  In my congressional district, 67 percent of children under the age of 
4, or 41,300, are eligible for WIC. This is the ninth highest district 
in the country.
  Indeed, in a story in Houston Chronicle, a young Houston mother posed 
a very relevant question. She asked, ``How am I going to feed my 
children?'' Has it come to this Mr. Speaker? A mother in the United 
States of America has to worry about her children going hungry. This is 
an outrage.
  In fact, in my state of Texas there are 971,000 WIC eligible 
children, the 7th highest in the nation.
  Madam Speaker, you might be interested to know that the top 10 states 
in terms of WIC eligible women and children are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   % WIC
             Rank                   State         Eligible      Number
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................  Mississippi....           54      115,600
2............................  Arkansas.......           53      103,800
3............................  New Mexico.....           52       74,900
4............................  Oklahoma.......           51      132,100
5............................  West Virginia..           50       52,000
6............................  Louisiana......           50      148,600
7............................  Texas..........           49      971,000
8............................  Tennessee......           48      196,700
9............................  Kentucky.......           47      132,000
10...........................  South Carolina.           47      138,800
------------------------------------------------------------------------

  The Agriculture Department, which funds WIC, released $100 million in 
contingency funds, out of the $125 million on hand when the budget 
impasse began, and is working with states to distribute about $280 
million in unexpended funds left over from the 2013 fiscal year.
  According to USDA, with these funds states should be able to continue 
to supply new and existing WIC participants only through the end of 
October.
  Madam Speaker, you will be as disappointed as I was to learn that. 
When I attempted to access more up-to-date statistics on the WIC 
Program, SNAP, and hunger, I was greeted by a message that said: ``Due 
to the lapse in federal government funding, this website is not 
available.''
  The National WIC Association does not support this dishonest attempt 
by House Republicans to extricate themselves from the mess they created 
when they recklessly voted to shut down the government and harm our 
economy and wreak havoc on the lives of millions of Americans who 
provide and depend upon services and benefits critical to our nation.
  According to the National WIC Association opposes this bill because 
it is ``a cynical ploy to use low-income nutritionally at-risk mothers 
and young children as political pawns for political ends'' and urges 
Congress:

     to end the uncertainty that exists in our fiscal environment 
     and the already challenged lives of vulnerable mothers and 
     young children by responsibly discharging and fulfilling its 
     moral obligations to the nation. We will not tolerate efforts 
     to leverage the nutritional health and well-being of pregnant 
     and breastfeeding mothers, their babies, and young children 
     to satisfy the political ends or strategies of policy-makers.

  Madam Speaker, if Congress fails to pass a ``clean'' continuing 
resolution before month's end, many WIC Programs across the nation will 
run out of operating funds and clinics will be forced to close their 
doors, turn participants away, and end benefits.
  This would be unconscionable.
  Normally I would be pleased to be here today to talk about the 
funding for this program, but this is different. What the majority is 
doing is playing games with the lives of real people--real mothers and 
their children--struggling to get by in the real world.
  WIC is the nation's premiere preventive public health nutrition 
program targeted at low-income mothers and young children who have or 
are at risk for developing nutrition-related diseases and disorders. 
Serving nearly 9 million mothers and young children, including 53 
percent of all infants in the country, WIC provides nutrition 
education, breastfeeding education and support, referrals to medical 
and social services and a small nutritious food package.
  Numerous studies show that WIC has been effective in improving health 
outcomes for its target populations.
  For example, every dollar spent on a pregnant woman in WIC saves up 
to $4.21 in Medicaid costs for her and her newborn because WIC reduces 
the risk for preterm birth and low birth-weight babies by 25 percent 
and 44 percent, respectively.
  The average first year medical cost for a premature or low birth-
weight baby is $49,033 compared to $4,551 for a baby born without 
complications.
  Children on WIC are also more likely to consume key nutrients, 
receive immunizations on time, and have high cognitive development 
scores than their peers not participating in WIC. Recent studies in Los 
Angeles County and New York State have documented a reduction in 
obesity rates in the WIC child population over the past several years.
  In light of these successes, it is no wonder that recent surveys 
indicate that WIC retains broad support across political, ideological, 
ethnic, and socio-economic lines in America. A bipartisan national 
survey of 1,000 likely November 2012 voters indicated nearly 3 in 4 
Americans want WIC funding to remain the same or increase.
  Because of increase emphasis by Congress and the WIC program, between 
1998 and 2010 the breastfeeding rate in WIC has risen from 41.3 percent 
to 63.1 percent. According to one estimate, if 90 percent of U.S. 
mothers exclusively breastfed their infants to 6 months, the U.S. would 
save $13 billion per year in medical expenses and prevent over 900 
deaths annually.
  Inadequate funding will have short-term and long-term consequences. 
In the short-term, mothers and young children cut from the program may 
go without healthy food or enough food.
  In the long-term, healthy childhood growth and development may be 
hampered resulting in health and development problems that will have 
life-long physical, mental, and financial costs.
  A full funding level for the WIC program would ensure that no 
eligible applicants are turned away; maintain current and anticipated 
WIC participation levels; assure adequate nutrition services and 
administration funding; respond adequately to economic forecasts of 
rising food cost inflation; and provide funds for nutrition services to 
maintain clinic staffing and competitive salaries.
  For these reasons, we should be working to pass H.J. Res. 59 as 
amended by the Senate. That is the best way to keep faith with all 
persons who serve the American people as employees of the federal 
government, and the women and children who depend upon the WIC program.

                                  USDA

       Due to the lapse in federal government funding, this 
     website is not available.
       After funding has been restored, please allow some time for 
     this website to become available again.
       For information about available government services, visit 
     usa.gov
       To view U.S. Department of Agriculture Agency Contingency 
     plans, visit: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/contingency-plans
       Message from the President to U.S. Government Employees
                                  ____


                [From the Huffington Post, Oct. 4, 2013]

              Government Shutdown Jeopardizes WIC Program

                         (By Michael Rubinkam)

       Allentown, Pa. (AP)--Jacob Quick is a fat and happy 4-
     month-old with a big and expensive appetite. Like millions of 
     other poor women, Jacob's mother relies on the federal Women, 
     Infants and Children program to pay for infant formula--aid 
     that is now jeopardized by the government shutdown.
       Pennsylvania and other states say they can operate WIC at 
     least through the end of October, easing fears among 
     officials that it would run out of money within days. But 
     advocates and others worry what will happen if the shutdown 
     drags on beyond that.
       ``What's going to happen to my baby?'' asked Jacob's 
     mother, Cierra Schoeneberger, as she fed him a bottle of 
     formula bought with her WIC voucher. ``Am I going to have to 
     feed him regular milk, or am I going to have to scrounge up 
     the little bit of change I do have for formula or even baby 
     food?''
       WIC serves nearly 9 million mothers and young children, 
     providing what advocates say is vital nutrition that poor 
     families might otherwise be unable to afford.
       Schoenberger, for example, said her son goes through about 
     $40 worth of formula a week. ``It's like a car payment,'' 
     said the unemployed mother of three.
       The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, 
     Infants and Children--better known as WIC--supplies low-
     income women with checks or debit cards that can be used for 
     infant formula and cereal, fruits and vegetables, dairy items 
     and other healthy food. WIC also provides breast-feeding 
     support and nutrition classes. Poor women with children under 
     5 are eligible.
       Just before the shutdown, the U.S. Department of 
     Agriculture had warned that states would run out of WIC cash 
     after a ``week or so.'' Now the agency says WIC should be 
     able to provide benefits through late October, with states 
     using $100 million in federal contingency money released 
     Wednesday and $280 million in unspent funds from the last 
     budget year.

[[Page 15206]]

       If the aid dries up, desperate moms will probably dilute 
     their babies' formula with water to make it last longer, or 
     simply give them water or milk, said the Rev. Douglas A. 
     Greenaway, head of the National WIC Association, an advocacy 
     group. Pediatricians say children under 1 shouldn't drink 
     cow's milk because they can develop iron deficiency anemia.
       ``These mothers have trust and confidence in this program, 
     and that trust and confidence has been shaken by Congress,'' 
     Greenaway said. ``This is just unconscionable.''
       Danyelle Brents, 22, a single mother of three, receives 
     about $200 a month in vouchers for food and formula for her 
     two children and baby. She is being hit doubly hard by the 
     shutdown: She is a contract worker for the Federal Aviation 
     Administration who catalogs records for aircraft 
     certification, and is furloughed. Now, with her baby going 
     through 10 cans of formula a month, she might lose key help 
     with her grocery bill.
       ``That's a lot of money, $15 a can,'' she said. ``Now that 
     I'm out of work, WIC is how I support my family . . . I'm 
     scared at this point to go buy anything extra.''
       Groups that fight hunger say they are also concerned about 
     the confusion that needy mothers may be feeling. Though most 
     WIC offices are open, many mothers mistakenly assumed that 
     benefits were cut off.
       Advocates are also worried that there will be a cumulative 
     effect as other, smaller government feeding programs run out 
     of money.
       Adding to the uncertainty: While USDA has said that food 
     stamps are guaranteed to continue through October, it is 
     unclear what will happen after that.
       In Pennsylvania, whose $208 million WIC program supports 
     250,000 women and children, all local WIC offices remain open 
     and benefits are being dispensed as usual. The state Health 
     Department said it has $25.5 million on hand to continue 
     operating the program through October. Ohio said it has 
     enough money to last through the second week of November.
       ``Ohio WIC is open for business!'' proclaimed the headline 
     on a state website.
       Utah's WIC program, though, immediately closed its doors 
     Tuesday in the wake of the government shutdown, meaning that 
     families who hadn't already received their October vouchers 
     were out of luck and new applications couldn't be processed. 
     The state got $2.5 million in USDA funding on Thursday, and 
     WIC offices throughout the state planned to reopen by noon 
     Friday.
       Charitable groups were already filling the void. A Facebook 
     group called ``The People's WIC--Utah'' was launched hours 
     after WIC offices closed, matching up families in need with 
     those able to donate formula and other food.
       In Layton, about 25 miles north of Salt Lake City, a 
     donation drive was planned for Saturday, with organizers 
     asking for fresh fruits and vegetables, unopened baby formula 
     and other necessities.
       Food banks, meanwhile, are bracing for a surge in requests 
     for help if WIC runs out of money.
       Linda Zimmerman, executive director of Neighbors In Need, 
     which runs 11 food banks in Massachusetts, said her 
     organization already provides a lot of baby formula to its 
     clients, most of whom get WIC aid as well.
       ``I think they're truly nervous,'' Zimmerman said. ``We're 
     going to have to be doing a lot of work to make sure we can 
     keep up with need for infant formula.''
       In some places, grocery stores refused to honor WIC 
     vouchers, assuming they wouldn't get paid. Terry Bryce, 
     director of Oklahoma's WIC program, said WIC officials called 
     and emailed grocers to assure them the program is still 
     funded.
       In New Jersey, Patricia Jones said she is worried about 
     losing her WIC assistance.
       ``You're affecting families that haven't done anything to 
     you,'' said Jones, a 34-year-old mother of five. Because of 
     the shutdown, she was turned away from the Social Security 
     Administration office in Newark when she tried to get 
     printouts of her children's Social Security numbers to renew 
     her welfare and WIC benefits.

  Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, let's be clear about what's happening here. 
We are in day four of the shutdown of the federal government for one 
reason, and one reason alone: The desire of a radical wing of the 
Republican Party to dismantle the Affordable Care Act.
  To that end, House Republicans have rejected the clean government 
funding bill passed by the Senate, and shut down the government. The 
shutdown could end today if Speaker Boehner would bring up the Senate-
passed funding bill. There are more than enough votes to pass it and 
send the bill to the President, who would sign it. The only reason we 
aren't voting on the Senate bill is because Speaker Boehner has not 
stood up to a radical group of Tea Party lawmakers who are demanding 
repeal of the Affordable Care Act.
  Instead of re-opening the entire government, the Republican 
Leadership is playing more games as they continue to bring up piecemeal 
bills to fund the most visible casualties of the shutdown they caused. 
Earlier this week, we had a vote to reopen the Smithsonian and the 
National Parks. Then we had a vote to reopen the National Institutes of 
Health. Then the Republicans began to feel the heat from veterans, so 
they brought up a bill to reopen the VA. These Band-Aid bills are an 
attempt by Republicans to give themselves political cover for causing 
this shutdown in the first place.
  Today we have another Band-Aid bill before us. This bill would 
restart funding for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for 
Women, Infants and Children through December 15. Nearly 9 million moms 
and kids under five living near or below the poverty line rely on WIC 
for healthy food, breastfeeding support, infant formula and other 
necessities. It's as if Republicans have just figured out that closing 
down the federal government has health consequences when mothers cannot 
provide food and nutrition for their kids.
  Let me read a statement from the National WIC Association, which 
urges the House to reject the bill before the House. They call this 
Republican bill ``a cynical ploy to use low-income nutritionally at-
risk mothers and young children as political pawns for political ends. 
Funding the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants 
and Children (WIC) in this piecemeal, short-term, stop-gap manner is 
not an acceptable solution. . . . NWA urges Congress to end the 
uncertainty that exists in our fiscal environment and the already 
challenged lives of vulnerable mothers and young children by 
responsibly discharging and fulfilling its moral obligations to the 
nation. NWA will not tolerate efforts to leverage the nutritional 
health and well-being of pregnant and breastfeeding mothers, their 
babies, and young children to satisfy the political ends or strategies 
of policy-makers.''
  It's time to stop playing politics, and have a vote on the Senate's 
clean funding bill. It's time to end the shutdown.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 371, the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint 
resolution.
  The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 
time, and was read the third time.

                              {time}  1730


                           Motion to Recommit

  Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the 
desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman opposed to the joint 
resolution?
  Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. I am, in its current form.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mrs. Kirkpatrick moves to recommit the joint resolution 
     H.J. Res. 75 to the Committee on Appropriations with 
     instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith 
     with the following amendment:
       Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the 
     following:

     That upon passage of this joint resolution by the House of 
     Representatives, the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 59) making 
     continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2014, and for other 
     purposes, as amended by the Senate on September 27, 2013, 
     shall be considered to have been taken from the Speaker's 
     table and the House shall be considered to have (1) receded 
     from its amendment; and (2) concurred in the Senate 
     amendment.

  Mrs. KIRKPATRICK (during the reading). Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent to dispense with the reading.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Arizona?
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I would like for the motion to be read.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk continued to read.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentlewoman's motion.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentlewoman from Arizona is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. Madam Speaker, it is not surprising that the WIC 
program is the latest subject of the majority's ploy to use low-income 
mothers and children as political pawns.
  WIC enjoys bipartisan support. A bipartisan poll in 2012 found the 
program enjoyed 67 percent approval among the American people, 
including 53 percent

[[Page 15207]]

of conservatives. By providing things like fresh fruits and vegetables, 
low-fat dairy and salmon, tuna for breastfeeding mothers, every dollar 
spent on pregnant women in WIC produces $1.92 to $4.21 in Medicaid 
savings for newborns and their mothers. That just makes common sense. 
On Wednesday, the USDA estimated that WIC would continue operations for 
a week or two, thanks to a small contingency fund.
  In Arizona, 29 percent of children are food insecure, and over 36 
percent of Arizonans live in WIC-eligible households. In my district, 
the Arizona Department of Health Services in Apache and Navajo Counties 
says 70 percent of families were WIC-eligible in 2010.
  We need this program. But the bill before us is not meant to relieve 
needy families. It is only a tool meant for partisan gain.
  The Republican budget proposal would cut WIC 22 percent. The National 
WIC Association estimates that the sequester has resulted in nearly 
12,000 deserving families in Arizona dropped from the rolls, yet now 
the majority reverses itself to fund this program.
  Beyond the cynicism of this tactic, WIC cannot stand alone. It is a 
gateway to health care and social services for families, services that 
will remain unsustainable due to the shutdown--services like low energy 
assistance through the Department of Energy, immunizations through 
Health and Human Services, and early childhood education programs like 
Head Start. Where is the funding for these programs? The majority 
proposes a fragmented program that would be crippled.
  My motion to recommit would open up the entire Federal Government for 
funding so that we're no longer picking and choosing the needs that we 
are going to meet.
  Can the Chair explain why it is not germane to keep all of the 
Federal Government open instead of just a tiny slice?
  Stop these political games. Let's get serious about helping the 
American people.
  I yield back the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I make a point of order against the 
motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Alabama will state his 
point of order.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, the instructions contained in the motion 
violate clause 7 of rule XVI, which requires an amendment be germane to 
the bill that is currently under consideration.
  As the Chair recently ruled on October 2 and October 3 of 2013, the 
instructions contain a special order of business within the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules, and therefore, the amendment is 
not germane to the underlying bill.
  So, Madam Speaker, I insist on my point of order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does any other Member wish to be heard on 
the point of order?
  Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. Madam Speaker, I wish to be heard on the point of 
order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Arizona is recognized 
on the point of order.
  Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. Madam Speaker, doesn't the bill before us fund the 
Federal Government? My motion to recommit would open up the entire 
Federal Government so all of our needs can be met.
  If we are funding WIC, why aren't we providing funds for school 
safety? If we are funding WIC, why aren't we providing funds for 
supplemental nutritional assistance? Why aren't we protecting food 
safety for every single American? Can the Chair explain why it is not 
germane to keep all of the Federal Government open instead of just a 
tiny slice? Why are the Republicans in favor of closing down the 
Federal Government and denying taxpayers the benefits they've already 
paid for? This makes absolutely no sense to the hardworking, everyday 
people trying to make a living.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does any other Member wish to be heard on 
the point of order?
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I wish to speak on the point of 
order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is recognized on the point of 
order.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Madam Speaker, on the point of order, it would 
be my view that you could clarify the legislative process by ruling 
against the point of order.
  If the point of order had not been raised, the next order of business 
would be an up-or-down vote on keeping the entire government open. A 
sustaining of the point of order would mean that if we do what we've 
done in the last few bills, there would be a challenge to your ruling. 
If that challenge were to be sustained, then we could get that up-or-
down vote because overruling the Chair would mean that we could get an 
up-or-down vote.
  So you should rule against the point of order to clarify all this. We 
can get a clear, up-or-down vote on keeping the government open, but on 
the other hand, Madam Speaker, the vote on keeping the government open 
will be on the motion to table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is prepared to rule on the point 
of order.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Madam Speaker, may I be further heard for just 
15 seconds?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may conclude.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Madam Speaker, if you rule against the point 
of order, we can have an up-or-down vote. Otherwise, the up-or-down 
vote will essentially be on the motion to table. We should vote against 
the motion to table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will rule.
  The gentleman from Alabama makes a point of order that the 
instructions proposed in the motion to recommit offered by the 
gentlewoman from Arizona are not germane.
  The joint resolution extends funding related to the special 
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program for Women, Infants, and 
Children. The instructions in the motion propose an order of business 
of the House.
  As the Chair ruled earlier today, as well as on October 2 and October 
3, 2013, a motion to recommit proposing an order of business of the 
House is not germane to a measure providing for the appropriation of 
funds on committee jurisdiction grounds.
  Similarly, the instructions here propose a non-germane amendment. The 
point of order is sustained.
  Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. Madam Speaker, I appeal the ruling of the Chair.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is, Shall the decision of the 
Chair stand as the judgment of the House?
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I move to lay the appeal on the table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to table.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on the motion to table will be followed by a 5-minute vote 
on passage of the joint resolution, if arising without further 
proceedings in recommittal.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 223, 
nays 185, not voting 23, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 523]

                               YEAS--223

     Aderholt
     Amash
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming

[[Page 15208]]


     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IN)

                               NAYS--185

     Andrews
     Barber
     Barrow (GA)
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera (CA)
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Enyart
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Holt
     Honda
     Horsford
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Michaud
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peters (CA)
     Peters (MI)
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--23

     Bass
     Cardenas
     DeGette
     Grayson
     Heck (WA)
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Jones
     Labrador
     Lummis
     McCarthy (NY)
     Miller, Gary
     Pastor (AZ)
     Perlmutter
     Pittenger
     Rush
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Tipton
     Vargas
     Visclosky
     Waxman
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                              {time}  1801

  Messrs. VELA and LEWIS changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the motion to table was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the joint 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas 
and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 244, 
nays 164, not voting 23, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 524]

                               YEAS--244

     Aderholt
     Amash
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bera (CA)
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lynch
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peters (CA)
     Peters (MI)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schneider
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IN)

                               NAYS--164

     Andrews
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Enyart
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Holt
     Honda
     Horsford
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Maffei
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Michaud
     Miller, George
     Moore

[[Page 15209]]


     Moran
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--23

     Bass
     Cardenas
     DeGette
     Grayson
     Heck (WA)
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Labrador
     Lummis
     McCarthy (NY)
     Miller, Gary
     Perlmutter
     Pittenger
     Rush
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Tipton
     Vargas
     Visclosky
     Waxman
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                              {time}  1808

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

                          ____________________