[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 3273-3280]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            PASSENGER RAIL REFORM AND INVESTMENT ACT OF 2015

  The Committee resumed its sitting.


               Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Perlmutter

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Hultgren). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 5 printed in House Report 114-36.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, add the following new section:

     SEC. 503. QUIET ZONE REPORT.

       Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Comptroller General shall transmit to Congress a 
     report evaluating the rule issued by the Federal Railroad 
     Administration on the use of locomotive horn at rail 
     crossings. Such report shall--
       (1) evaluate the effectiveness of the rule in reducing 
     accidents and fatalities at rail crossings;
       (2) evaluate the effectiveness of the rule in establishing 
     quiet zones;
       (3) identify any barriers to the establishment of quiet 
     zones; and
       (4) estimate the costs associated with their establishment.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 134, the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Perlmutter) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Chairman, my amendment to H.R. 749 requires the 
Government Accountability Office, the GAO, to conduct a study and 
submit a report to Congress evaluating the effectiveness of the Federal 
Railroad Administration's 2005 rule on the use of locomotive horns at 
rail crossings. We were just talking about rail crossings.
  After 10 years of being in effect, I believe it is fair we ask the 
FRA to update and modernize the train horn regulation, allowing 
flexibility for new technologies and innovations that may become 
available.
  The basic premise behind the rule has not changed: to promote public 
safety by requiring train operators to sound horns at certain decibel 
levels while passing through railway crossings to alert motorists and 
pedestrians.
  While the rule currently allows municipalities to apply for ``quiet 
zone'' status, I am concerned the current requirements for obtaining a 
quiet zone waiver are far too rigid, cost prohibitive, and time 
consuming. Achieving quiet zone status can take years of work and cost 
millions of dollars.
  By requiring the GAO to study the train horn rule, I am confident the 
FRA can craft an updated rule striking a balance between public safety 
and providing communities flexibility to establish quiet zones.

[[Page 3274]]

  I hope the GAO study will provide insight on how the FRA can update 
train horn requirements when communities invest in certain safety 
enhancements and measures installed at crossings, including barriers, 
warning signals, and other features to keep the public safe.
  Last year, I attended an event for the unveiling of a new quiet zone 
in one of the cities in my district, Commerce City, Colorado, which was 
established after significant investment from the city. I want to thank 
the FRA and State officials for working with Commerce City. But we need 
to review how long and how costly these quiet zone applications can be.
  Just last week, another city in my district, Arvada, announced four 
planned railway crossing improvements to establish crossing zones. 
According to a story published in The Denver Post last week, the city 
has been in discussions with the FRA for more than 5 years on getting 
the quiet zones approved. I include the text of The Denver Post article 
for the Record.

 Railroad Quiet Zones Will Silence Train Horns at Four Arvada Crossings

       Arvada residents living along the Union Pacific Railroad 
     tracks could sleep a little easier next year with the 
     establishment of ``quiet zones'' at four crossings.
       City Council recently approved a $1.8 million agreement 
     with Union Pacific that will see barriers and gates added 
     where the tracks intersect at Lamar and Carr Streets, Olde 
     Wadsworth Boulevard and West 66th Avenue.
       Arvada communications manager Maria Vanderkolk said the 
     city has been in discussions for more than five years with 
     the Federal Railroad Administration, the Public Utilities 
     Commission and Union Pacific on getting the quiet zones 
     approved.
       ``It's expensive--we got a couple approved elsewhere about 
     10 years ago, then we had issues with these four and they're 
     right in the heart of the city,'' Vanderkolk said. ``We told 
     the neighborhood this would be done last year. . . various 
     and sundry delays means this has literally taken years to get 
     approved.''
       Train horns are sounded in compliance with federal rules 
     and regulations, which require a train to blast its horn for 
     15 to 20 seconds at any public crossing. Under terms of the 
     agreement, the city will install four-quadrant gate systems--
     or gates with four arms, in addition to flashing lights and 
     ringing bells, at the four crossings. These type of gates 
     make it difficult for motorists to drive around.
       Once they're built, the trains will no longer have to blast 
     their horns and the Union Pacific train will run quietly 
     through the entire length of Arvada.
       ``Without a quiet zone, people see a train coming and think 
     they may be able to beat it and skirt around the gate,'' 
     Vanderkolk said. 'With a quiet zone, you construct a barrier 
     so the car physically can't get around it.''
       Michael Smith has lived blocks from the railroad tracks in 
     his home near 64th Avenue and Field Street for almost 35 
     years. He said over the years, the trains have become more 
     frequent and the horns so prevalent that at times they have 
     kept him and family members from getting a good night's 
     sleep.
       Things got so bad they considered moving, but decided to 
     stay once it became clear the city was working to address the 
     problem.
       ``We really appreciate the work city staff has done on 
     getting this completed,'' Smith said. ``It's a lot of money, 
     but it will be great for the community.''
       The city is coordinating with the railroad on getting the 
     crossings built by the end of 2015, said Chris Sveum, a city 
     civil engineer.
       She added: ``There's no guarantee the trains still won't 
     have to sound their horns from time to time, but this should 
     cut down the rate by 95 percent.''

  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Chairman, it is time for Congress to analyze the 
effectiveness of the train horn rule and work with FRA to improve the 
ability of our communities all across the country to continue investing 
in railway crossing safety.
  A more flexible rule could enable these communities to craft 
solutions reducing noise, promoting long-term economic growth, and, at 
the same time, ensuring the safety of residents.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I ask for an ``aye'' vote on this amendment, 
and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition, although I 
support the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, the past couple of weeks have seen some 
startling accidents at grade crossings. Having an independent entity 
review the train horn rule would be a good start to helping ensure such 
accidents don't occur in the future.
  The train horn and quiet zone rule was one that took the Federal 
Railroad Administration almost 10 years to complete. It was finalized 
10 years ago in 2005. So this would be a good time to revisit the 
effectiveness.
  Furthermore, with the rise in freight traffic on previously lower 
capacity routes, some communities are seeing more trains travel through 
their towns, which are used to lower traffic.
  Looking at crossings, the creation of quiet zones, and their costs 
will be a helpful tool for small communities across the country. I 
recommend support for the gentleman from Colorado's amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the 
Transportation Committee and all of the Members for working with me on 
this amendment. I would ask for an ``aye'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Perlmutter).
  The amendment was agreed to.


               Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. McClintock

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 
printed in House Report 114-36.
  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 2, line 3, through page 3, line 10, strike section 
     101.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 134, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. McClintock) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, this amendment removes the taxpayer 
subsidies and requires Amtrak to operate as a business, as we were 
promised it would when it was established back in 1971.
  Every year, as Amtrak's operating losses have mounted, Congress has 
dutifully shoveled more money at it to keep it afloat. Every year, its 
congressional supporters have promised reforms to bring these losses 
under control. And every year, these promises have fallen flat.
  This year, we are told, well, look at all the new reforms that we are 
building into this. In 5 years, they will have their act together. 
Well, how many times have we heard this promise? Let me cite just a 
few.
  Back in 1997, facing mounting criticism, the Amtrak Reform and 
Accountability Act required Amtrak to operate without any Federal 
operating assistance after 2002.
  When that didn't happen, in 2008, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Sessions) attempted to eliminate only its most expensive route from 
reauthorization. That year, the gentleman from Minnesota, Jim Oberstar, 
called any reduction in subsidies a ``preemptive strike'' and promised 
that the bill was chock-full of reforms that would soon solve Amtrak's 
problems.
  Well, when that didn't happen, in 2014, the gentleman from Georgia, 
Paul Broun, proposed eliminating subsidies, just as my amendment does. 
At the time, the gentleman from Iowa, Tom Latham, said: ``I concede 
that Amtrak could be more efficient. However, it has made significant 
improvements in this area recently and is moving in the right 
direction.''
  ``Moving in the right direction.''
  This year, taxpayers will subsidize Amtrak in the amount of about 
$1.4 billion. The bill before us authorizes $1.4 billion for next year. 
Put another way, we will shell out $45 every time a passenger steps 
aboard an Amtrak train. That is $45 per passenger, per trip, and direct 
losses billed to taxpayers. That is up from $32 of loss per passenger 6 
years ago.
  Despite endless promises, things are not getting better. Amtrak's 
apologists claim this is a 40 percent reduction in authorized funding. 
In fact, Amtrak received $1.4 billion in 2015, the same as this bill 
authorizes in 2016.

[[Page 3275]]

  Outside experts have reported that over the next 10 years, 
subsidizing Amtrak will cost taxpayers $49 billion. Let me put that in 
family-sized numbers. The average American family will have to cough up 
$392 from its taxes over the next 10 years just to cover Amtrak's 
losses.
  What does that $392 out of a family's taxes pay for? Well, among 
other things, Amtrak's food and beverage employees, who are paid an 
average of $106,000 a year to provide a service that lost over $800 
million over the past decade just selling snacks on Amtrak trains.
  Are we at least seeing any improvements in service? Not hardly. 
Amtrak's monthly on-time performance has significantly declined.
  Bigger losses, declining service--that is not moving in the right 
direction. That was a false promise then, just like all of the other 
false promises we have heard since 1971.
  In last year's appropriations debate, Amtrak apologists warned that 
cutting off the subsidies would ``eliminate an entire transportation 
option.'' It does no such thing.
  Amtrak claims that it is running a profit on a heavily traveled 
Northeast corridor. Nothing in my amendment would change this. Anything 
Amtrak makes on these profitable routes, Amtrak keeps.
  With this amendment, Amtrak would be perfectly free to continue to 
operate and expand its Northeast corridor from its own profits and to 
subsidize its other money-losing operations to the extent that its 
profits would cover them.
  However, this amendment would end the practice of forcing American 
taxpayers to underwrite another 5 years of broken promises.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Byrne). The gentlewoman from Florida is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, as I stand up here today, I know 
that if the gentleman from Minnesota, Jim Oberstar, was here, the 
transportation guru, he would be standing up for Amtrak. So I am going 
to stand up in place of Mr. Oberstar.
  And let's start out with, this amendment would kill Amtrak. It would 
shut it down. It would strand millions of passengers, disrupt commuter 
operations, add to our already congested roads and airports, eliminate 
over 20,000 jobs nationwide, and jeopardize local economies and 
business that depend on Amtrak's service.
  Amtrak provides the majority of all intercity passenger rail service 
in the United States, with more States and localities across America 
turning to passenger rail to meet the transportation needs of our 
citizens.
  Amtrak reduces congestion and improves our energy independence. One 
full passenger train can take up to 250 to 350 cars off the road. 
Passenger rail also consumes less energy than both automobiles and 
commercial airlines.
  With that, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Shuster), the chairman of the committee.
  Mr. SHUSTER. I thank the gentlewoman from Florida.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition.
  I certainly appreciate the gentleman's concern. He has been a true 
deficit hawk. One of the great challenges we face in America is 
reducing the deficit.
  There has been a longstanding debate in this Congress about passenger 
rail in this country. I, for one, believe it is necessary. I think that 
what we have in this bill--and I have watched for the past 40 years 
also some of these broken promises.
  I am committed to, and I think we committed in this bill to putting 
forth reforms, streamlining, empowering the States, which I think is a 
huge step in the right direction, giving States the ability to be at 
the table, to invest their dollars to force Amtrak to do things 
differently.
  So, again, throughout the bill, there are these reforms. I feel 
confident that, in the way the country is going, with population growth 
and with these corridors expanding, we have to have passenger rail to 
move people around some of the most densely populated corridors.
  So I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I would simply respond to the ridership 
claims that it has no impact on congestion because the ridership is 
infinitesimal. You have to compare Amtrak's 31 million trips to the 650 
million airline trips per year. According to Cato, the average American 
logs about 15,000 miles per year by car, 1,800 miles by plane, and just 
20 miles on Amtrak.
  If Amtrak is making a profit, it can use those profits any way it 
wants--to continue its operations, to subsidize its losing routes. But 
it should not be tapping further into taxpayers' pockets.

                              {time}  1400

  Voters have elected the biggest Republican majority in the House 
since 1928, with a resounding mandate to stop wasting money. Today this 
government is spending and taxing record amounts of families' earnings, 
and well above the 40-year average as a percentage of our economy. If 
we can't bring ourselves to cut this, one of the most outrageous 
subsidies in the entire budget, voters will have every right to ask 
what good are we?
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. How much time do I have remaining, Mr. 
Chairman?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to 
the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) to close.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, let's just back up for a minute. What the 
gentleman would do, he says, well, they could keep operating the 
Northeast corridor. Well, that is good, because three-quarters of the 
people going from Washington, D.C., to New York are choosing rail over 
air, and I don't know where we would fit that many more airplanes in 
the already congested skies. But that is actually, unfortunately, not 
true because of the other routes, particularly across-country and 
Western routes, the obligations under their contracts to their existing 
employees who would lose their jobs, other obligations they would have 
for abandoned lines and stations, and all that would total billions of 
dollars.
  So even if they theoretically--and you would have to do further 
changes in the law rather than just taking away the money--could 
operate the Northeast corridor, they couldn't because of these other 
obligations. Any money would have to go there, and they would be 
immediately bankrupt because it would exceed their revenues.
  So that is one, perhaps, unintended effect of the gentleman's 
amendment, because he does seem very sympathetic to the fact that 
three-quarters of the people going between Washington, D.C., and New 
York are choosing rail over air, and it is a growing percentage. He 
doesn't seem to be cognizant of the fact that ridership is up 14 
percent--that is actually 4 million people in 1 year--that revenue is 
up, and the operating losses have been cut in half. They are down 48 
percent.
  Mr. Chairman, there is no passenger rail system that operates like 
Amtrak across a continent as large as ours without assistance from the 
government. Now, if you want to disconnect the country--as I recounted 
earlier, on 9/11, I had a Federal official who had to get back for 
meetings in the Northwest. He took the train. We have an aging society. 
I tell you, when I don't have to get on an airplane every week and I 
can take a little more time to get somewhere--and I think a lot of 
other people, as they are aging, would like to avoid the hassles of air 
travel. I believe ridership will continue to grow.
  In the Northwest we are in a cooperative arrangement--and I pointed 
that out earlier--with Amtrak, where they operate our train, an Acela 
train which was purchased, and the ridership is up to about 1 million 
people a year. And it is growing quickly to avoid the already overly 
congested I-5 between Eugene and Seattle and avoid the hour and a half 
you are going to spend somewhere 60, 70 miles south of Seattle sitting 
in

[[Page 3276]]

your car. So he would deprive Americans of all this for ideology--not 
for good reasons, but for ideology.
  We should be going the other way. We should be investing more and 
building out a robust, 21st century rail system like every other 
industrial country in the world. Why do we have to be Third World?
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, 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. 7 Offered by Mr. Lipinski

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 
printed in House Report 114-36.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. 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 48, line 14, after ``procedures'' insert ``for 
     passengers, including passengers using or transporting 
     nonmotorized transportation such as wheelchairs and 
     bicycles''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 134, the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, before I discuss my amendment, I would 
like to thank Chairman Shuster, Chairman Denham, Ranking Member 
DeFazio, Ranking Member Capuano, and former Subcommittee Ranking Member 
Brown for all their hard work and for bringing this bipartisan 
legislation to the floor so early this year.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill shows us what Congress can do when we work 
together to build consensus, and yes, compromise--compromise--to get 
things done to improve our Nation's transportation infrastructure.
  This bill makes much-needed reforms to Amtrak's business model and 
the RRIF loan program, which I hope will unlock a potential financing 
source for the CREATE rail modernization program in northeastern 
Illinois and help commuter rail agencies make important improvements, 
such as installing positive train control.
  I am pleased the bill contains provisions extending Buy America 
requirements to RRIF projects. I have been mentioning this need since 
2009, and I am glad to see that we are codifying these requirements to 
ensure that this $35 billion loan program is investing our dollars in 
American materials and American jobs.
  My amendment today is a small but important addition to this bill. It 
sharpens the directive in section 211 that requires Amtrak's inspector 
general to conduct a review of Amtrak's boarding procedures. Section 
211 is a good step towards improving the experience of Amtrak riders 
and the efficiency of Amtrak's operations.
  This amendment builds on this provision by clarifying that the Amtrak 
IG should consider the boarding needs of passengers that use mobility 
devices, including all forms of wheelchairs, as well as passengers with 
items such as bicycles. This will make sure that the IG's report 
considers the needs of all its riders, guarantees that Amtrak will 
focus on complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and 
harnesses a potential revenue stream from bicyclists and other users of 
nonmotorized transport.
  Right now, Amtrak uses patchwork procedures that can make it 
difficult for an individual using a wheelchair or traveling with a bike 
to get on and off a train. The Amtrak inspector general issued a report 
in August of last year that found that only 10 percent of Amtrak 
stations are fully ADA compliant, which demonstrates the need to not 
only look at each station's infrastructure, but how each station gets 
passengers from station to platform to train. We need to make sure that 
Amtrak is serving all of its customers to the best of its abilities and 
in accordance with the law.
  Mr. Chairman, similar difficulties exist for other forms of 
transportation, such as bicycles. Only 38 percent of Amtrak lines 
provide baggage service for bicycles, while only 18 percent of lines 
even allow for roll-on bicycle service that are complemented by ad hoc 
policies at many of the stations on these lines. Mobility is important 
to reducing congestion, and if we improve the boarding process, we 
improve quality of service and help encourage ridership.
  This amendment is supported by Easter Seals, People for Bikes, the 
United Spinal Association, the League of American Bicyclists, AARP, the 
Rails to Trails Conservancy, the National Disabilities Rights Network, 
Transportation for America, and the Adventure Cycling Association.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the 
amendment even though I do not oppose the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SHUSTER. This amendment simply clarifies that when the Amtrak 
inspector general looks at ways to improve Amtrak's boarding procedures 
at major stations that it consider passengers using wheelchairs and 
other nonmotorized transportation. I know this is near and dear to the 
hearts of Mr. Lipinski's constituents, so, again, I rise in support.
  At this time, I would also like to take the opportunity, which I 
neglected to do, to thank the staff for their work over the past year. 
We rely on them to make a lot of this come together. Their hard work 
and dedication deserves recognition and appreciation.
  Specifically, I would like to thank on the rail subcommittee Mike 
Friedberg, Fred Miller, David Connolly, and Kristin Alcalde; on the 
Democratic side, Jennifer Homendy and Rachel Carr for their hard work; 
our communications team Jim Billimoria, Justin Harclerode, Michael 
Marinaccio--I think I finally got it right, and he has left the 
committee--Keith Hall; from our front office Jennifer Hall, Beth 
Spivey, Collin McCune, Clare Doherty, Isabelle Beegle-Levin, Denny 
Wirtz, and Mary Mitchell Todd. To all of them, I thank them for their 
very, very hard work on helping to put this bill together.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy 
in permitting me to speak on this, and I would like to express my 
appreciation to the chair, ranking member, ranking members of the 
subcommittee and chair. This is, I think, an example of Congress doing 
what it should do. I appreciate it. As an alumni member of the T and I 
Committee, I am proud to see this move forward.
  Rail corridors are absolutely critical in terms of being able to 
promote mobility. As the chair of the Bike Caucus, I am particularly 
interested in this amendment.
  The committee ended last Congress on a high note with WRRDA, and 
being able to start this Congress on a high note with a really 
thoughtful approach to Amtrak, moving this forward, I think, is a 
signal that there is no other committee that has more potential to do 
more this Congress to help rebuild and renew the economy and get 
America moving. This is a tremendous signal about what is possible.
  I lend my congratulations to the committee, Chairman Shuster, Ranking 
Member DeFazio, Ranking Member

[[Page 3277]]

Brown, and look forward to working with you on more excitement as we 
move forward.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I want to thank, again, Chairman Shuster for his work and Ranking 
Member DeFazio. This is what we need to be doing is coming together and 
working these things out. There is so much that America needs done, 
especially when it comes to transportation infrastructure.
  I want to thank the chairman for his great work in leading this 
committee. We have a lot of other issues to work on, other forms of 
transportation, but this is a good example of what we can do by working 
together.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to support my amendment and support 
the bill.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on the amendment printed in House Report 114-36 on 
which further proceedings were postponed:
  Amendment No. 6 by Mr. McClintock of California.


               Amendment No. 6 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 vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 147, 
noes 272, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 110]

                               AYES--147

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Babin
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blum
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Buck
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Collins (GA)
     Conaway
     Culberson
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Johnson, Sam
     Jolly
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Knight
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Mooney (WV)
     Mulvaney
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pearce
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stewart
     Stutzman
     Thornberry
     Valadao
     Walker
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zinke

                               NOES--272

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Barletta
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boustany
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Graham
     Granger
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Hastings
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Kuster
     LaMalfa
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Marino
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Moore
     Moulton
     Mullin
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Newhouse
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pitts
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Roby
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothfus
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Stefanik
     Stivers
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takai
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Trott
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Amodei
     Black
     Blackburn
     Crawford
     Fincher
     Hinojosa
     Long
     Roe (TN)
     Rush
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Waters, Maxine
     Yoho

                              {time}  1440

  Messrs. McNERNEY, WALBERG, WITTMAN, TAKANO, GALLEGO, ZELDIN, 
FORTENBERRY, RICHMOND, and LYNCH changed their vote from ``aye'' to 
``no.''
  Messrs. GUTHRIE, GOHMERT, RICE of South Carolina, Mrs. NOEM, Messrs. 
JOLLY, YOUNG of Indiana, MESSER, and Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS changed 
their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute, as amended.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Stewart) having assumed the chair, Mr. Byrne, 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. 749) to 
reauthorize Federal support for passenger rail programs, and for other 
purposes, and, pursuant to House Resolution 134, he reported the bill 
back to the House with an amendment adopted in the Committee of the 
Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment 
reported from the Committee of the Whole?

[[Page 3278]]

  If not, the question is on the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute, as amended.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.

                              {time}  1445


                           Motion to Recommit

  Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to 
recommit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York. Yes, I am in its current form.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Sean Patrick Maloney of New York moves to recommit the 
     bill H.R. 749 to the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure with instructions to report the same back to 
     the House forthwith, with the following amendment:
       At the end of the bill, add the following new section:

     SEC. 503. AMTRAK SECURITY.

       (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Secretary for the use of the Amtrak Police Department 
     $150,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2016 through 2019 for 
     acquisition of canines, explosive detection, surveillance and 
     communication equipment, baggage screening, counter-terrorism 
     and critical infrastructure protection, and other security 
     needs determined appropriate by the Secretary.
       (b) Veterans Protect Passengers Hiring Initiative.--Not 
     later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     Amtrak shall implement a veterans hiring initiative in the 
     Amtrak Police Department, which shall include veterans with 
     experience working with military working dogs.

  Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York (during the reading). Mr. 
Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the 
motion in the interest of time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I offer this 
amendment today as the final amendment to the bill.
  I am proud of the bipartisan work that the committee has done, and I 
want to commend the chairman, Mr. Shuster, also Messrs. DeFazio, 
Denham, and Capuano, and all the staff for the work that went into this 
legislation. This is a good bill, and it makes key investments in our 
rail infrastructure and in rail safety. I want to personally thank the 
chairman for all of his hard work on this bill and for, in particular, 
including the provisions that I authored on positive train control and 
grade crossings, the need for which has been so dramatically 
demonstrated by the terrible accidents in places like Valhalla and 
Spuyten Duyvil, New York, and recently in Oxnard, California.
  However, we can make this bill better. My amendment will not kill the 
bill nor send it back to committee. If adopted, it would proceed 
immediately to final passage.
  My amendment simply provides $150 million annually to Amtrak's police 
department to address critical security needs. Amtrak's security force 
is not large, but its task is monumental, protecting nearly 32 million 
passengers who use Amtrak every year. My amendment gives those security 
officials the resources they need to prevent and defend against 
terrorist attacks. From additional canine units to explosive detection 
equipment, we need to make sure that Amtrak's police officers, 
nationwide, have the capability to protect passengers.
  The amendment also requires Amtrak to implement a veterans hiring 
initiative specifically designed to hire veterans with experience 
working with military dogs, canine units. Amtrak has a long history of 
providing career opportunities to veterans, as well as Active Duty 
military members, but under current law is not required to do so. It is 
not required to seek out veterans for open positions. With more than 
200,000 Active Duty servicemembers transitioning to civilian life, we 
can, today, guarantee that Amtrak will seek out veterans for new hires.
  In the last 10 years, more than 800 attacks have occurred worldwide 
against passenger and commuter rail systems, killing thousands. Many of 
us remember the terrifying images of the terrorist attacks in Madrid 
and London. In Mumbai, three separate attacks in the last 15 years have 
killed hundreds of people.
  All of us here in both parties understand the real dangers our 
country is facing. I have no doubt that one of the greatest threats we 
face is to our U.S. rail system. Subways and commuter systems, in 
particular, remain a top threat. Information taken from Osama bin 
Laden's very compound in Pakistan indicated that al Qaeda was 
considering attacks on a number of U.S. rail systems.
  Our intelligence and law enforcement officials have foiled several 
threats in just recent years. In 2009, an Afghan-born jihadist plotted 
to bomb New York subways with devices very similar to those used in the 
2005 London attacks. And in 2011, two al Qaeda-supported terrorists 
were arrested after plotting to bomb and derail a train between Toronto 
and New York's Penn Station.
  At a time with heightened security and growing threats like ISIL, we 
are asking Amtrak's police force to do more with less. Amtrak reports 
that security funding overall has decreased by more than 50 percent 
since 2011. We need to reverse this trend to protect the security of 
our national passenger rail system.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this commonsense 
amendment to provide the necessary funding to ensure the safety and 
security of Amtrak passengers and rail commuters.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the motion.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, this amendment will do nothing more than 
kill the bill. H.R. 749 is a bipartisan bill with heavy, heavy reforms 
that will improve and advance passenger rail in this country, including 
security. We have taken that into consideration. I agree that security 
is important, but we cover the cost of security activities in this 
bill.
  Both sides of the aisle have worked very hard over the past 2 years 
to craft a bill that I believe is exactly the kind of legislation that 
the American people want. It is a reform bill. It is commonsense 
reforms. There has never been an Amtrak bill with these kinds of 
reforms in it empowering the States.
  This bill empowers the States, those 19 States that have 21 supported 
Amtrak lines. They will have a seat at the table to make investments to 
improve passenger rail in those 19 States. It is going to give the 
commission on the Northeast corridor more say, more teeth to be able to 
force Amtrak to do things. It is going to keep the profits of the 
Northeast corridor in the Northeast corridor for that heavily congested 
area of the country that needs to have passenger rail and, along the 
way, learn the lessons of when we make those investments, how we can go 
out to the other corridors around this country that are going to need 
passenger rail.
  This bill is not perfect; Amtrak is not perfect. But I truly believe 
this bill sets Amtrak on the course to reform itself and to improve 
itself so in the future they can move towards going away from the 
subsidy by the Federal Government. That is my goal: to get an Amtrak 
that doesn't have any Federal subsidies.
  So these reforms were put in place. They are strong reforms. As I 
said, we have never had an Amtrak bill like this before, and it was 
done on a bipartisan basis. I think we can be proud of it. The Congress 
can be proud of this bill, and the American people can be proud that we 
are doing something.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this motion.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.

[[Page 3279]]

  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair 
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on 
the question of passage. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 184, 
noes 232, not voting 16, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 111]

                               AYES--184

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hastings
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takai
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--232

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jolly
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--16

     Amodei
     Barton
     Black
     Blackburn
     Costello (PA)
     Crawford
     Fincher
     Guthrie
     Hinojosa
     Long
     Roe (TN)
     Rush
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Waters, Maxine
     Yoho

                              {time}  1457

  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. COSTELLO of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 111, 
meeting with constituents in office on matters involving Ukraine. Had I 
been present, I would have voted ``no.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. 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 316, 
nays 101, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 112]

                               YEAS--316

     Abraham
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Babin
     Barletta
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boustany
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chaffetz
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Cole
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Duncan (TN)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fitzpatrick
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Goodlatte
     Graham
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Guinta
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Hastings
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Hurt (VA)
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jolly
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Kuster
     LaMalfa
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lummis
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Marino
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mica
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Moore
     Moulton
     Mullin
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)

[[Page 3280]]


     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Newhouse
     Nolan
     Norcross
     Nunes
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Roby
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rouzer
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Russell
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stivers
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takai
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Trott
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Webster (FL)
     Welch
     Westerman
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (FL)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                               NAYS--101

     Allen
     Amash
     Barr
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Blum
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Buck
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Clawson (FL)
     Collins (GA)
     Conaway
     Culberson
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gohmert
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Grothman
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Jenkins (KS)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Knight
     Labrador
     Latta
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCaul
     McHenry
     McSally
     Messer
     Miller (FL)
     Mooney (WV)
     Mulvaney
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Rice (SC)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Stewart
     Stutzman
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Yoder
     Young (IA)

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Amodei
     Barton
     Black
     Blackburn
     Crawford
     Fincher
     Guthrie
     Hinojosa
     Lamborn
     Long
     Roe (TN)
     Rush
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Yoho

                              {time}  1505

  Messrs. STEWART, SMITH of Nebraska, and RICE of South Carolina 
changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.


                          Personal Explanation

  Mrs. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 110 for passage of 
McClintock Amendment No. 6, rollcall No. 111 for passage of the 
Democrat Motion to Recommit, and rollcall No. 112 for final passage of 
H.R. 749, which took place Wednesday, March 4, 2015, I am not recorded 
because I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have 
voted ``aye'' on rollcall No. 110, the McClintock Amendment No. 6, and 
voted ``nay'' on rollcall Nos. 111 and 112, against the Motion to 
Recommit and final passage of H.R. 749.

                          ____________________