DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2017; Congressional Record Vol. 162, No. 112
(House of Representatives - July 12, 2016)

Text available as:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.


[Pages H4750-H4790]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2017

  The Committee resumed its sitting.


                 Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Ellison

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed in 
House Report 114-683.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 38, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Ellison) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Ranking Member Betty 
McCollum.

[[Page H4751]]

  We can raise the living standards for working families all over the 
country right now if we use Federal dollars to create good jobs. The 
United States Government is the largest buyer of goods and services in 
the world, and the United States Government should use that power to 
create good jobs and to create a high-road economy for all Americans.
  My amendment would reprogram funds to create an Office of Good Jobs 
in the Interior Department that would do the following: it would help 
ensure the Department's procurement, grant-making, and regulatory 
decisions encourage the creation of decently paid jobs, collective 
bargaining rights, and responsible employment practices.
  Mr. Chairman, it is important for all Americans to know that more 
than 1 in 5 Americans are employed by companies with Federal contracts. 
Right now the U.S. Government is America's leading low-wage job 
creator.
  That is right. The United States Government, at this very hour, funds 
over 2 million low-paying jobs through contracts, loans, and grants 
with corporate America. That is why more than the total number--the 
total number of low-wage workers employed by Walmart and McDonalds 
combined do not equal the number of low-wage jobs funded by the United 
States Government.

                              {time}  1800

  That is right. Wal-Mart and McDonald's combined have fewer low-wage 
jobs than are funded by the Federal Government right now. U.S. contract 
workers earn so little that nearly 40 percent of them use public 
assistance programs like food stamps and Section 8 to feed and shelter 
their families.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota 
(Ms. McCollum).
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support this amendment. This 
Office of Good Jobs would help ensure that the Interior contracting 
employment decisions encourage the creation of decent paid jobs, 
implementation of fair labor practices, and responsible employer 
practices.
  The Federal Government should set an example to the Nation when it 
comes to contracting decisions, and the office will guide Interior to 
make responsible contracting employment decisions.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the amendment.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Rice of South Carolina). The gentleman from 
California is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is duplicative. It ignores 
the existing contractor award system that is already in place. 
Contracting officers must already consult the system for award 
management to ensure a contractor can be awarded a contract. Businesses 
on the excluded parties list system have been suspended or debarred 
through a due process system and may not be eligible to receive or 
renew Federal contracts for such cited offenses.
  The best way to ensure that the government contracts with or provides 
grants to the best employers is to enforce the existing suspension and 
debarment system.
  Bad actors who are in violation of the basic worker protections 
should not be awarded Federal contracts. That is why the Federal 
Government already has a system in place to deny Federal contracts to 
bad actors. If a contractor fails to maintain high standards of 
integrity and business ethics, agencies already have the authority to 
suspend or debar the employer from government contracting. In 2014, 
Federal agencies issued more than 1,000 suspensions and nearly 2,000 
debarments to employers who bid on Federal contracts.
  The amendment would delay the procurement process with harmful 
consequences. On numerous occasions, the nonpartisan Government 
Accountability Office has highlighted costly litigation stemming from 
complex regulatory rules, including from the Fair Labor Standards Act.
  This amendment punishes employers who may unknowingly or unwillingly 
get caught in the Federal Government's maze of bureaucratic rules and 
reporting requirements. The procurement process is already plagued by 
delays and inefficiencies.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time I have 
remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Minnesota has 2\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, let me point out that the gentleman 
confuses the debarment process, which says that we are going to look at 
the very worst actors and exclude them and the Office of Good Jobs, 
which would say that we will use education and we will use 
prioritization to make sure that the best employers are the ones that 
the American taxpayer is going to employ in order to award contracts. 
It is just a simple matter of understanding the difference between 
excluding the very worst and rewarding the best.
  I think that the American people would like to see the Federal 
Government say: You are a good employer, you pay good wages and good 
benefits, and we think that that kind of practice is the kind of thing 
we like to see, and, therefore, our Office of Good Jobs is going to 
prioritize such businesses.
  Time and time again, we hear Members of the party opposite confuse 
the debarment process with the Office of Good Jobs concept. It is a big 
difference, and I think that the American people would agree that where 
we find the best practices, we should reward them, not simply create a 
big, big bottle, a big, big vat of the best competing with the 
mediocre, and then exclude the very, very worst.
  I just want to make this point. This is good for good contractors in 
many ways, because if you are an excellent contractor and you go out of 
your way to reward good workers and help create a hybrid economy, you 
are still competing with the people who are doing the bare minimum they 
can just to avoid debarment. I think that is not fair to good 
contractors. I think good contractors ought to be rewarded.
  I think that if we establish this Office of Good Jobs, what we will 
see is a general wave throughout our economy as the private sector will 
look to the Federal Government as to what the best ways to create a 
fair economy could be, and we would see a greater measure of economic 
equality and opportunity throughout the land.
  I just want to say that if the system we had was adequate, why, then, 
would we have 40 percent of all people who work for Federal contractors 
eligible for Federal Government programs, like Section 8 and food 
stamps? Why would we see that? Well, because we are not prioritizing 
good jobs. We are just saying that if you are a lawbreaker, you will be 
excluded, but other than that, we don't really care. An Office of Good 
Jobs would change that.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``yes'' vote.
  It is intended that the appropriation for Departmental Operations in 
the Office of the Secretary at the United States Interior Department be 
used to establish an Office of Good Jobs in the Department aimed at 
ensuring that the Department's procurement, grant-making, and 
regulatory decisions encourage the creation of decently paid jobs, 
collective bargaining rights, and responsible employment practices. The 
office's structure shall be substantially similar to the Centers for 
Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships located within the Department 
of Education, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department 
of Homeland Security, Department of Health and Human Services, 
Department of Labor, Department of Agriculture, and Department of 
Commerce, Department of Veterans Affairs, U.S. Department of State, 
Small Business Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, the 
Corporation for National and Community Service, and U.S. Agency for 
International Development.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, we have a process in place. I certainly 
won't support subjective Federal decision-makers deciding who is a good 
employer and who is a bad employer. As a former employer myself, I know 
that most employers in this country are good people who want to make 
sure that people have good jobs.
  Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.

[[Page H4752]]

  

  Mr. ELLISON. 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 Minnesota 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Norcross

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider Amendment No. 9 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. NORCROSS. 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 38, line 20, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $13,060,000)''.
       Page 40, line 7, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $13,060,000)''.
       Page 74, line 25, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $13,060,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Norcross) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. NORCROSS. Mr. Chairman, my simple amendment would add $13 million 
to the Hazardous Substance Superfund to equal the level requested by 
the EPA.
  Superfund cleanup is the right thing for the environment, right for 
the economy, and certainly right for public health.
  I am from the Garden State. We are known across the country for 
having the best tomatoes, corn, blueberries, and cranberries we grow. 
But in south Jersey, we have a history as a cornerstone of heavy 
industry. New Jersey found out the hard way what you can and what you 
can't dump into the lakes, backyards, and other facilities.
  Then companies left, leaving our constituents holding the bag. 
Representative Jim Florio, who held my seat from 1975 to 1990, saw 
these very issues in south Jersey and across the country. That is why 
he authored the Superfund legislation back in 1980. Almost four decades 
later, the list of Superfund sites is still overflowing. There are well 
over 1,000 contaminated sites across the country, and I have 13 in my 
district alone.
  In 2015, the GAO studied the progress of the Superfund program. The 
report found that, in real dollars, appropriations to the EPA Superfund 
program declined almost $1 billion from 1999 to 2013.
  Congress has funded less than 40 percent of shovel-ready cleanup 
projects. The EPA is often forced to prioritize one seriously 
contaminated site over another, leaving those other sites to be 
contaminated, in some cases, up to 50 years.
  This amendment would help the EPA clean up more contaminated 
materials in their parks, backyards, and commercial properties sooner 
rather than later.
  Mr. Chairman, later the House will consider another amendment of mine 
that would designate an additional $15 million within the Superfund 
account, specifically for the enforcement division.
  Not only do we consistently underfund Superfund cleanup activities, 
we have even underfunded the EPA office that is supposed to go after 
those polluters who have been found guilty of dumping and polluting our 
environment.
  As I mentioned earlier, in my district alone, I have over 13 sites 
that lay contaminated today. I just briefly want to tell you about 
three of them. The sites are named after the company that was accused 
and has been found liable, that is the Sherwin-Williams site. These 
sites include the Sherwin-Williams/Hilliard's Creek site located in 
Gibbsboro, the Route 561 Dump Site in Gibbsboro, and United States 
Avenue Burn Site in Gibbsboro. Those other sites include part of 
Voorhees also.
  Back in the 1930s, Sherwin-Williams opened a paint factory. For 20 
years, they dangerously dumped these chemicals that were related to 
their synthetic varnish to be produced and dumped in around the 
Gibbsboro and Voorhees area.
  These toxic chemicals from the varnish seeped into the groundwater, 
contaminating not only the commercial properties, but the streams, 
lakes, and homes for miles around. After the devastating events of 
Flint, Michigan, I know I don't have to tell you about the horrific 
effects of lead exposure on children's developmental issues and 
pregnant women. According to the EPA, long-term exposure to high levels 
of arsenic can lead to cancers like skin cancer, bladder cancer, and 
lung cancer.
  This is why my constituents and, quite frankly, all Americans across 
the country are faced with this decision. They need relief today--not 
in a few years from now. We must hold companies like Sherwin-Williams 
accountable for the havoc that they have wreaked in communities like 
Gibbsboro and Voorhees. We owe it to our constituents to do everything 
in our power to protect their health.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, while I appreciate the intent of the 
gentleman's amendment to increase funding for the Superfund, something 
that we all support, it is important that Members understand two 
things: First, top line funding for the Superfund is already increased 
in the bill by $27 million from the FY16 enacted level.
  Second, the gentleman proposes to reduce funding for the Payments in 
Lieu of Taxes, PILT, program which is critical to counties and local 
governments in 49 States, including New Jersey, the Commonwealth of 
Puerto Rico, and the U.S. territories. PILT is fully funded in this 
bill. It is a program supported by a large, bipartisan majority in the 
House. A reduction in the PILT funding would have a detrimental effect 
on counties and local governments across the country.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the gentleman's 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. NORCROSS. Mr. Chairman, this is about protecting public health 
from designated sites that have been contaminated for literally 
decades.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``yes'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Norcross).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. NORCROSS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Beyer

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider Amendment No. 10 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. BEYER. 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 67, strike lines 4 through 19.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Beyer) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, this amendment simply strips the language 
that would block the implementation of the Stream Protection Rule.
  We should not willfully delay or stop this rule. I am very familiar 
with mountaintop removal mining. When I was Lieutenant Governor of 
Virginia in the 1990s, mountaintop removal mining became the most 
prevalent coal mining technique in central Appalachia. I made more than 
100 trips to Virginia's coalfields, and I know firsthand the negative 
impact mountaintop removal has had on the environment and on the health 
of these communities.
  If we know of reasonable ways to mitigate negative effects, we should 
be doing everything in our power to implement them. That is why the 
Stream Protection Rule is so important.
  During mountaintop removal, tens of thousands of cubic feet of 
mountaintops are blown off with explosives and

[[Page H4753]]

pushed over the sides, filling mountain valleys with enormous waste 
piles.

                              {time}  1815

  These valley fills, as they are called, bury headwater streams and 
everything else that once populated the valley. Already, mountaintop 
removal mining has flattened more than 500,000 acres of forested land 
and permanently buried over 2,000 miles of streams, destroying sources 
that feed our water.
  Emerging science has documented a dramatic decline in the diversity, 
the abundance, and the biomass of fish in streams with pollution that 
results from mining. It is the coal industry that asked the government 
to clearly define the expectations for environmental protection, and 
that is what this rule does. By introducing verified scientific methods 
and testing, the government provides regulatory certainty and achieves 
the environmental protection that is required by law.
  Without this rule, stream destruction continues to occur and the 
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement will remain 
vulnerable to more legal challenges. Local citizens will be forced to 
resort to the courts instead of having their government act to protect 
their welfare.
  The stream protection rule is sufficiently flexible to accommodate 
the different regions where coal is mined. It is very different in 
Wyoming than it is in southwest Virginia. The rule is designed to 
prevent water pollution due to coal mining using current scientific 
understanding. It is designed to protect our families while protecting 
jobs. In fact, the Office of Surface Mining's analysis shows this rule 
will have minimal impact on coal companies and minimal job loss. The 
estimate is 10 lost jobs--10.
  We have seen how necessary this rule is in Virginia. Water monitoring 
found that Kelly Branch Mine in Wise County dumped the toxic pollutant 
selenium into streams at levels way above State water quality standards 
and without a permit to allow such pollution. As a result of a citizen 
suit, Southern Coal Corporation has since agreed to perform 
environmental cleanup projects and pay penalties and attorney fees for 
these pollution violations.
  But, Mr. Chairman, we shouldn't need lawsuits. This violation 
shouldn't happen in the first place. Now is the time to give the people 
of Appalachia and others around the country protections for their 
waterways that were promised to them by Congress.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, in 2008, the Office of Surface Mining 
finalized revisions to the stream zone buffer rule in an open and 
transparent manner. After taking office, the Obama administration put 
on hold that rule and proposed a different rule last year without the 
input of the States.
  The administration's approach under the new rule has been anything 
but collaborative and inclusive, and States have been totally shut out 
of the process. In response, the FY16 omnibus includes language to 
bring the States and the administration back together. To date, OSM has 
not shared all documents with the States and refuses to meet with the 
States that have requested meetings.
  The American people expect more--more openness and transparency from 
their government--and that is why this funding prohibition must remain 
in the base bill.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and reject this 
amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, may I ask how much time I have remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia has 2 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), the ranking member.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment.
  The amendment would allow OMS to deal with the continuing problems 
posed by mountaintop mining removal because this practice contaminates, 
destroys streams, and negatively impacts human health. Two lawsuits 
challenge this Bush-era rule, and in February 2014, U.S. District Court 
for the District of Columbia vacated a 2008 stream buffer rule.
  It is important that we allow this to move forward, and I am going to 
simply state why.
  In a study in 2011, it found that counties near mountaintop mining 
areas had higher rates for five out of six types of birth defects, 
including circulatory, respiratory, skeletomuscular, central nervous 
system, gastrointestinal, and I could go on and on. Clearly, we know 
that the health effects from mountaintop mining-related air and water 
contamination is cumulative and is dangerous to public health.
  OSM must be allowed to go forward with this water protection rule to 
guarantee the public an opportunity to live a healthy life.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Beyer amendment.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, with great respect to the subcommittee 
chairman, I was at the hearing all morning at Natural Resources a few 
months ago when we had the Director of the Office of Surface Mining 
Reclamation and Enforcement on this exact issue. He deeply resisted the 
idea, what he called, I think it was, the fix or the myth that we 
weren't working closely with the States.
  I completely agree with the subcommittee chairman that the Office of 
Surface Mining should work very closely with the States to develop this 
rule and, in fact, insisted that they had from the beginning of the 
Obama administration, picking up on what the Bush administration had 
done, right through today. I agree that this is appropriate, but I 
resist the wisdom of the truth that the States have been shut out of 
the process.
  One more small point, but a really important point. A 2009 report on 
the NIH Web site estimated that coal mining cost Appalachia five times 
more in premature deaths--$42 billion--than it provided the region in 
all jobs, taxes, and other economic benefits from coal mining--just $8 
billion.
  We are not trying to get rid of coal. There is no war on coal. We 
just want to make sure that the people who are doing the work who live 
there are protected.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire of the Chair how much time 
is remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 4 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
West Virginia (Mr. Jenkins).
  Mr. JENKINS of West Virginia. Mr. Chairman, this is a critically 
important issue--the prohibition that is contained in this bill--
relating to this incredible overreach of the regulatory authority from 
this administration.
  The stream buffer zone rule is similar in character to so many of the 
efforts of this administration to empower the EPA and, in this case, 
the Office of Surface Mining to do things that are without legal basis 
and authority under the law. What is very important about this 
provision in this bill is saying no to this administration, no, once 
again, to a regulatory overreach that is not founded in basis of law.
  I strongly urge the rejection of this amendment so we maintain the 
language that is contained in the Interior appropriations bill saying 
no to this administration's overreach of the rules and regulations. I 
suggest and encourage a rejection of this amendment.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Huffman

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of the gentlewoman from 
New

[[Page H4754]]

Mexico (Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham), I offer amendment No. 11.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 68, strike lines 3 through 8.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Huffman) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, this amendment strikes section 122 from 
the underlying bill. That section would prevent the BLM from meeting 
its statutory obligations under the Mineral Leasing Act to ensure 
operators ``use all reasonable precautions to prevent waste of oil or 
gas.''
  The BLM would also be prevented, if this underlying provision 
remains, from modernizing the existing 30-year-old oil and gas 
production rules to bring them into line with technological 
advancements in the industry. If that provision stays in the bill, 
States, tribes, and Federal taxpayers stand to lose royalty revenues 
when natural gas is wasted, which a 2010 GAO report estimated could 
amount to as much as $23 million, annually, in royalty revenue.
  If this provision remains in the bill, BLM will not be able to update 
the current royalty rate or raise it as conditions may warrant. A 
recommendation has been made by both the GAO and the inspector general 
that they do that, that the conditions do indicate that an increase is 
in order.
  So it is just good government to take this provision out, to update a 
30-year-old set of regulations in order to better reflect the current 
operating climate and to ensure a fair royalty return.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, the bill includes section 122 because the 
Bureau of Land Management does not have the authority to regulate 
methane emissions. Congress has given that authority to the 
Environmental Protection Agency. BLM's proposed regulation is just 
another part of the administration's overly aggressive regulatory 
agenda and overly broad interpretation of current law.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to 
the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum).
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment.
  Can you imagine a 30-year-old oil and gas production rule and not 
being able to update it? This amendment allows a 30-year-old rule to 
comply with today's technology to make sure that we are doing what is 
best practices in the industry and we can work with the industry to do 
proper oversight.
  As was pointed out, if this provision stays in place, States, tribes, 
and Federal taxpayers would lose royalty revenues. We should be doing 
everything we can with our public lands to make sure the taxpayer 
receives full value whenever there is a lease.
  I support this amendment, and I urge for its adoption.
  Just once again, imagine not being able to update 30-year-old rules 
and not being able to update current royalty rates. We need to do 
better by the American taxpayer; we need to strike this provision; we 
need to do the updates; we need to update 30-year-old regulations; and 
we need to make sure that the American taxpayer gets a fair return on 
its royalties.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``no'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``yes'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Huffman).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. 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. 12 Offered by Ms. Castor of Florida

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. 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 69, beginning at line 3, strike section 124.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentlewoman 
from Florida (Ms. Castor) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Chairman, my amendment ensures that we 
keep the appropriate safety regulations in place for offshore oil 
drilling to reduce the risk of an offshore oil disaster and the 
devastating impacts on our economy and environment.
  The Deepwater Horizon blowout of 2010 is still very fresh in our 
minds. I represent a Gulf Coast district in Florida, in Tampa Bay, and 
I remember very well the 87 days that oil spewed out of that Deepwater 
well, the 11 lives lost, and the huge economic losses.
  One study said that, in Florida, we lost 50,000 jobs because of that 
blowout, not to mention the environmental catastrophe that it was, that 
we are still trying to determine the long-term impacts.

                              {time}  1830

  For 87 days, the well continued to pump 134 million gallons of toxic 
oil before it could be stopped. This tarred fisheries, wildlife, and 
fragile ecosystems. I will always remember the motel owner from 
Pinellas County who cried because all of her business had evaporated. 
We didn't even have oil on the Gulf Coast beaches around Tampa Bay, but 
all of the tourists left. Our lifeblood in Florida is the tourism 
industry and the fishing industry.
  This is really inexplicable after years of working with industry, 
after congressional hearings to determine the causes of that disaster, 
after numerous investigative reports, including the bipartisan National 
Oil Spill Commission, led by former Florida Governor and Senator Bob 
Graham, and Republican and former EPA Administrator William Riley, 
where they zeroed in on the fact that it was the well casing and the 
blow-out preventer that was the source of the problem. Based upon all 
of those findings and investigations, the Bureau of Safety and 
Environmental Enforcement developed its final Well Control Rule, which 
focuses on the blow-out preventer and well control requirements, 
because this is America, and we can develop state-of-the-art technology 
for risky oil drilling no matter where it is occurring.
  The final rule was developed after unprecedented outreach and 
consultation with industry and other stakeholders. It addresses the 
full range of systems and equipment that are related to well control 
operations, with a focus on blow-out preventer requirements, well 
design, well control casings, cementing, real-time monitoring, and 
subsea containment. These measures are designed to improve equipment 
reliability, especially for blow-out preventers. The most important 
thing is they protect our communities. They protect us from a disaster 
like the BP Deepwater Horizon from ever happening again.
  It is really inexplicable that the Republicans on the House 
Appropriations Committee zeroed in on this safety rule in this 
appropriations bill and said we are not going to support it, that we 
are not going to fund it for this year. What is that going to do? 
Industry already supports most of these things. They don't want to be 
on the hook for billions and billions of dollars. It is just, clearly, 
inexplicable to put our communities at risk again for another disaster 
like that.
  The Castor amendment eliminates this harmful provision, and it 
maintains the Department of the Interior's critical safety standards to 
prevent offshore oil disasters. The Gulf Coast is still reeling from 
the disaster of 2010, and local economies across the country cannot 
afford another catastrophe like

[[Page H4755]]

BP's. I urge the adoption of the Castor amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Minnesota 
(Ms. McCollum), the ranking member.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. I thank the gentlewoman.
  Mr. Chairman, investigations were conducted by industry experts, and 
they determined the actual causes of the catastrophe of the Deepwater. 
Many of the requirements of this rule are not new, and they already 
exist in industry standards.
  This rule has one goal for me, and that is to save lives. Eleven 
lives were lost in that explosion. We have learned from that event. It 
was a tragic event what happened with the Deepwater Horizon. We should 
do everything we can to put workers' safety ahead of Big Oil's profits.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Idaho is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, at various hearings throughout the year, 
Chairman Calvert expressed concern that the administration was taking a 
page out of its ``war on coal'' playbook and applying it to oil 
production.
  The Department of the Interior has been attempting to make it as 
costly as possible to operate offshore so that companies will make the 
decision not to apply for a permit. They took that a step further last 
week with its Arctic regulations. In this instance, the Department set 
onerous requirements under the Well Control Rule that mandated that all 
wells should have the same thickness regardless of where you are 
drilling. Now, any engineer will tell you that these are site-specific 
decisions that are based on many factors and that the thickness will 
vary, depending on where the well is drilled.
  Instead, the White House wants to lock in that decision from 
Washington, D.C. and ignore recommendations from technical experts. The 
result is an Obama administration de facto moratorium on oil production 
as part of the White House's ``keep it in the ground'' strategy. I urge 
a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Chairman, if you support the tourism 
industry, if you support the jobs in the fishing industry, if you 
support just saving lives, and being able to prevent disasters like the 
BP Deepwater Horizon from ever happening again, it is important that 
you stand up for these very basic, industry supported safety standards. 
The well rule was developed after months and years of investigations 
and study with stakeholder help.
  The bottom line is we have to do everything we can to prevent this 
from ever happening again in order to protect our economy, to protect 
our jobs, to protect our natural environment; so I urge the adoption of 
the Castor amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``no'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Florida 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Huffman

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 70, strike line 1 and all that follows through page 
     71, line 18.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Huffman) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am glad that my colleague from Florida 
brought up the Deepwater Horizon tragedy because it was 6 years ago 
this week, actually, after 87 terrible days of the worst oil spill in 
history, that the BP Deepwater Horizon's wellhead was finally capped. 
The toll of that disaster, as everyone knows, was horrific--11 workers 
killed, untold economic damage to communities around the Gulf of 
Mexico, and, of course, devastating and ongoing impacts on fish and 
wildlife.
  This is a good time for us to reflect and to discuss the role of the 
Federal Government in reviewing the environmental impacts of oil and 
gas development, not just in the Gulf of Mexico, but in a place where 
the environmental damage could be even worse if and when something went 
wrong, say, in the Arctic Ocean.
  My amendment would strike section 127 of the underlying bill. Doing 
that would allow the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management to move forward 
with its proposed update of regulation on air quality control reporting 
and compliance. It would allow that proposed rule to serve its intended 
purpose, which is to bring decades-old rules on offshore air emissions 
into the 21st century.
  The BOEM, itself, is a new agency. It was born out of the response to 
the BP Deepwater Horizon spill, but it was also born out of an 
awareness that the old agency--the Minerals Management Service--was, 
frankly, too cozy with Big Oil, and that that is why that old agency 
never updated these old rules. These existing air pollution rules have 
been in place since 1988, and it is past time that we moved forward 
with new pollution standards, new modeling, and new technology.
  The proposed rule, in this case, seeks to address the emissions of 
several very harmful air pollutants, including volatile organic 
compounds, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, and 
particulate matter. The proposed rule does that with flexibility. 
Actually, in some cases, it reduces regulatory burdens by eliminating 
redundant reporting requirements and by allowing operators to use 
emissions credits.
  The residents of the Arctic and other oil-producing regions and the 
workers in the industry shouldn't be subjected to additional air 
pollution from oil and gas development simply because of where they 
live and work. We should let these new rules go forward. If history 
teaches us anything, it teaches us that Big Oil cannot be trusted to do 
the right thing when it is left unregulated. I would hope that my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle would agree that strong and 
consistent oversight is necessary. I ask for a ``yes'' vote.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Idaho is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, the administration has started the process 
to promulgate new air quality regulations for offshore operations with 
the intention of finalizing them by year's end; however, key studies 
are currently underway that will not be finished until sometime next 
year, in 2017. The administration wants to finalize these rules before 
these key studies are done.
  The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has allocated nearly $4 million 
for the studies to determine if there are any impacts to a State's air 
quality from offshore operations. Section 127 of this bill instructs 
the Department to wait until these studies are finalized and to restart 
only if the findings indicate there is a need for rulemaking.
  This is one of those cases in which we say let the science be the 
science, and let's find out what the studies say before we make final 
decisions on this. There is a regulatory process which should be 
followed, and there is a scientific process that should be followed. 
That is coming from a Republican. The administration cannot circumvent 
one for the expediency of the other; so I urge a ``no'' vote on this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, it always warms my heart to hear my 
Republican colleagues embrace science. It is a beautiful thing. I wish 
it happened a lot more often.
  In this case, we have had 30 years of study. We know a lot. The 
administration has developed this rule to the

[[Page H4756]]

point at which it believes it is ready. It is an important rule; it is 
long overdue; and it is time to move forward. I continue to request a 
``yes'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to vote ``no'' on this 
amendment and to let the process go through and the studies and to find 
out what the studies say. Let's follow the science. I urge my 
colleagues to follow that and to vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Huffman).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
will be postponed.


           Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Smith of Missouri

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 72, line 11, after the aggregate dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $88,282,000)''.
        Page 184, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $88,282,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Missouri (Mr. Smith) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, under the Obama administration, 
we have seen an explosion of new regulations that have impacted every 
area of our lives. From the way we heat our homes in the winter to the 
way that we choose our health care, this administration knows no bounds 
in its regulatory overreach.
  The EPA leads the way on this front. According to a report that was 
released by the American Action Forum, the EPA now imposes nearly 200 
million hours of paperwork to comply with its regulations. This is the 
equivalent of 95,000 Americans working full-time for a year. This 
represents an astonishing 23 percent increase from 2009 and a 34 
percent increase since 2002 in the EPA's paperwork burden.
  New regulations, such as the Clean Power Plan, waters of the United 
States, and the ozone rule, all contribute to this growing burden. Yet, 
this burden isn't limited to just the act of doing paperwork. These 
regulations raise the price of energy, cost Missourians jobs, and hurt 
their bottom lines. The EPA uses the Air, Climate and Energy, ACE, 
program to advance research and regulations that are geared toward a 
climate change agenda. Regulations to address climate change are 
costing Americans billions with there being very little actual impact 
on global temperatures to show for it. The result of ACE research 
furthers regulations, which burden our Nation's energy sector and 
communities across the country.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and cut the ACE program 
and leave us with one less program to advance the regulatory overreach 
of this administration's and save taxpayer dollars.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1845

  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Maine is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. 
This amendment would eliminate the funding for the EPA Air, Climate, 
and Energy research program. I think we all know that the Clean Air Act 
has resulted in one of the most effective public health programs in 
American history by addressing air quality in the United States.
  What this amendment would do would be to set back any advances in new 
technology and new scientific tools that would help protect the 
American public from harmful exposure to air pollutants which, as we 
know, can damage our health, causing lung and heart disease, impact our 
immune, nervous, and reproductive systems, and shorten our lives.
  Millions of people in America live in counties that do not meet air 
quality standards for one or more pollutants, and new threats from 
climate change expand the air quality challenges confronting our 
society.
  The energy choices we make clearly influence air quality and climate 
change. Eliminating EPA funding to research and understand the impacts 
on air quality from alternative energy sources is, at a minimum, 
shortsighted.
  The bill already reduces the EPA by $164 million from the FY 2016 
enacted level. I think we have already done enough damage in that 
particular reduction.
  For the health and welfare of our citizens, I urge my colleagues to 
reject this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I continue to urge my colleagues to reject 
this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Missouri 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mrs. Lummis

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Chair, as the designee of the gentleman from Utah 
(Mr. Chaffetz), I offer amendment No. 15.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 73, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $14,000,000)''.
       Page 74, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,038,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentlewoman 
from Wyoming (Mrs. Lummis) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Wyoming.
  Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Chairman, this amendment transfers approximately $10 
million to the EPA's Office of Inspector General from the $2.5 billion 
EPA environmental programs and management appropriations account. The 
amendment is necessary to support the EPA OIG's work related to 
preventing waste, fraud, and abuse, and identifying inefficiencies and 
potential cost savings at the EPA.
  The EPA Office of Inspector General has faced significant funding 
challenges in recent years. Its full-time employees dropped from 349 to 
289, a decrease of almost one-fifth of the office's workforce.
  Despite significant resource challenges, the Office of Inspector 
General at EPA continued to conduct important investigations and audits 
that saved money for taxpayers and revealed misconduct and abuses at 
the agency. During FY14, EPA OIG reported $380 million in savings, 
which is a $7.35 return on investment for every dollar in the OIG 
budget. The EPA's Office of Inspector General identified $4.1 million 
in savings during the most recent semiannual reporting period.
  The EPA OIG has also investigated gross misconduct and abuses at EPA 
that yielded savings for taxpayers. For instance, in 2013, the office 
conducted a criminal investigation into former EPA employee John Beale, 
who was found to have stolen government money and engaged in travel 
voucher fraud and time and attendance fraud. Beale committed these 
frauds by masquerading as an employee of the Central Intelligence 
Agency. Beale agreed to pay restitution of $890,000 to EPA and $500,000 
to the Department of Justice. Beale was also sentenced to 32 months in 
prison.
  The EPA Office of Inspector General also investigated allegations of 
gross

[[Page H4757]]

mismanagement at the Chemical Safety Board in 2012 and found hostility 
toward whistleblowers and a toxic, ineffective work environment 
undermined by the board's chemical accident investigations. The EPA 
OIG's investigation and pressure from Congress caused the President to 
remove the CSB chairman.
  I want you to know that as the subcommittee chairman on our 
committee, that we have looked at the EPA and we have taken the 
Inspector General's reports and we have used them to make considerable 
changes that have increased morale, especially at the Chemical Safety 
Board; and that we have also saved taxpayer dollars because we have 
utilized the Office of Inspector General reports. They have shed light 
on a litany of other employee misconduct. This is a good investment of 
taxpayer dollars.
  This amendment ensures that EPA OIG will have the resources it needs 
to continue to conduct these essential investigations. So the amendment 
increases funding for the EPA OIG by $10,038,000. It decreases EPA 
environmental programs and management appropriations by $14 million. 
That is actually awash when you look at the out years.
  I strongly encourage adoption of the Chaffetz amendment to this 
legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, with gratitude for your time, I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Maine is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I just want to make a few points about 
this amendment. As my colleague has said, this would reduce the funds 
from EPA operations by $14 million and increase the Inspector General 
by $10 million. I think we would certainly agree that it would be a 
good idea to increase the funding for the Inspector General, and we 
would like to see the other side increase those funds.
  But we are uncomfortable with the idea of taking the funding from the 
operating account. This account has already been cut by $92 million, 
and it would reduce the operating account by $14 million, putting that 
money over there. This seems like too severe of a cut on top of what 
has already been done.
  We don't disagree that the work of the Inspectors General across all 
agencies in Federal Government are necessary and very important and 
they do good work.
  So, once again, I just oppose the shift in funding. I think it would 
be great if the other side wanted to enhance the funding for the Office 
of Inspector General, just not through this mechanism.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Wyoming (Mrs. Lummis).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 16 offered by Mr. Gosar

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 16 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. GOSAR. 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 73, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $70,000,000)''.
       Page 95, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $70,000,000)''.
       Page 96, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $70,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Gosar) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer a commonsense amendment that 
redirects funds from EPA bureaucracy to the Forest Services' hazardous 
fuels account in order to prevent dangerous wildfires.
  In 2015, over 10 million acres burned throughout the country, setting 
a new record. In that same year, fire season appropriations requests 
were approximately $4 billion for all wildfire programs. Shamefully, 
the President requested only $356 million of those funds go toward 
hazardous fuels reduction activities.
  Thinning overgrown forests and removing hazardous fuels creates jobs 
and increases overall forest health. Unfortunately, extremist self-
interest groups and Washington bureaucrats have failed to recognize 
this correlation. As a result, timber harvests are down 80 percent over 
the last 30 years.
  Such flawed thinking also negatively impacts education and local 
communities. Historically, 25 percent of the receipts from timber 
harvests by the Federal Government go toward schools and important 
infrastructure projects.
  The failure to prioritize hazardous fuels reduction activities is 
also bad for our environment, as sound data from NASA concludes that 
one catastrophic wildfire can emit more carbon emissions in a few days 
than total emissions in an entire State over the course of a year.
  As it currently stands, the Forest Service consistently raids its own 
treasury when firefighting costs exceed their estimated yearly 
allotment, taking money from programs that clear brush and remove dead 
trees. This represents yet another classic example of Washington's 
misguided prioritization of Federal funds.
  The Forest Service's own Fuel Treatment Effective Database reports 
that ``over 90 percent of the fuel treatments were effective in 
changing fire behavior and/or helping with control of the wildfire.''
  Hazardous fuels reduction activities work. In eastern Arizona, areas 
that were treated in the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest as part of 
the White Mountain Stewardship Project help prevent further destruction 
from the catastrophic Wallow Fire.
  Today there are still healthy trees as firefighters were able to 
control previously thinned areas. On other lands that were untouched by 
thinning practices and managed by the Forest Service, all that is left 
behind is scorched earth and sterilized soil.
  It is of the utmost urgency that the Federal Government adopt a 
forward-thinking, active management strategy that combats dangerous 
wildfires before they get started. My amendment helps accomplish that 
task by redirecting scarce resources to important hazardous fuels 
reduction activities.
  I am honored that this amendment is supported by the Americans for 
Limited Government, Public Lands Council, National Cattlemen's Beef 
Association, Agribusiness & Water Council of Arizona, Lake Havasu Area 
Chamber of Commerce, New Mexico Wool Growers, New Mexico Federal Lands 
Council, Yavapai County Cattle Growers' Association, Yuma County 
Chamber of Commerce, and countless other organizations and individuals 
in my home State of Arizona.
  I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. I thank the chairman 
and ranking member for their good work on this bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Maine is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I have to strongly oppose this amendment 
that would take even more money from the already starved EPA. The bill 
has already severely cut the Environmental Protection Agency's main 
operating account by $92 million. This would cut it by another $70 
million. And so far tonight, we have agreed to another $29 million 
through amendments.
  The very air we breathe and the water we drink are endangered by the 
funding and the policy decisions that are already made in this bill. 
Their consequences will be felt negatively in communities across this 
country.
  I know it is often an easy target for my colleagues across the aisle 
to cut the EPA, but I do want my colleagues to understand what this 
amendment would mean if this cut was adopted.
  The account funds programs that are important to both sides of the 
aisle, including permitting for construction projects across the 
country; toxics; risk prevention; part of the successful brownfields 
program; pesticides licensing, which, as we know, is a critical part of 
fighting the Zika crisis.
  In my opinion, this very large cut would be irresponsible, and I urge 
my colleagues to oppose it.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Calvert).

[[Page H4758]]

  

  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I believe that the Forest Service needs to 
be more proactive in managing our national forests. The latest 
estimates show that there are nearly 66 million dead and dying trees in 
California right now. This sets the stage for what could be a 
disastrous fire seed. We simply must get ahead of this situation. This 
is why we provided significant increases for hazardous fuel and 
management programs in this bill, but certainly we would support any 
additional help.
  I would move to adopt this very important amendment.

                              {time}  1900

  Ms. PINGREE. Madam Chair, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen). The gentleman from Arizona has 
1\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, while the bill does include nearly $2.9 
billion for wildfire activities, which I am thankful for, most of these 
dollars are focused on suppression activities.
  As I stated previously, the 2015 fire season set a new record, 
burning more than 10 million acres throughout the country. It is easy 
to make that statement when it is not your home burning. Clearly, we 
must focus on proactive solutions for our Nation's forests.
  The best way to do so is by providing the Forest Service hazardous 
fuel account with appropriate funding in order to prevent hazardous 
wildfires. My amendment accomplishes that task by redirecting scarce 
resources from the EPA's bureaucracy.
  The EPA is far from being underfunded. As it stands, this bill 
currently funds the EPA at over $7.98 billion. This marginal loss to a 
rogue administration that continues to circumvent Congress in order to 
implement lawless regulations is better spent through my amendment and 
will dramatically increase the Forest Service's ability to prevent 
dangerous wildfires. Again, I urge the support of my amendment.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Madam Chair, I just want to reiterate again, this bill 
has already severely cut the EPA's main operating account by $92 
million. Already tonight, amendments have cut it another $29 million. 
This agency is fundamental. The protection that they do is critical. 
This account funds programs that are important to us on both sides of 
the aisle.
  No one disagrees that it is important to fund the disastrous 
wildfires that have taken over in our country, and we very much 
understand those challenges, but this amendment is irresponsible. I 
urge my colleagues to oppose it.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
  The amendment was agreed to.


               Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Westerman

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 17 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 73, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $12,000,000)''.
       Page 90, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Chair, I would like to thank the gentleman from 
California, Chairman Calvert, for allowing me the opportunity to offer 
this important amendment.
  I rise today in support of my amendment. My amendment is simple. It 
removes $12 million from the EPA's environmental programs and 
management account and places $10 million into the U.S. Forest 
Service's forest and rangeland research account, which funds important 
scientific research through the Forest Inventory and Analysis Program 
and the Forest Products Laboratory. This will free up money from the 
Federal bureaucracy for use in on-the-ground scientific research into 
forest health, wood products, biomass, and threatened species.
  To make sound forest management decisions, it is imperative to 
quantify the amount of standing timber, the harvest and usage rates, 
how much is lost to insects and disease infestation, how many trees are 
lost to wildfire, and how much net growth occurs in our forest. The 
Forest Inventory and Analysis Program does just that.
  The data is used to assess the quantity and quality of our 
forestlands, both public and private. It lets us know if we are gaining 
or losing forestland, and it tells us if we have a net loss or net gain 
in trees and tree volume. This data is critical to calculate how much 
carbon storage we have in our forest, and without this data, we cannot 
understand our total carbon balance.
  The Forest Service often finds itself on extended sampling periods, 
sometime as many as 6 or 7 years, leading to delayed analysis of our 
Nation's forest landscape. This forces States to increase their 
matching contributions in order to have sound, timely scientific data 
for statewide forest management plans.
  FIA takes proactive, positive steps in the area of better forest 
management. FIA leads to scientific forest management practices that 
increase carbon storage and reduce the threat to wildfire. Additional 
funding to FIA will also give wood products and timber industries 
certainty in making business decisions. Forestry employs approximately 
2.8 million people nationwide, and this is larger than the automotive 
industry.
  The forest and rangeland research account also funds the Forest 
Products Laboratory. The Forest Products Laboratory conducts 
significant scientific research into wood products, forest biomass, the 
use of wood in tall buildings and threats to various species, such as 
white-nose syndrome. This amendment is a win-win for a healthy 
environment and scientific research.
  Madam Chair, I again want to thank the gentleman from California, 
Chairman Calvert, for the opportunity to offer this amendment.
  Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. WESTERMAN. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CALVERT. I just want to make a point.
  I appreciate the gentleman's interest in forestry issues and his 
support for changing the way we budget for catastrophic wildland fires. 
An increase in the Forest Service's research capability will help 
address our forest management issues. I support the amendment, and I 
certainly urge its adoption.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Maine is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PINGREE. Madam Chair, again, I must oppose this amendment because 
it continues to take more money from the already-starved EPA. The EPA's 
main operating account was cut by $92 million in the bill. With the 
last amendment that just passed, we have cut another $99 million 
tonight from the EPA account.
  We are not arguing that funding for forest and rangeland research is 
a poor purpose, but it was fully funded in the budget, and it is 
starting to feel a little bit like we are just seeing amendment after 
amendment that is a way to starve the EPA.
  The EPA is a critical agency. The very air that we breathe, the water 
that we drink are endangered by the funding and policy decisions that 
are being made in this bill. The consequences will be felt negatively 
in communities across the country.
  I just cannot support taking money from an underfunded agency and 
putting it into a program that is already receiving an increase in this 
bill, so I oppose the amendment.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Chair, healthy forests are critical to clean 
air, clean water, better wildlife habitat, better recreation 
opportunities, and more biodiversity. This amendment will promote 
healthy forests, and I urge a ``yes'' vote.

[[Page H4759]]

  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Madam Chair, we certainly support healthy forests. I 
represent the State of Maine, where we have a tremendous amount of 
forests and many people who work in the forest products industry, so we 
respect the value of this research. But it was fully funded in the 
budget, and this is just another cut to the EPA and will take away from 
the work that they are able to do to protect our clean air and clean 
water. I oppose the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
  The amendment was agreed to.


           Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Johnson of Georgia

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 18 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 73, line 17, insert ``, consistent with Executive 
     Order 12898,'' after ``implementation''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Johnson) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Madam Chair, power companies are closing 
coal-fired power plants as we move toward cleaner, more sustainable 
ways to generate electricity. A material known as coal ash is a 
byproduct of this industry. Coal ash contains carcinogens, known 
carcinogens, such as arsenic, lead, and mercury.
  The EPA is now regulating coal ash with its final rule on the 
disposal of coal combustion residuals from electric utilities. Many of 
the neighborhoods already exposed to dangerous levels of coal ash are 
in predominantly low-income and minority communities.
  The problem of low-income and minority communities being 
disproportionately exposed to chemicals, hazardous waste, and toxic 
materials is neither new nor confined to one area of the country. More 
than 134 million Americans--their homes, schools, businesses, parks, 
and places of worship--are in harm's way from dangerous exposure to 
coal ash.
  A 2014 study found that residents in vulnerable zones are 
disproportionately African American or Latino, have higher rates of 
poverty than the U.S. as a whole, and have lower housing values, 
incomes, and education levels. The poverty rate in these zones is 50 
percent higher than the national average. The percentage of Blacks is 
75 percent greater than for the U.S. as a whole, while the percentage 
of Latinos is 60 percent greater. This means that almost half of the 
people more likely to suffer from exposure are Black or Latino.
  But make no mistake, Madam Chair, coal ash poisoning is not racially 
discriminatory. Rural White communities throughout north Georgia, North 
Carolina, Tennessee, and Oklahoma are suffering from exposure to coal 
ash dumping, leaking coal ash ponds, and coal ash dust from coal ash 
transport. We cannot allow people across the country to fall between 
the regulatory cracks simply because they live in a certain 
neighborhood or have certain income levels.
  This amendment requires implementation of the EPA's coal ash rule to 
be consistent with Executive Order No. 12898. That executive order's 
purpose was to focus Federal attention on the environmental and public 
health effects that Federal regulations have on minority and low-income 
communities.
  More coal ash is expected to be dumped in the State of Georgia. In 
Jesup, Georgia, a landfill has agreed to accept over 10,000 tons of 
coal ash per day. Duke Energy is moving their coal ash from North 
Carolina to a landfill in Banks County, Georgia. Elsewhere within 
Georgia, communities have been exposed to contaminated drinking water 
by existing coal ash facilities. Last month, arsenic, beryllium, and 
selenium were found in the groundwater of various coal ash sites in the 
State.
  As we saw in Flint, we need to act at the Federal level before our 
failure to do so results in irreversible damage to the health and to 
the environment of the communities we represent. American families, 
regardless of income level, should not be unfairly and unreasonably 
exposed to toxic chemicals.
  I ask for support for my amendment.
  Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, because the gentleman's amendment restates 
current law and nothing more, I am more than willing to accept the 
amendment.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. I thank the gentleman.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                  Amendment No. 19 Offered by Ms. Esty

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 19 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. ESTY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 74, line 25, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 76, line 18, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 83, line 6, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentlewoman 
from Connecticut (Ms. Esty) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Connecticut.
  Ms. ESTY. Madam Chair, my amendment would increase funding by $10 
million to match the President's budget request for the State and 
Tribal Assistance Grants to clean up and revitalize brownfields.
  Too many cities and towns across America with proud manufacturing 
legacies are now struggling with vacant brownfield properties. As our 
country transitioned away from manufacturing, plants and mills began to 
close, leaving too many communities to deal with these industrial sites 
on their own.
  These former industrial sites have come to be known as brownfields, 
land where the presence or potential presence of contamination prevents 
expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of the land. Brownfield sites aren't 
limited to abandoned factories or buildings. They can also be former 
dry cleaning establishments or gas stations that are no longer in use. 
Every single congressional district in our Nation has at least one 
brownfield site, and some, in fact, have hundreds.
  In April, I was in Torrington, Connecticut, a former mill town in my 
district where, like many communities in the Naugatuck River Valley, 
there are brownfields scattered throughout the city. I met with Mayor 
Carbone and other city and local officials to learn about plans to 
clean up and repurpose two industrial sites, which would create jobs 
and revitalize the downtown area.

                              {time}  1915

  The plan to revitalize downtown Torrington was made possible by 
funding provided through the EPA's brownfields grant program. However, 
to implement Torrington's transformative plan, we need additional 
funding in the brownfields program.
  I think it is important to note that addressing brownfields is not 
simply an issue for our cities. Expanding funding for brownfields helps 
not only our cities, but also our suburbs and agricultural communities. 
Cleaning up and putting brownfields back into economic use in our 
cities helps preserve open space and surrounding communities by taking 
pressure off of demand for virgin or undeveloped land.
  Additionally, taxpayer dollars go a long way in the brownfields 
program. For every dollar expended by the EPA's brownfields program, it 
leverages, on average, approximately $18 in additional public and 
private investment and, in many cases, property values have more than 
doubled when communities were given the resources necessary to 
repurpose brownfield sites.

[[Page H4760]]

  According to a 2007 study, approximately 10 jobs are created for 
every acre of brownfields redevelopment, and with over 400,000 
brownfields sites across the country, the work needed to clean up these 
sites is far from complete.
  So let's do our job as elected officials by empowering our 
constituents with additional funding to clean up contaminated 
properties, attract new businesses, create jobs, safeguard public 
health, and revitalize our downtowns.
  I encourage all of my colleagues to support the Esty amendment.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I certainly understand the value of EPA's 
brownfields program. It is highly leveraged and promotes economic 
development in communities by cleaning up lightly contaminated 
properties and returning them to beneficial use. These are good things, 
no doubt about it. That is why the FY 2017 Interior bill continues to 
provide the brownfields program with $80 million. That is equal to the 
enacted level.
  With limited resources, we need to be strategic about where we 
provide increases. The FY 2017 bill increases funding to clean up most 
toxic contaminated Superfund sites across the Nation.
  We will debate some Democratic amendments that seek to increase the 
Superfund account beyond what we have done in the bill in order to 
match the President's request. Certainly, no one wants to live next to 
a Superfund site. We have more than 1,300 sites on the Superfund list. 
These sites contain led, arsenic, cadmium, PCBs, and other highly toxic 
chemicals. We need to make progress on these 1,300 sites.
  So, I must oppose the proposed cut to the Superfund and strongly urge 
my colleagues to do the same.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. ESTY. Madam Chair, again, with all due respect, I think, as my 
colleague has noted, these dollars make an enormous impact, and I would 
respectfully request and urge my colleagues to support the Esty 
amendment.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I urge opposition to the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. Esty).
  The amendment was rejected.


                 Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. Palmer

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 20 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. PALMER. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 76, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $100,000,000)''.
       Page 84, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $100,000,000)''.
       Page 184, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $100,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Alabama (Mr. Palmer) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama.
  Mr. PALMER. Madam Chair, I commend the gentleman from California for 
his and his colleagues' work on this bill.
  Madam Chair, my amendment would eliminate funding for the Diesel 
Emissions Reduction Act grant program, saving taxpayers $100 million. 
Funds from this program have gone to a number of questionable items, 
including $750,000 for cherry pickers in Utah, $1 million for 
electrified parking spaces at a truck stop in Delaware, and $1.2 for a 
new engine and generators for a 1950s locomotive in Pennsylvania.
  This program was intended to be a short-term effort to assist States 
and local governments in meeting diesel emissions standards, but has 
joined a long list of temporary government programs for which there is 
no end in sight.
  As Ronald Reagan famously said that, ``The nearest thing to eternal 
life we will ever see on this Earth is a government program.''
  One of the things I have learned as a freshman Member of Congress is 
that we have an office tasked with holding Federal agencies accountable 
and reporting on their programs. That office is the Government 
Accountability Office. One of the things that has surprised me is how 
rarely we act on their recommendations. I hope that won't be the case 
with this program.
  The GAO has noted that funding to reduce diesel emissions is 
fragmented across 14 programs at the Department of Energy, the 
Department of Transportation, and the Environmental Protection Agency. 
Surely we can make do with one less.
  The $100 million provided in this bill represents an increase of 100 
percent compared to last year's bill and an increase of 100 percent 
compared to the omnibus bill passed in December.
  With a national debt exceeding $19 trillion, and growing every day, 
we cannot afford to double the budget of a program that clearly 
duplicates, at least in part, 13 other programs, and has a marginal 
impact at best.
  The program was originally authorized in the Energy Policy Act of 
2005, and was reauthorized for 5 years in 2010. This authorization 
expired in fiscal year 2016, making any appropriation an unauthorized 
one.
  Congress should not provide $100 million for a wasteful and 
unauthorized program, and I urge my colleagues to support the 
amendment.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, Ronald Reagan was mentioned in discussing 
the gentleman's amendment.
  Ronald Reagan signed into law CalEPA in the State of California. He 
also signed into law the first air quality district to regulate air in 
the United States, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, in 
the State of California, which was authored by a former colleague of 
ours named Jerry Lewis.
  Clean air is not a political or partisan issue. Certainly, in my 
area, which has some of the dirtiest air in the United States, we have 
done a lot to clean up air in our area in California.
  We have included a great number of policy provisions to address EPA's 
regulatory overreach, which I agree with, in this bill. And we have cut 
the EPA's budget dramatically, which I am in favor of doing. However, I 
believe that this specific amendment targets a program that is yielding 
great benefits. When you have a program that is actually working, we 
ought to keep it.
  Many counties across the Nation are currently not in containment with 
EPA's existing standards for particulate matter and ozone. In many 
instances, these counties have been in non-containment for years, and 
those communities need help to improve their air quality.
  The Diesel Emission Reduction Act grant program, DERA, is a proven, 
cost-effective program that provides grants to States to retrofit old 
diesel engines. So it is a program that supports manufacturing jobs, 
while also reducing pollution significantly.
  Another benefit is these grants are highly leveraged, producing $13 
of economic benefit for every Federal dollar that is invested in this 
program.
  Today, newer engines produce 90 percent less toxic emissions than the 
older diesel engines. However, only 30 percent of trucks and heavy-duty 
vehicles transition to these cleaner technologies. We need to follow 
the science and accelerate the replacement of old engines with newer, 
cleaner engines.
  From fiscal year 2009 to fiscal year 2013, DERA grant funding has 
replaced or retooled almost 59,000 engines in vehicles, trucks, trains, 
and other equipment. Again, DERA is an effective, proven program that 
is delivering results.
  I strongly urge Members to vote ``no'' on the gentleman's amendment.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALMER. Madam Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's concerns.

[[Page H4761]]

Over the last 30 years or so, the air quality in the United States has 
improved dramatically, despite the fact that we have seen huge 
increases in vehicle miles traveled, a 30-something percent increase in 
our GDP, and a 30-something percent increase in population. Yet, we 
have seen dramatic improvement in air quality, and I appreciate the 
fact that government programs have had a part to play in that.
  In regard to the savings, the EPA has said that for every dollar we 
spend, we will get $14 in benefits. I would also like to point out that 
they also say that the Clean Power Plan will help the economy and that 
EPA regulations haven't lost jobs. I think the EPA estimates on savings 
are a little suspect.
  The program was funded at $30 million in FY 2015 and $50 million in 
2016. Now we are considering a bill to increase it to $100 million in 
2017. We cannot afford to continue spending without limits and pretend 
as if there are no consequences. Keep in mind that there are 14 
programs. Surely, we can consolidate these into one effective program.

  I also think it is important to note that this was supposed to expire 
after the first authorization. It was reauthorized for 4 more years. 
And that expires this year, making any appropriation for FY 2017 
another wasteful, unauthorized program.
  The Republican Study Committee budget recommended elimination and 
noted that the grants have gone to a number of wasteful programs.
  Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I want to point out that DERA is not a 
regulatory program. The power plant rule that was mentioned earlier is 
a regulatory program.
  What DERA does is replace old technology with the new technology that 
is up to 90 percent cleaner than the old trucks, old diesel engines 
that we are presently using. This is working.
  I am not in favor of programs and continuous studies and other 
oppressive methods by EPA that don't produce clean air. This does. It 
was mentioned that our air is getting cleaner. It is getting cleaner 
because of programs like DERA that actually work. It is measurable in 
the South Coast Air Quality Management District and other areas 
throughout the United States.
  They have been able to take these dirty, old trucks off the road. You 
have all seen them. You have been on the freeway and you see an old 
diesel truck that is putting out more emissions than virtually 
everything else around them. You take that truck off the road and it 
has immediate results.
  So let's not get rid of something that works. Let's work against 
these regulatory programs that oppress the economy and don't have any 
results.
  I might point out, too, the administration has been opposed to DERA. 
Most of the environmental folks have been opposed because they don't 
want any carbon in the economy. So they don't want us to clean up 
diesel because they want to have electric vehicles or zero emission 
vehicles, which do not have the horsepower or the ability to deliver 
the goods that we need to have in this Nation.
  So, I would urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALMER. May I inquire as to how much time I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 1 minute remaining.
  Mr. PALMER. In regard to the EPA, the gentleman from California cited 
an EPA finding on the benefits and my response to that--that it is not 
a regulatory program--but that is beside the fact. What it is, is a 
duplication of other programs. It is unauthorized and it is wasteful.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I might point out that the FBI is not 
authorized at the present time. We continue to fund it.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Palmer).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. PALMER. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Alabama will 
be postponed.


      Amendment No. 21 Offered by Mr. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 21 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. BEN RAY LUJAN of New Mexico. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at 
the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 76, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $6,000,000)(reduced by $6,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from New Mexico (Mr. Ben Ray Lujan) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Mexico.

                              {time}  1930

  Mr. BEN RAY LUJAN of New Mexico. Madam Chair, last August, the 
Environmental Protection Agency was responsible for the blowout at the 
Gold King Mine in Colorado that spilled 3 million gallons of 
wastewater, impacting New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Arizona, and the 
Navajo Nation.
  I was in Farmington, New Mexico, when the toxic plume turned the 
Animas River yellow. I met with the community and heard their concerns 
about the toll that the spill was taking on businesses, farmers, 
families, and individuals.
  Madam Chair, we are almost 1 year removed from the spill, and in 
communities that have been impacted, there remains serious concerns 
about the long-term effects that the spill will have on the river and 
all that its water sustains, from drinking water to farming and 
livestock.
  Long-term water quality monitoring is essential to ensure that 
communities along the Animas River have the data they need to protect 
the health of all those who rely on this water.
  Unfortunately, the State of New Mexico and the EPA have been unable 
to agree on what the long-term monitoring should look like. As a 
result, the State has moved ahead with a lawsuit against the EPA.
  Madam Chair, it is disappointing that it has come to this point of 
legal action. My amendment today seeks to address this issue by 
providing $6 million to direct the EPA to work with affected States and 
Indian Tribes to implement long-term monitoring programs for water 
quality on the Animas and San Juan Rivers in response to the Gold King 
Mine spill.
  The State of New Mexico has worked with stakeholders to develop a 
robust monitoring plan that I believe can serve as a basis for a truly 
comprehensive effort. Monitoring now and well into the future is 
necessary to protect the health of all those who rely on this water, 
and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I certainly appreciate the gentleman's 
remarks. It is important that EPA right the wrong that caused the Gold 
King Mine spill, and ensure that the affected States and Tribes have 
the resources they need following the spill.
  The FY17 bill includes language instructing the EPA to continue to 
operate a temporary water treatment plant to treat contaminated flows 
in the area until a more permanent water treatment solution is 
developed. And the FY16 omnibus instructed EPA to work with the States 
and tribes on an independent water monitoring plan.
  At this time I must respectfully oppose the gentleman's amendment, 
but I would also ask the gentleman to work with me as the committee 
continues to monitor the implementation and what the EPA is continuing 
to do.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BEN RAY LUJAN of New Mexico. Madam Chair, I appreciate the 
leadership of the chairman. He has been very

[[Page H4762]]

gracious, he and his staff, with several amendments that are important 
to New Mexico during this debate as well.
  What has happened now is the temporary facility has been located in 
the State of Colorado as well, where this has taken place, where this 
blowout took place; but we are still seeing remnants of heavy metals 
all the way down to that contamination plume, and it just hasn't been 
enough.
  I will read something that our Attorney General from the State of New 
Mexico recently said.
  ``The release of hazardous substances into waters that are the 
lifeblood of our economy and culture in New Mexico has had a 
devastating impact on our historical rural, agricultural and tribal 
communities . . . It is inappropriate for the EPA to impose weak 
testing standards in New Mexico and I am demanding the highest testing 
standards that the EPA would impose in any other state in the nation to 
protect the health and well-being of our citizens. Additionally, 
remediation and compensation dollars have been far too minimal for 
these very special agricultural and cultural communities who depend on 
this precious water source for irrigation and drinking water. They must 
be properly compensated and there must be appropriate independent 
monitoring to prevent future dangers to public health and the 
economy.''
  Attorney General Hector Balderas.
  Mr. Calvert, I really want to be able to get a vote on this one. I 
understand the opposition here, but I really want to force this point 
home to the EPA and the administration, that what has been put on the 
table, which is $2 million, is simply not enough to help us in New 
Mexico.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Again, I appreciate what the gentleman is up to. I 
wouldn't expect you not to have a vote if you choose to have a vote. 
Just know that we are working on this, and we will continue to work on 
this. We will continue to work with your office, but at this point I 
have to reluctantly oppose the bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BEN RAY LUJAN of New Mexico. Madam Chair, I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Ben Ray Lujan).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BEN RAY LUJAN of New Mexico. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded 
vote.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Mexico will be 
postponed.


                Amendment No. 22 Offered by Mrs. Dingell

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 22 printed in 
House Report 114-683.
  Mrs. DINGELL. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 106, strike lines 8 through 22.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentlewoman from 
Michigan (Mrs. Dingell) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The gentlewoman from Michigan is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. DINGELL. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Chair, my amendment strikes language in the bill that would 
exempt a number of potentially damaging activities in our national 
forests from full consideration under the National Environmental Policy 
Act. Simply put, this sort of language has no place in an 
appropriations bill.
  Our national forests are a true public legacy that sustains both our 
environment and our economy. They provide clean air, clean water, 
precious wildlife habitat, and they support approximately 450,000 jobs 
throughout the country. We should all be coming together to ensure that 
our forests are healthy and that future generations will be able to 
enjoy them.
  Yet, the language that my amendment proposes to strike could allow 
many types of damaging activities to occur in our national forests 
without a full review under the National Environmental Policy Act, or 
NEPA, as we call it.
  NEPA has a simple premise; you look before you leap. This landmark 
law gives the public an opportunity to review and comment on actions 
proposed by the government, adding unique perspectives to the 
evaluation process that highly specialized, mission-driven agencies 
might otherwise ignore.
  The underlying legislation proposes to make six different activities 
in our national forests eligible for a categorical exclusion under 
NEPA, which means a full review would not be conducted and the public 
would not have the right to be heard.
  While some of these activities may be appropriate to consider for a 
categorical exclusion, they should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis 
and should not automatically be eligible for categorical exclusion, as 
this legislation proposes.
  As the Council on Environmental Quality has stated: ``Categorical 
exclusions are appropriate in many circumstances but should not be 
relied on if they thwart the purposes of NEPA, compromising the quality 
and transparency of agency decisionmaking or the opportunity for 
meaningful public participation.''
  I couldn't agree with them more. CEQ was right, and that is exactly 
what this bill proposes to do.
  As an example, the underlying bill proposes to exclude all activities 
related to reducing hazardous fuel loads from a full NEPA review. This 
makes little sense. If a hazardous fuel load reduction is not done 
properly, it could destroy an entire forest. This is exactly the sort 
of activity that should have a thorough and comprehensive NEPA review.
  I hope my colleagues will join me in standing up for public 
participation in government decisionmaking by supporting this 
amendment.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the gentlewoman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. 
Westerman).
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Chair, I must say, as I rise in opposition to 
this amendment, that I serve on the Natural Resources Committee with 
the gentlewoman from Michigan, and I know that we hold a common idea to 
be good stewards of our resources. We just happen to have a difference 
of opinion on the best way to do that on this issue, so I must rise in 
opposition to her amendment.
  Our Nation's forests are in dire health, and Congress must provide 
the Forest Service additional tools to allow more management of our 
national forest system.
  This amendment would needlessly deny the Forest Service an 
opportunity to more quickly address a forest system that is overgrown 
and prone to wildfire, disease, and insect infestation.
  Last summer I was proud to sponsor H.R. 2647, the Resilient Federal 
Forest Act, which passed the House with a strong bipartisan majority. 
This bill included several provisions to allow the Forest Service to 
engage in urgently needed restoration in a more timely fashion.
  These are forest stands that are already being destroyed by natural 
occurrences; and in order to restore those forest habitats, we have to 
act in an urgent and a timely manner.
  One specific provision would allow the Forest Service to treat up to 
3,000 acres of land at a time under a categorical exclusion from NEPA 
within limited circumstances. Some of these circumstances include 
treating a forest infected by invasive species, if a forest has been 
affected by a natural disaster such as a hurricane or tornado, or if 
work is needed to protect a municipal water source.
  This provision was based on a carefully crafted provision in the 2014 
farm bill that the Forest Service has used successfully to reduce the 
threat of catastrophic wildfire in our rural communities. I am pleased 
that Chairman Calvert chose to include this provision in the fiscal 
year 2017 Interior Appropriations bill.
  The Natural Resources Committee has heard testimony from stakeholders

[[Page H4763]]

across the country about the dire need to better manage our forests. We 
have heard from the Forest Service that nearly 60 million acres of land 
are in need of some form of treatment. While we wait for the Senate to 
act on wildfire legislation, we must continue to seek opportunities to 
help reduce the threat of wildfire to communities across the country.
  This amendment would strip this important provision from the 
appropriations bill. We should be doing more to shorten the timeframe 
for the Forest Service to engage in restoration work. I urge my 
colleagues to join me in opposing this amendment.
  Mrs. DINGELL. Madam Chair, I want to quickly respond to the comments 
made by my dear friend. We are good friends, and we all do need to work 
together to protect our great lands in this country, but I would 
respectfully disagree. I have nothing but the utmost respect for both 
of my Republican colleagues that I hate disagreeing with, and we agree 
on the same goal, but I respectfully disagree on your disagreeing on my 
amendment.
  Some of these activities may be appropriate for a categorical 
exclusion, but that should be decided by the agency on a case-by-case 
basis, not be dictated by Congress, which you tell us many times, in an 
appropriations bill.
  Make no mistake, mandating the use of categorical exclusions, like 
this bill proposes, is simply a ruse to make an end run around NEPA and 
the public process that is so important to it.
  We often hear that NEPA is a scapegoat for projects being delayed, 
and I would not want that to be the case; but GAO and others have found 
that outside issues, including the complexity of the project, local 
opposition and, most importantly, funding issues, are almost always the 
cause of the delays.
  We shouldn't be limiting public comments and involvement in 
government decisions, but, instead, should be enhancing them. This bill 
does the opposite, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I just want to make a point. At this time 
there are about 66 million dead and dying trees in my State. It is 
estimated that over the next few years, we could lose up to 120 million 
trees. That is 20 percent of the entire State of California's total. 
The trees are dying from drought, severe insect and disease 
infestation, which only intensifies the potential for disastrous and 
potentially catastrophic fires.
  Unfortunately, we have already seen the loss of life and property 
from the fast-moving wildfires this year, just most recently, right in 
the Majority Leader's Congressional District, where people, 
unfortunately, lost their lives.
  I have worked with the senior Senator from California on this. We 
have used this to the benefit of our State, and other States have used 
it to the benefit of theirs. This provision is truly limited in nature.

                              {time}  1945

  It can only be used on small acreages about 3,000 acres or less.
  Madam Chairman, I urge opposition to this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mrs. DINGELL. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan 
will be postponed.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chairwoman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. 
Chaffetz) for the purpose of colloquy.
  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Madam Chair, Federal land management agencies are 
biting off more than they can chew. Not only are these agencies tasked 
with managing one-third of the entire landmass in the United States of 
America, but they are also asked to provide law enforcement and police 
support to some 660 million acres on the Federal estate.
  Land management agencies should not be in the business of policing. 
Currently, the Nation's largest land management agency, the Bureau of 
Land Management, has just one office--one person--per 1 million acres 
of Federal land. This is an inadequate system that does not serve the 
public, Federal lands, or local communities very well.
  Local county sheriffs, on the other hand, and local law enforcement 
deputies are in a better position to police lands within their county. 
These individuals are known by members of their community. They are 
trusted, they are better equipped, and there are more of them. Already 
local law enforcement agencies contract with the Federal Government to 
carry out the very same law enforcement functions that Federal agencies 
require. We need to expand this concept and take actions to limit the 
role of land management agency law enforcement officials.
  Madam Chair, I believe we must work to transfer authorities and, 
ultimately, funding to those local jurisdictions and sheriffs. There 
will come a time when the Appropriations Committee will play a key role 
in executing this strategy. I request that the chairman work with 
Chairman Rob Bishop of the Committee on Natural Resources, me, and 
other Members to accomplish this important policy change.
  Mr. CALVERT. Reclaiming my time, I am pleased the gentleman has 
raised this issue. It is important to work together to ensure law 
enforcement arrangements are best suited to the populations they serve. 
I appreciate the gentleman's dedication to this issue, and I look 
forward to working together to assess the role of law enforcement.
  Madam Chairwoman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 23 will 
not be offered.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 24 printed in House 
Report 114-683.


               Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mr. Cartwright

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 25 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, and 
I ask that it be considered.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike section 425.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cartwright) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Chair, this amendment is very simple. It strikes section 425 of 
H.R. 5538. Section 425 would prohibit the EPA from updating the 
definition of the terms ``fill material'' or ``discharge of fill 
material'' under the Clean Water Act.
  These definitions underlie section 404 of the Clean Water Act, which 
governs dredge and fill permitting, one of the act's most important 
components. Put more simply, section 425 would continue giving real 
legal cover to mountaintop mining companies to dump mining waste into 
valley streams. As such, section 425 is an attack on the Clean Water 
Act.
  Now, mountaintop mining for coal produces a lot of unusable excess 
material, known as overburden. The cheapest and easiest way for 
industry to dispose of overburden is to bulldoze it into valleys and 
waterways surrounding these decapitated mountains. This had been 
illegal because the Clean Water Act categorized overburden as waste, 
which cannot be disposed of in that manner. However, in a 2002 giveaway 
to the mountaintop mining industry, the George W. Bush administration 
reclassified overburden as fill. This cleared the path for it to be 
dumped in mountain valleys once teeming with life.
  As if mining overburden were not enough, the definition of fill was 
expanded to also include material such as wood chips, construction 
debris, and plastic. As a result, every year, 120 miles of headwater 
streams are buried in mining debris. These so-called valley fills can 
be more than 1 mile long, each, and hundreds of feet deep.

[[Page H4764]]

  This overburden doesn't just take up space; it is also an 
environmental hazard. Mining debris can contain chemicals and toxins 
that pose health risks to humans and ecosystems alike. For example, 
studies have found substantially higher levels of selenium, a mineral 
that is toxic to fish in high doses, in rivers near mountaintop mine 
sites. These hazardous substances also pose real dangers to the 
downstream users of the water.
  Overburden dumping and the mining that causes it produce soil erosion 
and waterway siltation. A 2008 EPA study found that 90 percent of the 
streams downstream of surface mining had impaired aquatic life. The 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that the loss of forest and 
aquatic habitat to mountaintop mining affects almost 250 species, 
including several listed species.
  This practice also destroys an archetypal American landscape, one 
which gave rise to a unique culture which has shaped generations of 
Appalachian residents and which has left its imprint on the broader 
American culture.
  Allowing mountaintop mining operations to continue dumping their 
waste into our Nation's streams and rivers is both dangerous and 
irresponsible. I urge my colleagues to join me in putting an end to it. 
Allow EPA to do their work and protect the environment and the public's 
health. Support my amendment striking section 425.
  Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chairman, the language in section 425 simply 
maintains the status quo regarding the definition of fill material for 
purposes of the Clean Water Act. The existing definition was put in 
place through a rulemaking initiated by the Clinton administration and 
finalized by the Bush administration. That rule harmonized the 
definition on the books of the Corps and EPA so both agencies were 
working within the same definition.
  Any attempts to redefine this important definition could 
significantly negatively impact the ability of all earthmoving 
industries--road and highway construction and private and commercial 
enterprise--to obtain vital CWA section 404 permits.
  Changing the definition of fill material could result in the loss of 
up to 375,000 high-paying mining jobs and jeopardize over 1 million 
jobs that are dependent upon the economic output generated by these 
operations.
  For these reasons, I support the underlying language and oppose the 
amendment.
  Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chairwoman, the gentleman's points are well 
taken that the status quo is preserved, and that is the problem. 
Section 425 would prohibit any change in the status quo and would 
prohibit the EPA from updating the definitions of the terms ``fill 
material'' or ``discharge of fill material'' under the Clean Water Act, 
thereby hamstringing the EPA from making any kind of sensible updating 
of those terms. Any attempt at this point to enumerate the number of 
jobs that could be lost in some as yet undefined change of those terms 
simply lacks credibility at this point.
  There is no point in hamstringing the EPA in this fashion by refusing 
to allow any further clarification of the terms ``fill material'' or 
``discharge of fill material.''
  Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Madam Chairwoman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
West Virginia (Mr. Jenkins).
  Mr. JENKINS of West Virginia. Madam Chairman, I do also rise in 
opposition to this amendment. As a Member representing southern West 
Virginia, I know firsthand the effect a rewrite of the fill material 
regulations would have on coal mining operations. What this amendment 
would do would freeze operations and lead to even further layoffs on 
top of the more than 10,000 jobs we have lost in just the last 5 years.
  As the chairman referenced, in last year's omnibus, Congress 
included--Congress included--similar legislation preventing the EPA and 
the Corps of Engineers from changing the definition of fill material. 
Unfortunately, redefining fill material would harm both existing and 
future operations in the coal mining business, resulting in the loss of 
thousands of good jobs.
  Congress should include this provision to prohibit the EPA from 
changing the definition of fill material, and I urge opposition.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Carter of Georgia). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cartwright).
  The amendment was rejected.


               Amendment No. 26 Offered by Mrs. Lawrence

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 26 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mrs. LAWRENCE. 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 147, strike lines 10 through 21.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentlewoman 
from Michigan (Mrs. Lawrence) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Michigan.
  Mrs. LAWRENCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment that 
would strike section 427 from the underlying bill.
  My amendment would preserve the Army Corps of Engineers' and the 
Environmental Protection Agency's final rule that revises regulations 
and defines the scope of waters protected under the Clean Water Act. 
More than 1 million public comments were submitted during this process, 
a majority of which support the waters of the United States rule. In 
issuing the final rule, the agencies' intention was to clarify 
questions of the Clean Water Act's jurisdiction, consistent with the 
agencies' scientific and technical expertise.
  One in three Americans rely on public drinking water systems not 
previously protected by the Clean Water Act. This rule changes that.
  The water crisis in Flint, Michigan, and the crumbling drinking water 
infrastructure in neighborhoods and communities around the country 
reinforces the need to protect our streams, ponds, and wetlands. These 
challenges impact millions of lives and disproportionately affect poor 
and minority communities.
  Our country faces a very difficult choice. We can either overlook the 
challenges facing our existing water infrastructure and the millions of 
lives it affects and the billions of dollars that it costs us, or we 
can all work together to find solutions that ensure that all Americans 
have access to safe, clean, and affordable drinking water.
  The waters of the United States rule is a commonsense reform designed 
to secure our water sources, while guaranteeing protections to millions 
of Americans.

                              {time}  2000

  This rule represents a commitment to protecting and restoring the 
national water resources that are vital for our health, environment, 
and economy.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Michigan?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.


               Amendment No. 27 Offered by Mr. Cartwright

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 27 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. Lowey), I offer amendment No. 27.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 149, strike lines 3 through 17.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cartwright) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

[[Page H4765]]

  

  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  My amendment would strike section 429, which delays implementation of 
the EPA's lead renovation, repair, and painting rule.
  According to the Centers for Disease Control, at least 4 million 
households have children who are exposed to high levels of lead. This 
includes 535,000 children younger than the age of 5. The problem is 
particularly prevalent in low-income communities.
  Yet, even as lead poisoning is a front page news story, the majority 
ignores another threat from lead and paint. There is no safe blood 
level of lead for children. That is why it is so imperative that we do 
everything we can to help families avoid lead poisoning.
  The Environmental Protection Agency has proposed reasonable 
requirements for workers to train and follow lead-safe work practices. 
It is important to mention that the rule does not apply to do-it-
yourselfers or those making improvements to newer homes.
  Opponents argue that when EPA first proposed the rule back in 2008, 
the rule offered a training exemption for those contractors who used an 
EPA-approved test kit that meets specific criteria. There are now three 
EPA recognized test kits available on the market.
  In light of the tragedy in Flint, Michigan, it is unfathomable that 
this bill would actively strip one of EPA's tools for addressing lead 
paint in homes. If we do not remove this harmful rider, we are choosing 
to endanger the health of our children.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, the Lowey amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, let me be clear, the language in the bill 
does not block EPA's implementation of the rule.
  To date, EPA has not yet approved a test kit that meets the false 
positive and false negative standards. It is yet another example of EPA 
finalizing a rule with unattainable standards.
  Therefore, the FY17 bill prompts the EPA to finish what it intended 
to do 7 years ago--approve a lead test kit as an alternative to costly 
third-party lab testing so as to prevent delays and reduce the cost of 
in-home renovations. Otherwise, EPA should solicit formal public 
comment on alternatives. The language in the bill prevents EPA from 
collecting fines for paperwork and recordkeeping violations until EPA 
solicits public comments on alternatives.
  It is straightforward, commonsense language. As such, I urge a ``no'' 
vote on the amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, may I ask the Chair how much time I 
have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania has 3 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Israel).
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I thank my distinguished friend from 
Pennsylvania.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in very strong support of the Lowey amendment.
  This amendment would strike a provision of the bill that waives part 
of the EPA's lead renovation, repair, and painting rule.
  Mr. Chairman, after Flint, we have become more aware of the growing 
need to protect our communities from the devastating impacts of lead 
exposure. According to the CDC, at least 4 million households have 
children who are exposed to high levels of lead, especially in low-
income communities.
  EPA's rule has been in effect since 2008, so why now, 8 years later, 
is the majority trying to undermine these protections? Why now? Why 
after Flint?
  Mr. Chairman, lead paint is still present in millions of homes. Now 
is not the time, it is absolutely the wrong time, to give industry a 
pass at the expense of America's children.
  I urge adoption of the amendment to protect the health and well-being 
of the American people.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from New York for 
those important words.
  Either we protect our children from lead paint or we don't.
  Mr. Chairman, I don't think anybody here would want to live in a home 
or send their children to a school that was renovated by a company that 
recklessly did not have lead-safe training. We owe it to our children 
and grandchildren to take every step possible to prevent harmful lead 
exposure.
  Vote for my amendment, vote for the Lowey amendment, to improve this 
bill and help ensure that fewer children will suffer lead poisoning.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, again, we are talking about an agency that 
can't even get a test right after 7 years. Until they do that, it is 
yet another example of EPA finalizing a rule with unattainable 
standards.
  I oppose this amendment, and I urge a ``no'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cartwright).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 28 Offered by Mr. Becerra

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 28 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. BECERRA. 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 149, strikes lines 18 through 25.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Becerra) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Chairman, my amendment strikes section 430 from the 
underlying bill. Section 430 blocks efforts by the Environmental 
Protection Agency to ensure that industries which handle hazardous 
substances set aside sufficient funds, in the form of bonds or 
insurance, to clean up toxic spills or releases that are attributable 
to their hazardous activities.
  Under current law, the EPA is required to set financial 
responsibility requirements for industries at high risk of polluting 
the environment to the point of creating these toxic Superfund sites. 
Congress required the EPA to establish financial responsibility 
requirements to ensure that taxpayers do not have to pay for the cost 
of cleaning up contaminated sites.
  Communities across America experience firsthand what it is like to 
live and breathe through the contamination of a serial polluter. Right 
now, thousands of people in my hometown of Los Angeles are living 
through this very nightmare. After nearly 30 years of operating a lead 
recycling battery plant, Exide Technologies in the Los Angeles area 
shut its operations down after contaminating some 10,000 thousand homes 
with lead--let me repeat that--10,000 homes with lead in the Los 
Angeles area.
  It has been more than a year since Exide shut down this plant and we 
still don't know who will foot the bill for cleaning those nearly 
10,000 homes with each home carrying up to a $40,000 price tag to get 
cleaned up. A $40,000 price tag, 10,000 homes--do the math--$400 
million. And that $400 million only deals with the cleanup, it doesn't 
deal with the health effects that those 10,000-plus people will have to 
deal with for their children and for themselves having suffered from 
the contamination of lead in and around their property.
  Mr. Chairman, section 430 lets polluters off the hook and leaves the 
American taxpayer on the hook for cleaning up their messes. I don't 
believe the American people intend for American taxpayers to have to 
take on the cost of cleaning up someone else's pollution.
  That is why I have introduced this amendment to strike section 430 
from

[[Page H4766]]

the bill, so that polluters, not American taxpayers, take the 
responsibility for cleaning up their mess.
  I urge passage of my amendment to ensure that polluters, not 
taxpayers, clean up their pollution.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately, EPA is under a court order 
to propose a rule by December 2016, according to a suit brought by the 
environmentalists, to compel EPA to move forward with more regulation 
on a schedule they dictate.
  BLM, the Forest Service, and the States already impose financial 
assurance regulations. Therefore, any EPA regulations proposed would be 
duplicative.
  The Western Governors' Association, along with others, have indicated 
a willingness to work together to ensure that there aren't gaps in the 
existing regulatory framework so such requirements remain protective. 
Therefore, there already is a process in place, and language that has 
been included in the bill, to alleviate the need for EPA to expend 
taxpayer resources to develop yet another set of duplicative rules.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Chairman, may I ask how much time is remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 2\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, section 430 in this bill provides a blanket prohibition 
of the EPA having the opportunity to make sure that financial 
responsibility requirements are imposed on polluters. There may be some 
provisions in this bill to try to deal with some of these aspects of 
pollution, but there is nothing that would require the polluter to show 
financial responsibility if we don't get rid of section 430.
  Therefore, in this bill, we would essentially be making lawful 
polluters polluting communities and not having to take responsibility 
for cleaning them up. I don't believe the American people, and 
certainly not American taxpayers, are expecting Congress to be passing 
bills that put the burden on taxpayers to clean up someone else's 
pollution.
  Beyond the cost of the pollution is the cost to our families. 
Children who are infected by lead contamination could suffer a 
permanent effect. I think that we want to make sure we are providing 
our children and our families with every bit of safety they expect, 
especially when they had no responsibility for the contamination of the 
pollution that exists in their neighborhoods.
  I urge my colleagues to consider this amendment which simply would 
strike this provision so that EPA can do the work that we expect it to 
do, and that is to preserve the safety and health of our communities by 
making sure if you are going to have a business that pollutes, that you 
be responsible for cleaning it up.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I encourage opposition to this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chair, if a business pollutes, then it is the 
responsibility of that business, not the taxpayer, to pay for the 
cleanup. It is that simple and it is morally right and fair.
  I represent Vernon, California, where a lead-acid battery recycling 
plant, for years, blanketed families in and around Vernon with lead, 
arsenic, and other toxins.
  The plant eventually closed but tragically, its environmental damage 
remains, leaving an estimated 10,000 contaminated homes.
  Because there are no clear requirements for financial responsibility, 
the response to the lead contamination in my district was delayed, and 
after more than a year, it still has not been resolved. Families living 
in these areas continue to live in fear for their children while others 
struggle to care for children who, as a result of this contamination, 
are suffering from learning disabilities, cancer and other health 
related issues.
  To allow section 430 to prohibit the EPA from issuing financial 
responsibility requirements for businesses that handle hazardous 
substances which can pollute our communities across the country is 
madness, Mr. Speaker.
  We must pass this amendment to ensure that polluters who cheat the 
system pay the bill, not the American taxpayer.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BECERRA. 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. 29 Offered by Mr. Peters

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No 29 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pallone), I offer amendment No. 29.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 150, strike line 1 and all that follows through page 
     151, line 2.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Peters) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, everyone who doesn't deny the science 
understands that climate change is real and dangerous. Uncontrolled 
carbon pollution is going into the atmosphere, trapping more heat, and 
warming the planet.
  Americans are experiencing the results in every part of this country. 
From more devastating fires in the West, including San Diego, to 
flooding in West Virginia, to coastal erosion in superstorms along the 
east coast, we are experiencing climate change today and it is getting 
worse.

                              {time}  2015

  We have a choice--pretend it is not happening and abandon future 
generations, or start to clean up the carbon pollution that is driving 
climate change.
  As President Obama recently said: ``Climate change is no longer some 
far-off problem. It is happening here. It is happening now.''
  We can't wait for some future generation to take action. To that end, 
the EPA finalized a workable plan to reduce carbon emissions from power 
plants, which are the largest uncontrolled source of man-made 
greenhouse gases in the United States.
  The Clean Power Plan gives the States tremendous flexibility to 
choose how to achieve those reductions. The goals are State-specific 
and cost-effective. This is a moderate and reasonable approach that 
ensures flexibility, affordability, reliability, and investment in 
clean energy technologies; and polls show that the public supports the 
Clean Power Plan by large majorities. It outlines a path to cleaner 
air, better health, a safer climate, and a stronger economy. If we make 
these investments in cleaner energy, the United States can be the world 
leader in industries of the future.
  The majority wants to stop this. They want to deny the science, 
pretend climate change isn't happening, and let power plants keep 
spewing carbon pollution without control. They refuse to act to limit 
carbon pollution, and now they are outraged that President Obama is 
keeping his word and using his authority under the Clean Air Act to act 
because we in Congress won't. So they included language in the 
underlying bill that aims to block the implementation of the Clean 
Power Plan and the EPA's carbon pollution standards for new and 
modified power plants. This is a ``just say `no''' agenda. My amendment 
strikes the harmful rider from the bill.
  Let's not heed the arguments on behalf of companies that profit from 
the status quo. These are defeatist arguments. They aren't interested 
in developing a plan to help us reduce emissions while maintaining a 
reasonably and reliably priced electricity system. We have already 
wasted enough time on legislation to ``just say `no''' to climate 
action. Now Congress must move on. What we cannot do, as President 
Obama said, is ``condemn our children to a planet beyond their capacity 
to repair it.''

[[Page H4767]]

  I strongly urge my colleagues to support my amendment. The Clean 
Power Plan is an important, long overdue, and critical tool in our 
fight against global climate change.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert) is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, the Supreme Court has ruled on a number of 
occasions that the EPA does not have the authority to rewrite the Clean 
Air Act, as it has been attempting to do. In February, the Supreme 
Court issued a stay on the EPA's greenhouse gas rule. It is no surprise 
that the EPA finds itself on shaky legal ground as it attempts to rely 
on limited authorities to write a rule that would vastly expand its 
reach.
  This administration's policies, regulations, and rhetoric are all 
aimed at making energy more expensive in America. The administration 
cannot be allowed to change the laws of the land administratively, 
which is why the language in this bill should remain in this bill.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment to strike.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time I have 
remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California (Mr. Peters) has 2\1/
2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Israel).
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this amendment.
  The effects of climate change are real, and they are being felt by 
Americans every day. NASA says that climate change is causing drought 
and increased forest fire frequency in the West, flooding in the 
Midwest, declining water supplies in the Southeast. Ninety-seven 
percent of all climate experts agree that human activity, specifically 
the combustion of fossil fuels and the release of carbon into the 
atmosphere, is changing our climate; yet this Congress continues to 
deny that there is a crisis, and it refuses to take the action that is 
necessary to protect the safety, the health, and the well-being of our 
constituents.
  Mr. Chair, the standards that the administration has proposed are 
just about protecting the health of our children and putting this 
Nation on a path to a 30 percent reduction in carbon pollution from the 
power sector by 2030.
  We cannot continue to deny that there is something happening with our 
weather. We cannot continue to deny that there is something happening 
with our climate nor can we continue to deny that, if we do this right, 
we will create a new generation of jobs and careers in new 
technologies. For those reasons, I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from West 
Virginia (Mr. Jenkins).
  Mr. JENKINS of West Virginia. Mr. Chair, we, as a country, should be 
pursuing a true all-of-the-above approach to energy-electricity 
generation. Unfortunately, this administration's power plant rules 
would pick winners and losers. It would determine the market for coal, 
cost miners their jobs, and raise energy prices for all Americans.
  The EPA has exceeded its legal authority by double regulating coal-
fired power plants and by forcing States to fundamentally shift their 
energy portfolios away from coal. It sets standards for new coal-fired 
power plants that are based on technologies which have not even been 
proven to be commercially available.
  While this administration is using every regulatory effort that is 
possible to put our hardworking coal miners in the unemployment line, 
we are pushing back here on the Appropriations Committee. We included 
this important provision in this bill to protect miners, to protect 
families, and to protect businesses and our economy.

  The chairman is exactly right when he references the United States 
Supreme Court. The other side would simply take casually the fact that 
there is no legal authority for the administration to pursue the rules 
and regulations like in this particular case. It is critically 
important that we oppose this amendment.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, I understand the gentleman's concern about 
coal. Without the implementation of the Clean Power Plan, coal has been 
affected by the market, not by the EPA, and the availability of natural 
gas has certainly, I think, hurt the coal industry. I understand that, 
but this is a sensible approach to dealing with air quality and climate 
change; and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I urge opposition to this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Peters).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 30 Offered by Mr. Peters

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 30 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 152, strike lines 14 through 24.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Peters) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, my amendment would strike section 434, a 
harmful policy rider that limits the ability of our environmental 
agencies to take action to improve public health and to fight the root 
causes of climate change.
  If we are to lower the impact of greenhouse gas emissions, we need 
Federal action. The largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the 
United States is from burning fossil fuels, which raises atmospheric 
levels of CO2. Greenhouse gas emissions can affect coastal 
regions, energy, defense, food supplies, wildfire preparedness, and our 
quality of life.
  This rider blocks the Environmental Protection Agency's ongoing 
efforts to reduce the damage that hydrofluorocarbons do to our climate. 
Hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, are factory-made gasses that are used in 
air-conditioning and refrigeration and are up to 10,000 times more 
potent pound for pound than carbon dioxide.
  While not as abundant as carbon dioxide, super pollutants, like HFCs 
and methane, have contributed up to 40 percent of observed global 
warming. Unless we act now, the United States' HFC emissions are 
expected to double by 2020 and to triple by 2030.
  By limiting the EPA's authority under the Clean Air Act to propose, 
finalize, or enforce any regulation or guidance regarding HFCs, this 
rider would undercut its ability to protect public health and to 
demonstrate American leadership in emissions reductions.
  The EPA's Significant New Alternatives Policy Program, or SNAP, 
requires us to evaluate substitutes that are already being developed by 
industry for super pollutants like HFCs. Through SNAP, we can ensure a 
more smooth transition to safer alternatives for our country's 
industrial sector. Last year, the SNAP finalized a new rule on HFCs 
that the Environmental Investigation Agency estimates will reduce 
emissions by 2030 by the equivalent of taking 21 million cars off the 
road.
  The standards set by the EPA will drive U.S. and international 
innovation and the market development of low-emission and energy-
efficient refrigeration, air-conditioning, foam blowing agents, and 
aerosol technologies. These innovations will actually get at one of the 
root causes of climate change before we are forced to react to 
increasingly extreme weather and sea level rise.
  By embracing these forward-thinking proposals, we can tackle the low-
hanging fruit while adopting alternatives that are actually much more 
energy efficient than current HFCs. This is one

[[Page H4768]]

example of how embracing the clean energy revolution doesn't just limit 
damage to our climate but also increases America's competitiveness and 
creates economic opportunity. Last year, we saw major companies, 
including Coca-Cola, Carrier, DuPont, Honeywell, PepsiCo, and other 
industry leaders commit to voluntarily reducing harmful HFC emissions.
  I appreciate the concerns of some in the industry about the pace at 
which they are required to transition to lower emission materials, but 
the answer to that is not to halt this process entirely. Preventing the 
SNAP program from functioning when less harmful materials are being 
developed is not the right approach. My amendment strikes this 
shortsighted rider so that America can continue to be a leader in 
advancing innovative solutions to reducing our emissions. We should not 
be handcuffing the important work being done at the EPA to reduce super 
pollutants. I ask my colleagues to support the amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, last year, the EPA issued a final rule to 
disqualify many refrigerants and other chemicals. The rule contained 
aggressive deadlines for the phase-out of many chemicals. Some of those 
deadlines applied within 6 months. Historical experience with the 
Montreal Protocol indicated that manufacturers needed 6-plus years to 
successfully transition between new materials.
  It is nice if the Fortune 100 companies, as the gentleman mentioned, 
are able to quickly transfer their technologies, but a lot of Main 
Street people can't. They just simply go broke. Clearly, the EPA chose 
winners and losers, and for the losers, the timelines are absolutely 
unworkable. Manufacturers need time to implement engineering and 
technology changes and to address new risk and safety challenges.
  No sooner did the EPA finalize its regulation last year to disqualify 
certain products than the EPA initiated version 2.0--that the 
rulemaking is now in the works. This is truly an out-of-control process 
that is driven by the White House's agenda.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, I take the gentleman's point. I would just say 
again that, if there are concerns about the timeline, I would be more 
than willing to work--and I am sure my colleagues would--on a better 
timeline, but stopping all activity is not the answer. That is why I 
think this is the appropriate response; so I urge my colleagues to 
support the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Peters).
  The amendment was rejected.


                 Amendment No. 31 Offered by Mr. Peters

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 31 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Page 154, strike line 22 and all that follows through page 
     155, line 8.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Peters) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, the social--or real--cost of carbon is the 
monetary estimate of the damages caused by carbon dioxide emissions to 
the environment, health, and economic growth.
  Today's bill contains an unnecessary and harmful policy rider that 
would delay, indefinitely, incorporating that cost in rulemaking or 
guidance documents. My amendment would strike that bad rider and would, 
instead, put us on a path of responsible policymaking that reflects the 
realities of changing climates and increasingly extreme weather events.

                              {time}  2030

  Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's bipartisan Risky 
Business report notes that accounting for the real cost of carbon 
emissions and preparing for climate change is a smart business 
practice.
  If we continue on our current path, by 2050, between $66 billion and 
$106 billion worth of existing coastal property will likely be below 
sea level nationwide. Eighty percent of California's GDP is derived 
from our coastal counties.
  Greenhouse gas-driven changes in temperature by burning fossil fuels 
will necessitate construction of new power generation that Mayor 
Bloomberg's report estimates will cost residential and commercial 
ratepayers as much as $12 billion per year. That is $12 billion that 
could be spent by families to put their kids through school or to buy a 
home. It could be spent by businesses to hire more employees or give 
annual bonuses.
  Accounting for the social cost of carbon now provides greater 
certainty and greater freedom in the future.
  I anticipate my colleagues in opposition to this amendment will 
suggest that the harmful rider merely delays using the social cost of 
carbon until a new working group can update the data we use to guide 
rulemaking. In practice, this would send this rule back to the drawing 
board when the data we have now about how carbon emissions damage our 
economy and our health is perfectly adequate and backed by peer-
reviewed science.
  By adding more layers of bureaucracy, this rider rejects a forward-
thinking approach already used by the private sector and backed by 
science in favor of the status quo, in favor of doing nothing.
  There is a real cost to our environment and our prosperity associated 
with delaying this rule. For too long we have heard that we have had to 
choose between supporting prosperity and a clean environment. The 
implication is we can't have both, but that is a false choice we can't 
afford to make. We have to provide both economic opportunity and clean 
water and air for future generations.
  I want to take a cue from the private sector, from businesses that 
already account for the cost of carbon, and let's be sensible and 
support this amendment.
  I want to thank my friends--Congressman Polis, Congressman Lowenthal, 
Congresswoman Esty, Congressman Beyer, and Congressman Welch--for 
backing this effort.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I have long been concerned with how the 
EPA conducts its cost-benefit analysis to justify its rulemaking. This 
is something that the committee has discussed with the EPA on a number 
of occasions. The Supreme Court recently ruled that EPA's approach to 
examining costs in their regulations was, at the least, flawed.
  The administration's revised estimates for the social cost of carbon 
help justify, on paper, larger benefits from reducing carbon emissions 
in any proposed rule. If the administration can inflate the price tag 
so that the benefits always exceed the costs, then the administration 
can gold plate required regulations from any department or any agency.
  Section 436 says that the administration should reconvene a working 
group to revise the estimates in a more transparent manner and to make 
that information available to the public.
  I oppose the gentleman's amendment, and I urge my colleagues to vote 
``no.''
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, may I ask how much time I have remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lowenthal).
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, the majority has repeatedly brought 
bills to this same House floor that add

[[Page H4769]]

requirements for Federal agencies to use more cost-benefit analyses; 
but now, when we are dealing with climate change, we are told that we 
should remove requirements to honestly consider the cost of climate 
change.
  Which way do you want it? Is cost-benefit analysis only a good thing 
when it suits the majority's purpose to slow regulation and a bad thing 
when it may shed some light on the true cost of our carbon-based 
actions?
  Ignoring the facts because we don't like them won't make the problem 
go away. Greenhouse gas emissions from human activities are causing 
climate change with profound monetary costs for our health, 
infrastructure, food security, and national security.
  Let's bring more information and transparency into the Federal 
rulemaking process by using the social cost of carbon to quantify those 
costs. That way we can understand the risks and make sound investments 
in our Nation's future.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Polis).
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, this is ironic because we hear from 
Republicans all the time about the importance of cost-benefit analyses 
before this regulation, before that regulation. Well, of course, we 
acknowledge and I acknowledge that there are costs to regulation with 
regard to emissions, there is no doubt. There are also benefits.
  I have a tourism-dependent district. We have great ski areas like 
Vail, Breckenridge. Well, guess what. That is climate dependent. We 
have agriculture in my district--climate dependent.
  You know what? I would also acknowledge, of course, all the costs, 
all the benefits, those are estimates.
  You know, what? No model is perfect, but I guarantee you that the 
model is far superior to just throwing it out altogether and having no 
model. There are real costs to carbon emissions, and it is 
completely appropriate to use the best science-driven data to estimate 
those in any type of regulation.

  It is important to look at costs as benefits, and I feel we are 
making the argument our Republican friends usually make. But here, in 
this case, they don't happen to like these particular costs. Maybe they 
don't think they are real. Maybe they don't believe in them. But we let 
science guide us.
  The fact that I have a weather-dependent district and we have a 
climate-dependent economy across our country is powerful testimony 
towards including the social cost of carbon.
  I urge my colleagues to adopt the amendment.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
West Virginia (Mr. Jenkins).
  Mr. JENKINS of West Virginia. Mr. Chair, folks, here is what is going 
on: the EPA and other Federal agencies are increasingly using this 
thing called social cost of carbon in their environmental rulemaking.
  So what is social cost of carbon? It is an ambiguous and confusing 
matrix that has been used simply to justify the validity of many of the 
administration's clean air environmental regulations that target the 
direct and indirect carbon dioxide emissions from various sources.
  Since its very first use, the administration has recalculated the 
models multiple times in order to inflate the supposed cost of small 
increases in CO2 in the atmosphere and, thus, supposed 
benefits.
  What is most outrageous is that the administration, which the 
minority here says is just simply trying to put in the economic 
factors, is actually ignoring the Office of Management and Budget's 
circular A-4, which explicitly states that ``a real discount rate of 7 
percent should be used as a base-case for regulatory analysis.''.''
  Guess what. They ran the numbers. Seven percent doesn't get them what 
they need from the social costs, so what they do is ignore OMB and come 
up with their own factors. That is the deceptive nature of their 
supposed cost factor. Change the underlying assumptions, change the 
factors, get the results you want that justify your findings.
  Folks, that is not how we should be doing it. I strongly urge 
opposition to this amendment.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 30 seconds remaining.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I would just say, again, I think the 
gentleman makes an excellent point that 7 percent is a pretty 
aggressive discount rate and maybe we should talk about the 
methodology. But what we should not do is prevent the discussion in its 
entirety, which is what that language does.
  So I hope that my colleagues will support our amendment and that we 
will be able to get it right. We can agree on a methodology that fairly 
represents this issue, and I would be happy to work with my colleague. 
I hope they will support my amendment so we can, at least, have this 
discussion.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, this is voodoo environmentalism, so I 
would absolutely have opposition to this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Peters).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. PETERS. 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. 32 Offered by Mr. Grijalva

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 32 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. 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 155, strike lines 9 through 15.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I rise to speak on behalf of the amendment that I have offered to 
protect farmworkers throughout this Nation.
  Every day, farmworkers work long hours under the scorching sun in one 
of the most dangerous industries in this country, and they suffer the 
highest rates of chemical injuries and skin disorders due to pesticide 
exposure. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that up to 
3,000 farmworkers suffer acute pesticide poisoning every year through 
their work-related exposure.
  Every year, an estimated 1.1 billion pounds of pesticides are applied 
to agricultural crops in the United States. According to the EPA, 
10,000 to 20,000 farmworkers suffer pesticide poisoning annually. 
Exposure to pesticides increases the risk of chronic health problems 
amongst adult and child farmworkers, such as cancer, infertility, 
neurological disorders, and respiratory conditions.
  There are approximately half a million child farmworkers in the U.S., 
and farmworker children face increased risks of cancer and birth 
defects. It should be noted that this workplace, in the farms and 
working crops, is the only area in this country where child labor laws 
do not apply. Should we then increase the children's risk and exposure 
because they are not covered by a law that covers the rest of the 
children in this country?
  Research also shows that both farmworkers and their children may 
suffer decreased intellectual functioning from even low levels of 
exposure to insecticides, which are widely used in agriculture.
  After more than 20 years, the Environmental Protection Agency finally 
made the long overdue updates to the worker protection standards for 
farmworkers. The standards provide basic workplace protections to 
farmworkers to reduce harmful exposures and result in fewer pesticide-
related injuries, illnesses, birth defects, and deaths among 
farmworkers and their family members.
  Farmworkers play a critical role in our economy, ensuring that our 
constituents have nutritious, quality food

[[Page H4770]]

on their tables. The 2017 Department of the Interior, Environment, and 
Related Agencies Appropriation Act contains a harmful provision, 
section 437, that will remove farmworkers' rights to a designated 
representative.
  A designated representative in this process is a critical part of 
improving access to pesticide information for workers in various 
situations. There are times when a worker may need the help of a 
spouse, family member, or coworker to obtain information. For instance, 
if a worker is injured or hurt and cannot be there in person, the 
information could be requested by the treating medical personnel. This 
standard is in practice in other sectors where workers are exposed to 
toxic substances and is consistent with the access to exposure records 
that those workers now have.
  To protect the health of those who harvest the food for our 
constituents and put it on our tables, it is critical to have a uniform 
Federal standard that applies to all workers, and that is the right to 
have a designated representative.
  In the amendment that I offer, I would simply strike section 437 in 
order to protect farmworkers' rights and also provide health 
protections.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Grijalva-Sanchez amendment to 
strike section 437. This amendment is important to the health and 
safety of farmworkers and their families. We must ensure that 
farmworkers can appropriately access information on pesticides so they 
can protect themselves and their families while doing their jobs that 
are so vital to our Nation and to our economy.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, prior to finalizing the worker protection 
rule, the EPA shared a draft with the House Committee on Agriculture. 
The draft did not contain a section that authorized the use of 
designated representatives. It was later inserted by the EPA without 
congressional consultation, and the EPA failed to follow the law that 
requires consultation with the authorizers on these pesticide rules.
  However, the broader concern is the substance of the rule. Farmers 
are concerned they will have little recourse but to turn over their 
documents to unauthorized individuals. The section of the rule is ill-
advised, and unintended consequences were clearly not considered. The 
EPA needs to reengage with the authorizing committee and the 
agricultural community on this.
  In the meantime, I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2045

  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, at the urging of many organizations, and 
at the urging of being consistent and uniform with the protections 
extended to workers who work with toxic substances throughout this 
country, which includes the provision that a representative may 
represent the interests, seek information, and provide transparency for 
that worker in order for them to pursue their health and their safety.
  I think this section, the worker protection section, if we strike 
this section, all we are doing is making the process uniform for every 
industry. To deny farmworkers, and more particularly children, as I 
mentioned, that is the only workplace sector in which the child labor 
laws do not apply, to provide them, their families, and children with 
the simple ability to be treated like every other worker, in every 
other industry, that deals with toxic substances, I think, is just 
merely playing a fair game, treating all workers equally, and in this 
instance, this amendment would be consistent with what is going on in 
the rest of the Nation and the protections extended to all workers.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I urge opposition to this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will 
be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 33 Offered by Mr. Polis

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 33 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I have an excellent amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Page 156, strike line 23 and all that follows through page 
     157, line 11.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to offer this amendment, along 
with my colleagues, Ms. DeGette, Mr. Cartwright, Mr. Lowenthal, Mr. 
Sarbanes, Mr. Huffman, and Ms. Lujan Grisham.
  It is a very simple amendment. It just strikes a policy rider, 
section 439 of the bill. This section would block the EPA from doing 
its job. It would block the EPA's commonsense standards for sources of 
emissions of methane in the oil and gas industry, an issue that is 
literally in our backyards in the State of Colorado.
  It would even prevent the EPA from doing research into existing drill 
sites for methane standard purposes, and, most astonishing, it would 
actually prevent the EPA from clarifying the scope of emission sources, 
which would continue to make sure that we know less and are less 
protected rather than more protected.
  The President and the EPA are taking action to protect our country, 
our planet, from methane emissions. It is past time that we take bold 
action to combat climate change and reduce the impact of impending 
catastrophic changes to our climate, to our world, reducing national 
security and hurting our economy in tourism and agriculture-dependent 
districts like mine. Taking aggressive action now is, quite simply, a 
moral imperative, not only within the purview of the EPA, but the 
actual charge that Congress is giving the Environmental Protection 
Agency.
  The sad reality is that right now, the majority of our energy still 
comes from fossil fuels. That is why while of course we need to invest 
in renewables, at the same time, we can't wait to transition entirely 
to renewable energy before we address the extraction process that 
releases dangerous chemicals, such as methane as a by-product. Pound 
for pound, methane pollution from oil and gas wells is 80 times more 
potent than carbon dioxide and is responsible for one-quarter of human-
made climate change, according to scientists.
  These EPA rules are long overdue standards for the oil and gas 
industry, which will reduce methane pollution and provide certainty for 
the industry. Although I wish, frankly, these new rules went further, I 
wish, frankly, that Congress had taken bold action, these stricter 
standards are a good start, and they are necessary. Scientists have 
recently published even more convincing data showing that the methane 
released during natural gas extraction is a deadly climate threat.
  New scientific mapping shows that 12.4 million people live within a 
half mile of the 1.2 million active oil and gas facilities in the 
United States, many in my home of Colorado. This threat radius is a 
very conservative estimate of the distance from which toxic air 
emissions from oil and gas facilities have an adverse impact on public 
health. It is why in many areas of northern Colorado and Wyoming, we 
have worse air quality than downtown Los Angeles.
  We must not prevent the EPA from moving forward to protect our air, 
our water, and our planet, which is what Congress has charged them to 
do. It is time for us to allow them to do their science-based work. It 
is time to make the fossil fuel industry and fracking play by the same 
set of rules the rest of the country plays by, instead of letting them 
emit tons of chemicals, literally tons of chemicals into our air that 
put our health and the future of the planet in jeopardy.

[[Page H4771]]

  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, in May, EPA issued regulations for new and 
existing oil and gas operations. These are the latest steps in the 
President's climate agenda. EPA pulled the rug out from underneath 
these companies, working in good faith to share information with the 
Agency. The industry was making tremendous progress to reduce emissions 
through voluntary measures. By any measurable degree, they were making 
tremendous progress.
  But this administration feels the need to overregulate the oil and 
gas industry at every single turn, to use their police powers to bring 
this industry to their knees. I urge my colleagues to oppose this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, voluntary measures are just that, voluntary. 
While there might, and perhaps there are a few good actors willing to 
abide by them in some States, like my home State of Colorado, have 
implemented air standards. What we care about is the aggregate. We want 
to discourage a race to the bottom among producers and have a national 
baseline for methane emissions.
  While, again, frankly, I think this rule should go a lot further, at 
least it provides that baseline, provides the industry certainty, and 
helps begin the process of us getting a handle on ensuring that the air 
we breathe is clean and reducing climate change.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
West Virginia (Mr. Jenkins.)
  Mr. JENKINS of West Virginia. Mr. Chairman, here we go again. Just 
two amendments ago we had something called the social cost of carbon. 
Well, yes, the administration has now put out a new methane rule. Guess 
what. Social cost of methane is now being put forth as the economic 
justification for their rules.
  I pointed out just a moment ago that despite the OMB's circular 
recommending a certain discount rate, unfortunately when running the 
numbers, apparently the Agency doesn't get the results they want, so 
what they do is change the underlying assumptions.
  I rise in opposition to this amendment. This amendment would remove a 
critical provision to protect against new, expansive methane 
regulations that could harm the economy, would harm the economy, and 
strangle our domestic energy portfolio. These regulations are being 
developed using the same overly aggressive interpretation of the Clean 
Air Act that was responsible for the costly, burdensome Clean Power 
Plan.

  What is interesting on this one, however, is that even the EPA found 
that the methane rule would provide only marginal benefits. But they 
plow ahead regardless of that finding. I urge the opposition to this 
amendment.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, you can't just pretend that things don't 
have costs. Of course, carbon emissions have a cost. Of course, methane 
emissions have a cost. It doesn't mean that people are proposing we 
abolish carbon emissions from our economy. It means we want to look at, 
in this case, methane emissions and their cost. Colorado has 
implemented similar rules already that the industry has adopted. There 
are actors in the industry who want this very certainty so they know 
what they need to do with regard to methane emissions. There are plenty 
of companies providing new recapture technologies.
  All this does is begin to get a handle on it. Again, in my opinion, 
it doesn't go far enough. In my opinion, it isn't the kind of action I 
would hope a bold Congress would take. But at the very least, let's 
have standards for methane emissions. Let's prevent a ban on research 
into existing drill sites for methane standard purposes.
  If this section is left intact, not only does it strike the emission 
standards, it prevents the EPA from doing research into what the 
standards should be or could be, so we are never going to reach ``the 
right answer.'' It should be beholden on those who believe that this is 
not the right answer to actually support the very kind of research for 
methane standard purposes that is blocked by this very section, which 
our amendment will remove from the bill. I ask for your support on this 
simple, commonsense amendment to remove this policy rider and help keep 
our air clean.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. POLIS. 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 Colorado 
will be postponed.


               Amendment No. 34 Offered by Mr. Lowenthal

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 34 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. 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 157, strike lines 13 through 16.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Lowenthal) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment would strike a misguided policy rider that 
could cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, and it maintains 
a sweetheart, below-market deal for the fossil fuel industry.
  My amendment would strike section 440 of the underlying bill, a 
section that would prevent the Interior Department from updating 
royalty rates and valuation methodologies for coal, oil, and natural 
gas resources on public lands.
  Now, I would think that saving the taxpayer money by charging a fair 
return for the development of our public resources is something that 
both sides of the aisle could agree upon. So maybe the sponsors behind 
this policy rider didn't know the true magnitude of the cost to 
taxpayers that their rider to this appropriations bill would impose 
upon Americans.
  To make sure that we all understand, Mr. Chair, what we would be 
costing the taxpayer if we were to vote to keep this harmful rider, Mr. 
Chair, I would like to share some eye-opening research on this matter.
  The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the CBO, just released 
in April a detailed study that reviewed possible changes to the oil and 
gas fiscal system. That report explicitly analyzed how much money the 
American taxpayer is losing from the current below-market onshore oil 
and gas royalty rates.
  CBO concluded that the U.S. Treasury would receive $200 million 
additional and the Western States another $200 million over 10 years if 
the Interior Department were to simply raise the onshore royalty rates 
to parity with the current offshore royalty rates.
  So, to be clear, keeping this misguided policy rider would prevent an 
additional $200 million from being sent to the Western States and 
another $200 million to the Federal taxpayer.
  Mr. Chairman, I have also heard specious arguments that claim raising 
onshore royalty rates will decrease production, put all oil and gas 
companies out of business and actually reduce the return to the 
taxpayer. This is false, and here is why: The CBO analyzed these 
effects and found that this was not the case. The CBO found that the 
effects on production would be negligible, and that the increases in 
Federal and State revenues are net increases that include the decreases 
in income from bonus bids and production changes. Furthermore, 
production would not simply move to State or private lands to find 
lower royalty rates because private mineral owners and Western States, 
like Wyoming, New

[[Page H4772]]

Mexico, Louisiana, North Dakota, Montana, even Oklahoma and Texas, all 
of them charge higher royalty rates.
  Thus, I hope these facts will disabuse those who used to believe in 
keeping onshore oil and gas royalty rates below market price, and now 
will, instead, support the Lowenthal amendment No. 34 that will allow 
the Interior Department to provide the taxpayer and Western States with 
hundreds of millions of dollars in additional revenue.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2100

  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, we included a provision in this prohibiting 
the Department of the Interior from changing royalty rates in its 
valuation regulation for coal, oil, and gas on Federal land in order to 
stem the hemorrhaging of jobs we are seeing in coal country and 
throughout the United States.
  I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Zinke).
  Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to Mr. Lowenthal's 
amendment to strike the language that would defund the administration's 
efforts to kill coal, oil, and gas development.
  My colleagues and I included this language for good reason. We are 
trying to protect our schools, our infrastructure, our communities, and 
the very livelihoods that depend on these revenues.
  I know that royalty and valuation mean very little outside these 
walls, but to my constituents across Montana, it means funding schools 
and empowering local communities.
  Mike Johnson, an operating engineer from Billings, I think sums it up 
best:

       I am a working man from Montana. I am not a doctor or a 
     lawyer or anything, but I personally suffered from the 
     Federal mismanagement of our public lands in western Montana. 
     I am a displaced worker from a paper mill. I now work in 
     eastern Montana, and people don't understand the impact these 
     jobs have on our lives. I saw five about five of my friends 
     commit suicide after the mill closed. My wife had cancer, and 
     I lost my health care, and I lost darn good-paying jobs.

  The chairman of the great Crow Nation, Old Coyote, said:

       A war on coal is a war on the Crow people.

  Without Crow revenue, without revenue from coal, the Crow people 
faced a lifetime of despair and poverty. They have very few options but 
coal. Yet, this administration, at every turn, tries to prevent the 
Crow Nation from being sovereign and from having their choice to export 
and use their resource as they want. These words capture the real 
problem, and the cost is real people.
  I know that many don't understand where Montana is. Montana is the 
same size as from here to Chicago, plus 2 miles. I understand Montana. 
I understand that Montana is blessed with resources, and we want to use 
them in a responsible way. But I also have to protect our families, our 
ability to provide a living in Montana.
  For this reason, I ask my colleagues to vote against this amendment 
and stand with American workers, families, and the great Crow Nation.
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chair, may I ask how much time I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California (Mr. Lowenthal) has 1 
minute remaining.
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chair, we heard a very passionate plea that this 
amendment of mine would hurt jobs, would hurt schools, would kill coal. 
It is just the opposite.
  As I pointed out, the CBO's report just indicated that production 
would not go down. In fact, the largest impact upon production, the 
dominant factor that controls production, is the price of crude oil and 
natural gas, not the royalty rates.
  I also would like to remind those on the other side of the aisle that 
States like Montana already at the State level and also on private 
property charge much higher than we are asking at the Federal level.
  I would agree to the same charge that Montana charges residents for 
its own oil and gas and coal production.
  Mr. Chairman, I request an ``aye'' vote on this very reasonable 
amendment that really brings money back to both States and also to the 
Federal Treasury.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, it is interesting. We hear the devastating 
effects from people who represent these States that are rich in natural 
resources and what is happening in coal country and to the oil industry 
and the rest. I respect their opinion and I, obviously, oppose this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Lowenthal).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. 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.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 35 printed in House 
Report 114-683.


   Permission to Consider Amendment Nos. 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, and 40 
             Offered by Mr. McNerney of California En Bloc

  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that amendment 
Nos. 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, and 40 printed in House Report 114-683, be 
considered en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from California?
  There was no objection.


        Amendments En Bloc Offered by Mr. McNerney of California

  Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment Nos. 35, 36, 37, 38, 
39, and 40.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments.
  The text of the amendments is as follows:

         Amendment no. 35 offered by Mr. McNERNEY of California

       Page 162, beginning on line 14, strike section 447.


         Amendment no. 36 offered by Mr. McNERNEY of California

       Page 166, beginning on line 19, strike section 448.


         Amendment no. 37 offered by Mr. McNERNEY of California

       Page 172, beginning on line 4, strike section 449.


         Amendment no. 38 offered by Mr. McNERNEY of California

       Page 182, beginning on line 18, strike section 450.


         Amendment no. 39 offered by Mr. McNERNEY of California

       Page 182, beginning on line 24, strike section 451.


         Amendment no. 40 offered by Mr. McNERNEY of California

       Page 183, beginning on line 3, strike section 452.



 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  July 12, 2016, on page H4772, the following appeared: The text 
of the amendments is as follows: Page 162, beginning on line 14, 
strike section 447. Page 166, beginning on line 19, strike section 
448. Page 172, beginning on line 4, strike section 449. Page 182, 
beginning on line 18, strike section 450. Page 182, beginning on 
line 24, strike section 451. Page 183, beginning on line 3, strike 
section 452
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: The text of the 
amendments is as follows: AMENDMENT NO. 35 OFFERED BY MR. McNERNEY 
OF CALIFORNIA Page 162, beginning on line 14, strike section 447. 
AMENDMENT NO. 36 OFFERED BY MR. McNERNEY OF CALIFORNIA Page 166, 
beginning on line 19, strike section 448. AMENDMENT NO. 37 OFFERED 
BY MR. McNERNEY OF CALIFORNIA Page 172, beginning on line 4, 
strike section 449. AMENDMENT NO. 38 OFFERED BY MR. McNERNEY OF 
CALIFORNIA Page 182, beginning on line 18, strike section 450. 
AMENDMENT NO. 39 OFFERED BY MR. McNERNEY OF CALIFORNIA Page 182, 
beginning on line 24, strike section 451. AMENDMENT NO. 40 OFFERED 
BY MR. McNERNEY OF CALIFORNIA Page 183, beginning on line 3, 
strike section 452.


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. McNerney) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I am submitting an amendment to strike 
provisions from Mr. Valadao's bill, H.R. 2898, that were included as 
riders in this year's Interior and EPA appropriations bill.
  I am disappointed that my Republican colleagues continue to attach 
bad policy on important appropriations bills. In this case, they have 
attached the same damaging riders to the Interior appropriations bill 
that would drain the California delta with over pumping. These 
provisions would ravage the ecology of the delta, destroy the local 
fish and wildlife, and harm communities we serve.
  They would undermine 40 years of progress in protecting our land and 
resources. They override environmental protection for California 
rivers, fisheries, threatening thousands of fishing jobs, and weaken 
the Endangered Species Act. Fish will go extinct. But my Republican 
colleagues claim that this bill will not harm fish.
  These sections violate existing biological opinions protecting salmon 
and other endangered fish, which would impact the salmon industry 
across the entire Pacific Coast.
  These riders do nothing to prepare our communities for droughts in 
the future. These are droughts we know are coming. They misstate 
California water law and encourage further regional divides in the West 
when we need to work together to bridge those differences.
  H.R. 2898 has been opposed by the State and key stakeholders, 
including commercial and sport fishermen, Native American tribes, 
environmental groups, and recreational employers. And the Obama 
administration has already threatened to veto it, but my Republican 
colleagues keep claiming that water is being wasted.

[[Page H4773]]

  Hydrological conditions have played a primary role in water 
deliveries since the start of California's drought. The 2014 water year 
was the third driest in California's recorded history, and some experts 
conclude that the current drought may be the State's most severe in 
1,200 years.
  Currently, 100 percent of the State is experiencing some level of 
drought, and more than 40 percent is experiencing ``exceptional 
drought,'' the most severe drought classification according to the U.S. 
Drought Monitor.
  The Department of the Interior estimates that the Endangered Species 
Act accounted for a mere 2 percent of the water supply reduction in the 
Central Valley Project water deliveries in 2014, and current estimates 
suggest a similarly small impact in 2014. California's State Water 
Resources Control Board estimated that in 2015, only 2 percent of this 
water flowed out to the ocean solely for environmental protection.
  The water that Donald Trump said was being shoved out to sea was 
actually used to prevent saltwater intrusion that would permanently 
damage some of the most valuable farmland in the world. Water being 
released for salinity control protects Central Valley farms from being 
contaminated.
  California and Federal officials have been able to increase exports 
from the California delta using existing authority. This action has 
helped maximize the use of what little water exists in the State. A 
lack of water is our biggest threat, not operational flexibility. And 
my colleagues still wonder where some of that water went.
  Well, according to the Bay Institute, earlier this year, 
approximately two-thirds of storm runoff was captured or diverted, with 
only one-third of the runoff making it through the delta estuary. And 
for the period of October 1 of last year to January 31, 60 percent of 
storm water was diverted or stored.
  Water scarcity in California is caused by longstanding and severe 
drought and the slow pace of investments in efficiency, water 
recycling, and other supplies. Many senior water right holders have 
received 100 percent of their allocation this year. According to State 
law, they are supposed to get that amount. The other junior right 
holders got much less, but that is what it means to be a junior water 
right holder--you don't get as much water in a drought.
  California has the right to stop seawater intrusion, protect water 
quality for our communities and farms, and distribute allocations 
according to their water right system. Even the junior water right 
holders have proven their resiliency. In fact, the National Agriculture 
Statistics Service projects a record almond crop in California this 
year. The orchards will yield an estimated 2.05 billion pounds, up from 
an even 2 billion the year before. It would eclipse the record.
  I am deeply disappointed this bill has been included in this year's 
Interior appropriations bill, and I hope my amendment passes to strike 
out these harmful provisions.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, we all know there has been a drought in 
California, except for this year. This year, we have had some relief 
from the historic drought conditions that have been certainly made 
worse by Federal actions, which have, undoubtedly, led to increased 
pressure on California's ability to provide water throughout the State.
  I have been following the flows of water through the delta virtually 
every day. I remember one day there was 185,000 cubic feet per second 
moving through the delta. And for whatever reason, decisions were made 
to only pump 2,500 cubic feet per second when you are allowed under the 
biological opinion to pump 5,000. I am just going to give that as one 
example.
  I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Valadao), who 
has been working very hard in the Central Valley for the farms and his 
constituents.
  Mr. VALADAO. Mr. Chairman, 380 million gallons a day; that is a 
number that should have been quoted. When you hear about 380 million 
gallons a day of sewage being dumped in this estuary that they talk 
about, this environment they are trying to protect, when you think 
about that much sewage being dumped into the delta on a daily basis, 
you hear the same people talking about trying to protect it.

  There are things going on in that delta. And they have been 
restricting our water for the last 20 years, and it has not saved that 
species. There are provisions in these bills that actually help. We 
attacked the invasive species that is attacking the delta smelt, the 
striped bass. We have offered that provision many times.
  We are offering many solutions. Like the author mentioned earlier, we 
have had language in probably five different pieces of legislation 
going through the House over to the Senate. We have begged for an open 
and transparent process where we can debate this and have some 
commonsense ideas brought forward and voted and signed into law so that 
we can help both our communities.
  If you truly care about the delta, stop polluting it. If you truly 
care about the people of California and what it costs to feed your 
families, if you truly care about farm workers, if you truly care about 
these small communities, you would care about water and doing this 
right and having an honest debate.
  Now, I have been approached off camera a million times now to have 
another off-camera conversation about this, and we have said all along: 
No more conversation like that. Everything on the floor. This is an 
open, transparent process. Five pieces of legislation have this 
language in it. And we are going to continue to push until we can get 
some support so we can fix this problem.

                              {time}  2115

  So those little communities in my district that people claim to care 
about could actually turn on a faucet and fill a pot of water so they 
can make themselves some food to eat and some dinner, maybe bathe their 
children, because that is where we are today. We have houses that, when 
they turn on a faucet, they no longer have water.
  And I get the whole junior water rights concern, but if they were 
truly concerned about the environment, they would give up some of their 
water. But you look at Hetch Hetchy, that has had 100 percent of their 
water and continues to deliver that water via pipeline all the way to 
San Francisco without one conversation about that water being able to 
help some of these rivers and some of these species, but they are not 
willing to give up any of their water. They are willing to take other 
people's water. It is the same thing we hear about on so many different 
issues; take someone else's product, or someone else's water and try to 
solve another problem with it.
  And the problem has to be solved the right way: language that we have 
offered, that has been offered into these amendments, into these bills, 
and that we have pushed over to the Senate, and the conversation has to 
be had in an open, transparent process like our Senators have told us 
they wanted.
  So we are here. We are ready for that conversation. We want an honest 
debate, and we want to talk about the way we actually fix these 
problems.
  We are not going to try to accommodate communities dumping their 
sewage in the delta, but we want to help those species, and there is 
language in there to do that, even language in there to help capture 
some of the water. Use some of the infrastructure we have paid for as 
taxpayers and allow it to be used to its full capacity so we can 
continue to store water that we do have and not waste it.
  This is an honest piece of language that could actually help solve 
California's problems, and I think we need to continue to have an 
honest debate.
  Mr. CALVERT. Obviously, this is an emotional subject. It is not just 
water that is going to the Central Valley, also to the southern 
California region for the millions of people who live there.
  We don't want to see water wasted. This year, we saw hundreds and 
hundreds of thousands of acre-feet of water being released through the 
delta, really, with not saving one fish. Even independent agencies will 
privately agree that they were overly conservative

[[Page H4774]]

when they were managing the pump operations of late.
  So this suffering that is going on is terrible. It needs to come to 
an end. I certainly oppose this amendment and urge a ``no'' vote.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendments offered by the gentleman from California 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 41 Offered by Mr. Grijalva

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 41 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. 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 183, strike line 23 and all that follows through page 
     184, line 15.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment to strike section 
453 from the underlying bill.
  Section 453 restricts funds from being used to establish a national 
monument pursuant to the Antiquities Act in several Western counties, 
including Maricopa County in Arizona, a portion of which I represent in 
Congress.
  I understand the Member who inserted this language into the bill 
during committee consideration is generally opposed, if not totally 
opposed, to the use of the Antiquities Act.
  This section restricts the use of the Antiquities Act on over 160 
million acres of public land, nearly one-quarter of all Federal land in 
the lower 48. I know that many of the Members of Congress who represent 
these areas do not support this blanket restriction on the use the 
Antiquities Act.
  So that we are absolutely clear, these monuments can be established 
only on land already owned by the Federal Government. This is how 
Federal lands should be preserved. It is not about adding more land to 
the Federal estate.
  Since Theodore Roosevelt's designation of the first national 
monument, Devils Tower in Wyoming, 16 Presidents from both parties have 
used the Antiquities Act to protect more than 160 of America's best 
known and most loved landscapes; only 3 Presidents have not.
  America's public places are becoming more and more inclusive, more 
representative of all Americans, and as President Obama has 
demonstrated with the use of the Antiquities Act, more representative 
of the real reality, history, culture, and special places of this 
Nation that represent all people. That is why, presently, I am working 
with the region's Native American communities and, in earnest, I have 
asked the President to designate the Greater Grand Canyon Heritage 
National Monument on public land surrounding the Grand Canyon.
  Section 435 of this bill will jeopardize not only that effort, but 
other efforts around the country to honor, recognize, and protect our 
most cherished cultural, historic, and natural resources, and it should 
be removed from the bill.
  I urge my colleagues to stand up in defense of the Antiquities Act 
and support my amendment to strike Section 435 from this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Utah (Mr. Stewart).
  Mr. STEWART. Mr. Chairman, some 20 years ago, President Clinton went 
to Arizona and he pointed across the border into Utah, in my district, 
and he said: I'm creating a national monument over there--nearly 2 
million acres.
  He did not have the courage to come to Utah to defend this monument 
nor to create it because he knew that the local people did not support 
it. That monument has been incredibly unpopular since then. It has 
kicked ranchers off the range. It has decimated the local economies, 
until we have reached this point, where some of the local school 
districts have had to declare an emergency because their schools are 
dying and their children are having to ride a bus for 2 hours, one way, 
2 hours, to go to school. Why? Because there are no jobs that can 
support a family, and people are having to leave.
  Local input is so important to the creation of these monuments, and 
there are examples where local input and where people collaborating 
have worked together and come to a great solution. Rob Bishop has done 
that. Just yesterday, we held a bipartisan press conference where we 
had local mayors, Republicans and Democrats, on what we called the 
Mountain Accord.
  I am asking President Obama, please, come to my State. Talk to the 
people in my district. See what they think about this monument. Come 
talk to us and see how this will impact them.
  Now, let me close with this. There is a reason I live in Utah. I love 
to ski. I love to rock climb. I love to hike. I love to sit on my porch 
and look at the beautiful landscape around me. I want to preserve this. 
All of us do. But there is a right way to do this and there is a wrong 
way to do this, and the Antiquities Act and the stroke of a pen of a 
President who won't even come to the State to defend his action is not 
the right way.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Maine (Ms. Pingree).
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding the time.
  I really want to support this important amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona. It is important because it will strike a 
section of this bill that will hurt a small group of States, including 
my State of Maine.
  As we all know, the Congress gave the President the right to create a 
national monument over 100 years ago. Since then, the President has 
used that authority to create national monuments like Yellowstone, 
Grand Canyon National Park, and Acadia National Park in my district.
  National monuments bring economic benefits to States, and the use of 
the Antiquities Act has been an important conservation tool for over a 
century. For my State of Maine, a national monument would bring new 
visitors to the area and create jobs, not just in the immediate region, 
but throughout the State.
  For example, we already have a national park in Maine, Acadia 
National Park. Acadia started out as a national monument 100 years ago 
this very month, and it brings about 3 million visitors a year to the 
region.
  Mr. Chair, this bill has very problematic language in that it will 
block the creation of national monuments, even in areas where one might 
be supported by our local communities. We need to strip this provision 
out of the underlying bill.

  I urge my colleagues to strongly support the Grijalva amendment.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Grijalva, who represents 
southwestern Arizona, is seeking to lock up 1.7 million acres in 
northern Arizona, at the behest of special interest groups, for the 
sole purpose of preventing mining, retiring grazing permits, closing 
roads to OHV users, and preventing forest thinning activities. There is 
significant opposition in Arizona to this proposed land grab, as 
Americans for Responsible Recreational Access recently reported that a 
scientific poll found that 71.6 percent of Arizonans are opposed.
  In April, I held a public meeting to hear concerns about this 
proposal, and hundreds of local stakeholders showed up in opposition. 
More than 30 Arizona witnesses submitted formal testimony against this 
land grab, including Arizona's Governor, the Arizona Chamber of 
Commerce and Industry, numerous businesses, sportsmen's groups, ag

[[Page H4775]]

groups, local officials, and countless taxpayers. In fact, several of 
the comments pertaining to today are out of line.
  In fact, in this proposal, the entire town of Tusayan, which is in 
Coconino County, would be swallowed up by this proposed monument. Town 
managers testified against it.
  Arizona State Land Department Commissioner Lisa Atkins submitted 
testimony stating: ``Of the 1.7 million acres included in the proposal 
for the Grand Canyon Watershed National Monument, 64,000 acres belong 
solely to the Common Schools beneficiary: K-12 education.''
  The list goes on and on and on. I asked everybody. In fact, Arizona 
Governor Doug Ducey stated: ``Imposition of a preservation management 
objective overlay on 1.7 million acres of land in Arizona thwarts 
Arizona's land management objectives and values, and it does so by 
bypassing a public process that would most certainly result in a much 
more thoughtful result. The Grand Canyon Watershed National Monument is 
not narrow, targeted, warranted, or being considered through an open 
cooperative public process.''
  I, last but not least, bring up that attorneys also have testified 
that this proposed monument will tie up future surface water use and 
future groundwater use.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on amendment 41.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, is there any time left for the opposition?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Nevada (Ms. Titus).
  Ms. TITUS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of Mr. Grijalva's 
amendment.
  I represent the heart of the Las Vegas Valley, which attracts more 
than 42 million visitors from around the globe every year to the world 
famous Strip to visit our first-class casinos, restaurants, shopping, 
and shows.
  But that is not the only reason people come to Nevada. They come to 
see the West as it was hundreds, even thousands, of years ago. They 
come to see the iconic bighorn sheep, the Joshua tree, the petroglyphs 
that tell the history of the first people who called southern Nevada 
home.
  Congress rightfully entrusted in the President the authority to 
designate such special places for protection, but this bill would 
eliminate his or her ability to do that, to protect those places that 
tell America's stories.
  I urge my colleagues to support Mr. Grijalva's amendment to strip out 
this section from the bill.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, in closing, let me say, since the item 
came up of the Grand Canyon, the Grand Canyon is an icon to this whole 
Nation and is supported overwhelmingly by public opinion to create a 
monument that protects it from degradation from uranium mining, that 
protects the watershed that feeds water to 23 million people across the 
West, Nevada, California, Arizona. To say that this is merely a 
grabbing and a taking is to misrepresent history, misrepresent the 
reality of that resource; and, in the long term, understand that this 
icon, the Grand Canyon, is there to be preserved and protected by this 
Congress, not to be turned over for exploitation.
  I urge support of the amendment to protect the prerogatives of not 
only a President, but the prerogatives of our natural resources to be 
protected in perpetuity for generations and generations to come.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will 
be postponed.

                              {time}  2130


                 Amendment No. 42 Offered by Mrs. Black

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 42 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mrs. BLACK. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used by the Environmental Protection Agency to finalize, 
     implement, administer, or enforce section 1037.601(a)(1) of 
     title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, as proposed to be 
     revised under the proposed rule entitled ``Greenhouse Gas 
     Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and 
     Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles-Phase 2'' published by the 
     Environmental Protection Agency in the Federal Register on 
     July 13, 2015 (80 Fed. Reg. 40138 et seq.), or any rule of 
     the same substance, with respect to glider kits and glider 
     vehicles (as defined in section 1037.801 of title 40, Code of 
     Federal Regulations, as proposed to be revised under such 
     proposed rule).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentlewoman 
from Tennessee (Mrs. Black) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
  Mrs. BLACK. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to 
protect American workers and small manufacturing businesses from a 
misguided provision in a proposed EPA rule. Last year, the EPA released 
its phase 2 fuel efficiency and emissions standard for new medium- and 
heavy-duty trucks.
  While many in the trucking industry are not opposed to the phase 2 
rule as a whole, one section in the proposal wrongly applies these 
standards to what are known as glider kits.
  A glider kit is a group of vehicle parts that can include a brand new 
truck frame, cab, or axles, but which does not include an engine or 
transmission. Since a glider kit is less expensive to purchase than a 
new heavy-duty truck and can extend the investment and working life of 
a truck, businesses and drivers with a damaged or older vehicle may 
choose to purchase a glider kit instead of buying a new one.
  Gliders extend the useful life of truck engines while frequently 
having a higher resale price against comparable trucks. Due to their 
rebuilt engines, they can also often be a more fuel-efficient option, 
allowing trucking companies and drivers to use less fuel.
  Unfortunately, the EPA is proposing to apply the new phase 2 
standards to glider kits even though gliders are not really new 
vehicles. Further, it is unclear whether the EPA even has the authority 
to regulate the replacement parts like gliders. While the EPA's stated 
goal with phase 2 is to reduce emissions, the agency has not studied 
the emissions impact of remanufactured engines and gliders compared to 
new vehicles.
  It appears the agency's actual motivation is to force businesses and 
drivers that would like to use glider kits to instead buy new trucks. 
Applying the phase 2 standards to glider kits would certainly harm the 
workers and owners in the glider industry, leading to possible closure 
of these businesses and job losses at both manufacturers and 
dealerships. Additionally, the EPA's rule would limit consumer choice 
in the marketplace. Under this proposal, many operators and businesses 
would simply choose to continue using current vehicles, leaving older 
trucks on the road longer.
  My amendment would protect these businesses and American 
manufacturing jobs by prohibiting the EPA from finalizing, 
implementing, administering, or even enforcing phase 2 standards on 
glider kits.
  To be clear, this amendment would not--and I repeat, would not--bar 
the EPA from implementing the whole phase 2 rule for medium and heavy-
duty trucks. It would simply clarify that glider kits and glider 
vehicles are not new trucks as the EPA claims.
  I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment to help 
support American manufacturing and stop the EPA from attempting to shut 
down the glider industry.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.

[[Page H4776]]

  

  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chair, last year, the Environmental Protection Agency 
and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued proposed 
fuel efficiency standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks as required 
by the Energy Independence and Security Act.
  This amendment would prohibit EPA from finalizing, implementing, 
administering, or enforcing this proposed rule or any rule of the same 
substance with respect to glider vehicles. These new standards are 
designed to improve fuel efficiency and cut carbon pollution to reduce 
the impact of climate change.
  To be specific, Mr. Chair, these standards are expected to lower 
CO2 emissions by roughly 1 billion metric tons, cut fuel 
costs by $170 million, and reduce oil consumption by up to 1.8 billion 
barrels over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the program. Now, 
heavy-duty trucks account for 5 percent of the vehicles on the road, 
and yet they create 20 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions created 
by all transportation sectors.
  I would note for my colleagues that this amendment doesn't actually 
suspend all aspects of the new rule; it simply carves out an exemption 
for one particular industry, the industry that produces what are known 
as glider vehicles.
  Glider vehicles are heavy-duty vehicles that place an older or 
remanufactured engine on a new truck chassis. These are engines that 
date back to 2001 or older. They have emissions that are 20 to 40 times 
higher than today's clean diesel engines.
  In essence, Mr. Chair, this amendment would allow an entire segment 
of the truck manufacturing industry to avoid compliance with the new 
criteria pollutant standards that are in the rule. These are engines 
that will continue to emit greenhouse gases and slow down our progress 
in reducing the impacts of climate change. In short, Mr. Chair, this 
amendment creates a loophole that you could drive a truck through by 
allowing dirty engines to continue to pollute our environment.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BLACK. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Calvert) the chairman.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, it is my understanding that the overall rule 
is supported broadly by many in the truck and the manufacturing 
industry. However, as any rule, there are some specifics that do need 
to be ironed out, and my colleague has narrowly tailored this amendment 
to address concerns within the EPA's rule. So you really can't drive a 
truck through it.
  I support this language in the Interior bill.
  Mr. Chair, I urge Members to vote ``aye'' on this amendment.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BLACK. Mr. Chair, this proposed language from the EPA is 
improper and ill-conceived with no regard to jobs. If the EPA is going 
to promulgate rules that raise the costs and hurt jobs in districts 
like mine, the least they can do is to have a few facts prepared to 
back them.

  Communities where these kits are manufactured are already struggling 
with above average unemployment, and would see more job opportunities 
put out of reach.
  Furthermore, there seems to have been little time for the glider 
industry to even respond and to have little to no economic 
consideration given prior.
  Our constituent, dealers and employees, glider truck owners and 
operators, and remanufacturing businesses will disproportionately be 
affected by the EPA's decision to effectively ban the products that 
they sell, service, and drive. The U.S. truck industry has been a 
bright spot in the recovery of the national economy, and applying new 
standards to the gliders would increase expenses for our businesses and 
their drivers.
  Congress has recognized the value of remanufactured parts and 
components. The United States Senate and House of Representatives have 
voted overwhelmingly in support of legislation, the Federal Vehicle 
Repair Cost Savings Act, which was signed into law just last year, to 
encourage Federal agencies to consider using remanufactured parts in 
the Federal vehicle fleet. So it is happening in the Federal 
Government. This is going to affect the private sector.
  To restrict the usage of manufactured engines under this rulemaking 
appears to be counter to the congressional intent.
  I will reiterate that gliders, by definition, aren't a motor vehicle, 
and they therefore should be used outside the EPA's authority.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chair, I would just restate that this amendment 
creates a loophole. It creates a loophole for one industry. It picks 
winners and losers. The winners would be one segment of the truck 
industry. The losers would be jobs, our health, and our environment.
  Mr. Chair, I ask for opposition to this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Black).
  The amendment was agreed to.


               Amendment No. 43 Offered by Mrs. Blackburn

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 43 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  Each amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act that is not required to be appropriated 
     or otherwise made available by a provision of law is hereby 
     reduced by 1 percent.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentlewoman 
from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Tennessee.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the recognition. I want to 
begin by saying I think the committee has done an amazing job with 
consistently making reductions in what they are spending. It is 
appropriate that we do that because we are $19.3 trillion in debt.
  My amendment is a very simple reduction in spending. It is a penny 
out of a dollar--1 percent--across the board. I know it is not popular. 
I know everybody says it goes too far. But this will save us $321 
million--of course, not a lot when you look at the total budget, but it 
is very appropriate that we begin to take these steps.
  I think it is so interesting talking about Ronald Reagan and how he 
approached things. He would always say: Let's take a little bit, a few 
steps at a time and begin to get behind some of this and get our 
economy and get our government back in shape, right-size it.
  That is exactly what he did, and it paid off for our country with 
economic growth, making certain that our economy was growing, and that 
our revenues were growing. Indeed, Mr. Chairman, since that time, we 
have seen our country doesn't have a revenue problem. What we have is a 
spending problem. What we have is a priority problem. What we fail to 
do time and time again is to realize that the taxpayers tell us they 
are overtaxed, our government is overspent, and they want us to 
consistently make as many spending reductions as we possibly can.
  So I come, once again, to the floor with this 1 percent across-the-
board spending cut. What it will do is to make that reduction of 
another $321 million to build on the success the committee has already 
shown with coming $64 million below the 2016 enacted levels. They are 
to be commended for that. But let's get in behind it. Let's compound 
these savings and begin to get our fiscal house in order.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I believe that our colleagues will be 
treated to a rare display of bipartisan harmony on this amendment.

[[Page H4777]]

  Mr. Chair, I strongly oppose the amendment.
  Look, this is not a perfect bill, and there are clear differences on 
this amendment, but we should not be underfunding what, in my view, is 
already underfunded. If this amendment were to pass, we are looking at 
fewer patients that would be seen at the Indian Health Service, fewer 
safety inspectors ensuring that accidents do not occur, and deferred 
maintenance on our Nation's drinking water and sanitation 
infrastructure. More generally, Mr. Chairman, investments in our 
environmental infrastructure and our public lands will be halted, and 
jobs will be lost.
  The bill is already underfunded in my view, and this amendment would 
not encourage the agencies to do more with less. Simply put, it would 
force agencies and our constituents to do less with less. I strongly 
urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ISRAEL. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I certainly appreciate the gentlewoman's amendment and her intent to 
reduce spending. As she well knows, we have reduced this bill somewhat 
over the years, as we have on all of the discretionary accounts that 
the Appropriations Committee is responsible for.
  This really is a decision based upon discussion regarding 
discretionary accounts versus nondiscretionary accounts. If we could 
have cut the nondiscretionary accounts as much as we have cut 
discretionary accounts, we could probably balance the budget plus. But 
unfortunately, we are not there.
  So I rise in opposition to this amendment. I commend my colleague for 
her consistent work to protect taxpayer dollars, but this is not an 
approach I can support. While the President's proposed budget exceeds 
the bill, the increases were paid for with proposals and gimmicks that 
would never be enacted. This bill makes the tough choices with an 
allocation that adheres to the current law.
  We may not agree that it is enough, but that is what the current law 
is. So we made trade-offs, and we have done many difficult choices to 
make this work.
  Mr. Chair, I urge opposition to this amendment.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2145

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I have heard every excuse that there 
is--always do--and I know that spending reductions are not popular 
around here. I get it. I know it. But let me tell you what I think also 
is not proper.
  I think that it is immoral for us to spend money that we don't have--
it is not our money; it is taxpayer money--and to spend it on programs 
that our constituents don't want.
  I think it is also immoral for us to not get our spending under 
control and to pass along all this debt to our children and our 
grandchildren. Just think about it. My grandsons, who are 7 and 8 years 
old, by the time they begin paying taxes, these programs, many of them, 
will have outlived their usefulness. The utilization of these dollars 
will be gone.
  Do I hope we have the political will to look at the mandatory 
spending side of the column? Absolutely.
  A couple of other points. I would hope that bipartisanship will come 
to reducing what we spend in this Chamber, that there will be agreement 
that we are, indeed, overtaxed and overspent, and the fiscal health of 
this Nation needs to be addressed.
  I also think that what we need to look at is the burden of taxation 
has caused many of our constituents to face deferred maintenance on 
their homes, on their businesses, on their dreams, because they are 
having to pay their taxes, they are having to pay what the Federal 
Government takes out of those paychecks, first right of refusal on 
those paychecks. It also causes job loss.
  It is time for us to address our overspending and our national debt. 
I do hope we see some work on the mandatory side of the column.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, may I ask how much time I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York has 2\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman notes that it is the 
taxpayers' money. She is right, it is the taxpayers' money. Taxpayers 
expect that their money will be spent safeguarding their 
infrastructure. They expect that their money will be spent on 
maintenance, maintaining their infrastructure. They expect that their 
money will be spent making sure that when they turn on the faucets in 
Flint, Michigan, toxic water doesn't come out. They expect that if they 
have health problems, they will be able to get some monitoring and that 
their health will be taken care of. They expect us to spend their 
dollars wisely.
  As I said before, Mr. Chairman, this is not a perfect bill. But the 
chairman is correct, this bill adheres to the law. While we would say 
we are not investing enough, and while the chairman would say we are 
investing about what we have, the gentlewoman's amendment would 
actually force us to do much less with even less.
  Those are not priorities we can support, Mr. Chairman, which is why I 
urge my colleagues to join the chairman and our ranking member in 
opposing this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Tennessee 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 44 Offered by Mr. Boustany

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 44 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used by the Secretary of the Interior to implement, 
     administer, or enforce any rule or guidance of the same 
     substance as the proposed rule regarding Risk Management, 
     Financial Assurance and Loss Prevention for which advanced 
     notice of proposed rulemaking was published by the Bureau of 
     Ocean Energy Management on August 19, 2014 (79 Fed. Reg. 
     49027) or the National Notice to Lessees and Operators of 
     Federal Oil and Gas and Sulphur Leases, Outer Continental 
     Shelf (OCS) issued by such Bureau (NTL No. 2016-N03).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would prohibit the use of 
funds by the Secretary of the Interior for the purpose of 
implementation, administering, or enforcing any rule or guidance 
similar to the proposed guidance that the Bureau of Ocean Energy 
Management released regarding financial assurances for oil and gas 
operations on the Outer Continental Shelf.
  The Federal Government currently requires American offshore oil and 
gas companies to buy liability bonds ranging from tens of thousands of 
dollars to tens of millions of dollars for every offshore lease. In 
August of 2014, BOEM published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
seeking industry input on ``risk management, financial assurance, and 
loss prevention.''
  Inexplicably, BOEM elected to circumvent the rulemaking process it 
initiated and, instead, released proposed guidance in August 2015 that 
creates new rules that will change the way the oil and gas industry 
funds these decommissioning costs--also referred to as ``plugging'' or 
``abandonment''--of wells, pipelines, and other facilities in the Gulf 
of Mexico's Outer Continental Shelf.
  The Obama administration ignored warnings from stakeholders that this 
proposed guidance could drive many companies into bankruptcy precisely 
at a time when the industry is suffering from a commodity price 
collapse. A lot of workers in Louisiana

[[Page H4778]]

and across the Gulf Coast have been laid off.
  BOEM has asserted that these rule changes are necessary to prevent 
taxpayers from being left with the tab for decommissioning work in 
light of a number of recent bankruptcy filings by OCS shelf operators. 
Ironically, BOEM's solution will likely trigger the major risk that it 
is trying to protect against. If implemented, these changes will pose 
an existential threat to many OCS shelf operators, discourage future 
investment, cost thousands of jobs, and dramatically reduce the 
royalties to U.S. taxpayers.
  For example, under the new rules, each party would be assessed 100 
percent on shared leases, and a joint operating agreement is no longer 
accepted as a reflection of actual liability.
  This means that if there are four companies sharing a project and it 
would cost an estimated $20 million to remove that particular platform, 
BOEM would, nevertheless, require each party to post a $20 million bond 
to remove the platform. It hardly seems necessary to require $80 
million in bonding for a $20 million project.
  The new rules also require full bonding up front for all possible 
wells in the exploratory plan, despite the fact that the wells may 
never be drilled. The P&A liability, in many cases, will not accrue for 
many, many years. For facilities already in production, BOEM will 
require capital assurance for the lifetime production value of the 
property every year, meaning that each year a lessee will be 
responsible for 100 percent of the P&A liability for every production 
facility exploration activity in production value.
  In fact, many of the industry experts have expressed concern that 
BOEM has not even provided a clear definition of the problem that the 
agency is trying to solve nor has there been any justification provided 
as to the need for major changes to the existing regulatory framework. 
Experts throughout the industry remain concerned that if this proposed 
guidance were to be finalized, it would dramatically limit the 
industry's ability to successfully explore and extract oil and gas from 
the Gulf of Mexico.
  A new rule, guidance, or any other form of notice from BOEM on 
supplemental bonding will stifle oil and gas production on the OCS and 
throughout the Gulf of Mexico. This is not in the interest of the 
United States.
  I urge adoption of my amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would clearly block the 
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management from finalizing guidance to clarify 
financial assurances for oil and gas companies operating in the Outer 
Continental Shelf.
  The guidance is important because it details the procedures that will 
be used to determine the lessee's financial ability to carry out its 
obligations so that we, the taxpayer, our constituents, can be sure 
that the oil company can pay for all of its costs associated with 
offshore drilling. The guidance is necessary to ensure that oil 
companies have the financial capability to properly decommission outer 
shelf facilities instead of abandoning them and leaving the American 
taxpayer, our constituents, on the hook to pay the cost.
  The guidance will modernize the financial assurance regulations to 
match the current industry practices, provide updated criteria for 
determining the lessee's ability to self-insure its liabilities based 
on the lessee's financial capacity and financial strength. We should be 
working together to ensure that the U.S. taxpayer never pays to 
decommission an OCS facility and that the environment is protected at 
the same time.
  This amendment protects the special interests of Big Oil at the 
taxpayer's expense, so I must protect the taxpayer and oppose this 
amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Louisiana has 1 minute 
remaining.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).
  Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman 
from Louisiana for bringing this amendment up.
  Here is the reality. This is largely a solution in search of a 
problem. There has not been a single case in the history of offshore 
energy production where the government has been left holding the bag. 
It doesn't exist. So, yes, we should be working together. Representing 
one of the most ecologically productive coastal areas in the United 
States, we are very concerned about what happens with our coastal area.

  But, again, we are proposing solutions in search of problems. All 
this is going to do is it is going to result in a decrease in 
competition for offshore energy production, a decrease in competition, 
and a decrease in revenue for the United States Treasury. This funds 
the Land and Water Conservation Fund, something that your side often 
stands up for and fights for. This has provided nearly $200 billion for 
the United States Treasury, one of the largest revenue streams for the 
United States Government outside of taxes.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge support of this amendment. This policy, this 
notice to lessees, is ill-advised. It simply has been done in the dark 
of night, and it is a solution in search of a problem.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, we need in this day and age to make sure 
that the American taxpayer is protected. We have seen time and time 
again when environmental disasters happen and brownfields are left 
behind or what is going on in Flint, the taxpayer picks up the bill.
  I just really believe that this guidance is necessary to ensure that 
oil companies have the financial capability--that they have on the 
books the financial capability to properly decommission their Outer 
Continental Shelf facilities instead of abandoning them, leaving the 
American taxpayer to pay for the cleanup.
  Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 45 Offered by Mr. Boustany

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 45 
printed in House Report 114-683.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     used by the Secretary of the Interior to implement, 
     administer, or enforce any rule of the same substance as the 
     proposed rule entitled ``Oil and Gas and Sulphur Operations 
     in the Outer Continental Shelf-Blowout Preventer Systems and 
     Well Control'' and published April 17, 2015 (80 Fed. Reg. 
     21504), the final rule issued by the Bureau of Safety and 
     Environmental Enforcement with that title (Docket ID: BSEE-
     2015-0002; 15XE1700DX EEEE500000 EX1SF0000.DAQ000), or any 
     rule of the same substance as such proposed or final rule.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 820, the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chairman, my amendment will prohibit any money 
being spent for the implementation or enforcement of any rule or 
guidance similar to the well-controlled rule offered by the Bureau of 
Safety and Environmental Enforcement, or BSEE.
  Unfortunately, according to experts throughout the oil and gas 
industry, many of the prescriptive requirements contained within the 
final well-controlled rule will neither improve safety nor reduce 
environmental risk in drilling, but will actually have unintended 
consequences of increasing risk beyond that of existing regulations.
  Additionally, the final rule will create significant additional 
expenses and burdens for those engaged in exploration development and 
production activities on the Outer Continental Shelf.
  Ultimately, these added economic and compliance cost tens of billions 
of

[[Page H4779]]

dollars over 10 years, and together with other regulatory burdens, they 
could force some smaller operators out of business and drive larger 
operators from the Federal OCS toward countries with less prescriptive 
regulatory environments or other opportunities. This means that the 
negative impacts of this destructive rule will likely be felt 
throughout all 50 States.
  To my colleagues who represent States that do not have offshore 
development, I would argue that you should support this amendment 
because BSEE's well-controlled rule is yet another example of the Obama 
administration not listening to real experts in this industry and, 
instead, forcing rules and regulations into place that will hurt the 
domestic industry and our U.S. economy.
  In effect, the well-controlled rule ultimately could increase risk 
and decrease safety on the Outer Continental Shelf. It is a one-size-
fits-all proposal that really is not realistic.

                              {time}  2200

  It will also negatively impact the attractiveness of the Gulf of 
Mexico for future oil and gas investment, and it will likely result in 
oil and gas operators choosing to develop energy resources in other 
parts of the world, taking those jobs and those investment 
opportunities with them.
  As the House's Task Forces on Reducing Regulatory Burdens and 
Restoring Constitutional Authority explains in its mission statement, 
we as a government should be working to ``make it easier to invest, 
produce, and build in America with a modern and transparent regulatory 
system that relieves the burden on small businesses and other job 
creators and encourages financial independence while balancing 
environmental stewardship, public safety, and consumer interests.''
  BSEE's well control rule does not do this. America cannot continue to 
be the global energy leader without policies that foster this kind of 
innovation, investment, and development of our energy resources. 
Safety, not convenience, must always be the driving force behind these 
initiatives. BSEE'S well control rule not only leaves industry with 
numerous questions about compliance, but it also has experts concerned 
that these new measures will increase risk.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I am surprised this amendment is being 
offered because there is already a rider in the bill that pretty much 
accomplishes what the gentleman's amendment would do. Let's be clear 
what this amendment does.
  It reverses the safety improvements that were developed following the 
Deepwater Horizon tragedy. It would delay or prevent the implementation 
of a rule that was developed directly from the recommendations of 
numerous investigations. There was a full investigation. These are the 
recommendations from it. The investigations were conducted by industry 
experts, and they determined the actual cause of the Deepwater Horizon 
tragedy and the impact on the Gulf of Mexico and on the surrounding 
States and on the local communities, as we heard Ms. Castor from 
Florida talk about earlier.
  Many of the requirements of this rule are not new. They were already 
in existence as industry standards, notice to lessees and guidance and 
equipment and operation requirements that were already part of the 
regulation. What the rule does is consolidates these requirements into 
one section and makes them enforceable--yes, enforceable. The 
Department of the Interior estimates that the regulation amendment 
blocks would prevent between $657 million and $4.4 billion of damage 
caused by well blowouts over 10 years.
  Most importantly, this estimate does not take into account the human 
element of these protections. I think we can all agree that you cannot 
put a price on human life. The Deepwater Horizon was a tragic event. 
Eleven lives were lost in that explosion. It is unconscionable that 
this amendment, once again, looks to put the profits of big oil 
companies ahead of workers' safety; so I oppose this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chair, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Louisiana has 2 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Graves).
  Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the gentleman from 
Louisiana for yielding and also for bringing up this amendment.
  Let's talk about reality versus fiction. Here is the reality.
  The reality is that these regulations have not been out there. They 
were not subject to investigations and studies. I was the lead trustee 
for the State of Louisiana. I was the tip of the spear who was fighting 
BP during the entire Deepwater Horizon, and I was the natural resource 
manager for the coast of Louisiana under which over 600 miles of our 
coast was oiled.
  I appreciate the gentleman for stepping in and trying to defend our 
environment and our resources. For the constituents whom I represent 
who lost family members, the reality is this: 60 percent of the wells 
since the Deepwater Horizon couldn't even be drilled under this 
proposed rule. The reality is that the Department of the Interior's 
cost estimate said it was going to cost $883 million to comply with 
when a private study said it was going to be $93 billion.
  The reality is this: you have a bunch of bureaucrats who are sitting 
around in a vacuum who have no idea what they are doing and who are 
proposing things under the auspices of safety but that actually 
threaten the lives of our citizens in south Louisiana who are producing 
energy for this Nation--in fact, approximately 17 percent of the energy 
for the United States.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota has 3 minutes 
remaining.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, in closing, that is why I do not understand 
the redundancy, the duplicity--why we keep doing this over and over and 
over again. This bill already undoes a lot of what the regulation would 
do to protect the environment and to protect workers' safety.
  I read from the bill at page 69, line 4, section 124, and this is 
about drilling margins:
  ``None of the funds made available in this act or any other act for 
any fiscal year may be used to develop, adopt, implement, administer, 
or enforce any change to regulations and guidance.'' It goes on.
  This amendment would reverse the safety improvements that were 
developed following the Deepwater Horizon tragedy, something to which, 
I think, America said no more: no more loss of life, no impact like 
this on our environment.
  I oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chair, in Louisiana, we understand quite clearly 
how good environmental policy, economic policy, energy policy march 
hand in hand. We also know that the men and women who work on these 
rigs are our friends, our neighbors, our family, and safety is first. 
We also know from experts across the industry that this proposed rule 
is a one-size-fits-all proposal that increases risk. It makes it more 
risky, and we will not stand to allow this rule to go forward. That is 
why I urge the adoption of this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Louisiana 
will be postponed.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 114-683 on

[[Page H4780]]

which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 1 by Ms. Castor of Florida.
  Amendment No. 3 by Mr. Himes of Connecticut.
  Amendment No. 8 by Mr. Ellison of Minnesota.
  Amendment No. 9 by Mr. Norcross of New Jersey.
  Amendment No. 10 by Mr. Beyer of Virginia.
  Amendment No. 11 by Mr. Huffman of California.
  Amendment No. 12 by Ms. Castor of Florida.
  Amendment No. 13 by Mr. Huffman of California.
  Amendment No. 14 by Mr. Smith of Missouri.
  Amendment No. 20 by Mr. Palmer of Alabama.
  Amendment No. 21 by Mr. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico.
  Amendment No. 22 by Mrs. Dingell of Michigan.
  Amendment No. 27 by Mr. Cartwright of Pennsylvania.
  Amendment No. 28 by Mr. Becerra of California.
  Amendment No. 29 by Mr. Peters of California.
  Amendment No. 31 by Mr. Peters of California.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


            Amendment No. 1 Offered by Ms. Castor of Florida

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Florida 
(Ms. Castor) 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 197, 
noes 225, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 417]

                               AYES--197

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     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
     Costello (PA)
     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
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     Nugent
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--225

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bishop (MI)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Costa
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     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
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stewart
     Stivers
     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
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Bishop (UT)
     Dold
     Foxx
     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai
     Wilson (FL)

                              {time}  2229

  Messrs. HANNA, GUTIERREZ, and FITZPATRICK changed their vote from 
``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. DOLD. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 417, I was unavoidably detained. 
Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''


                  Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Himes

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 183, 
noes 241, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 418]

                               AYES--183

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Benishek
     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
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard

[[Page H4781]]


     Gallego
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Guinta
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Katko
     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
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--241

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     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
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     DelBene
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garamendi
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     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
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McDermott
     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
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--9

     DeSaulnier
     Foxx
     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Collins of Georgia) (during the vote). There is 
1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2231

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


                 Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Ellison

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 173, 
noes 251, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 419]

                               AYES--173

     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
     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
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     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)
     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
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--251

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     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
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garamendi
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Himes
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     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
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert

[[Page H4782]]


     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (NY)
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     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
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Foxx
     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Richmond
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2236

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


                Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Norcross

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 143, 
noes 282, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 420]

                               AYES--143

     Barletta
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (FL)
     Bustos
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis, Danny
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Garrett
     Gibson
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kind
     Kuster
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moolenaar
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Swalwell (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--282

     Abraham
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Aguilar
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Babin
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Butterfield
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Capps
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Cleaver
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Cook
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huffman
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Larsen (WA)
     Latta
     Lipinski
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lowenthal
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lummis
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Massie
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nolan
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (NY)
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Titus
     Trott
     Turner
     Valadao
     Vela
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Welch
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Foxx
     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2239

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


                 Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Beyer

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 190, 
noes 235, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 421]

                               AYES--190

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     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
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Heck (WA)
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind

[[Page H4783]]


     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     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
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--235

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     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
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     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
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     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
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Foxx
     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2242

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


                Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Huffman

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 184, 
noes 240, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 422]

                               AYES--184

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     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)
     Clawson (FL)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     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
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--240

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     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
     Jackson Lee
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     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
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Thompson (PA)

[[Page H4784]]


     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
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Foxx
     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Serrano
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2245

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


           Amendment No. 12 Offered by Ms. Castor of Florida

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 186, 
noes 237, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 423]

                               AYES--186

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clawson (FL)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Graham
     Grayson
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     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
     Nugent
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--237

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     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
     Jackson Lee
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     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
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Vela
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Foxx
     Hastings
     Jolly
     Joyce
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai
     Tiberi


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2249

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


                Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Huffman

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 181, 
noes 244, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 424]

                               AYES--181

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     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
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     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)
     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

[[Page H4785]]


     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--244

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     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
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     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
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     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
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Vela
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Foxx
     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting Chair (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2252

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


           Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Smith of Missouri

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 208, 
noes 217, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 425]

                               AYES--208

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     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
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moolenaar
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                               NOES--217

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     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
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     LaMalfa
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     McSally
     Meeks
     Meng
     Miller (MI)
     Mooney (WV)
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz

[[Page H4786]]


     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Foxx
     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting Chair (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2255

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


                 Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. Palmer

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 175, 
noes 250, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 426]

                               AYES--175

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Babin
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Burgess
     Carter (GA)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Collins (GA)
     Conaway
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (MS)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shuster
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stewart
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                               NOES--250

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Barletta
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bucshon
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter (TX)
     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
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellmers (NC)
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibbs
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     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
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     McSally
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Miller (MI)
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Noem
     Nolan
     Norcross
     Nugent
     Nunes
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Stivers
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Trott
     Tsongas
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walorski
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Foxx
     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting Chair (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  2258

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Ms. SINEMA. Mr. Chair, during rollcall vote No. 426 on H.R. 5538, I 
mistakenly recorded my vote as ``yes'' when I should have voted ``no.''


      Amendment No. 21 Offered by Mr. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 219, 
noes 207, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 427]

                               AYES--219

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amash
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buck
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chaffetz
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gohmert
     Gosar
     Graham
     Graves (LA)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Heck (WA)
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Lamborn
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Love
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lummis
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn

[[Page H4787]]


     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     McSally
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mooney (WV)
     Moore
     Moulton
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Newhouse
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Rohrabacher
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salmon
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stewart
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tipton
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--207

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Goodlatte
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Hice, Jody B.
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mullin
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Scalise
     Scott, Austin
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stivers
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     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
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2302

  Mr. SIRES and Ms. McSALLY changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Amendment No. 22 Offered by Mrs. Dingell

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 170, 
noes 256, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 428]

                               AYES--170

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     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
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     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
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--256

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bera
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     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
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garamendi
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     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
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kilmer
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Kuster
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McDermott
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nolan
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder

[[Page H4788]]


     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2305

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


               Amendment No. 27 Offered by Mr. Cartwright

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 195, 
noes 231, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 429]

                               AYES--195

     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
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Miller (MI)
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--231

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     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
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     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
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2308

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


                Amendment No. 28 Offered by Mr. Becerra

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 190, 
noes 236, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 430]

                               AYES--190

     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
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     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)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     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
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)

[[Page H4789]]


     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--236

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     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
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     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
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Marchant
     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
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stewart
     Stivers
     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
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2311

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


                 Amendment No. 29 Offered by Mr. Peters

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 182, 
noes 244, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 431]

                               AYES--182

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     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
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     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
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--244

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     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
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     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
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     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
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     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
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai

[[Page H4790]]


  



                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2314

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


                 Amendment No. 31 Offered by Mr. Peters

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 185, 
noes 241, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 432]

                               AYES--185

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     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
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     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
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--241

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     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
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     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
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     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
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     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
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Hastings
     Jolly
     Marino
     Poe (TX)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Stutzman
     Takai


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2317

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Byrne) having assumed the chair, Mr. Collins of Georgia, 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. 
5538) making appropriations for the Department of the Interior, 
environment, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 
30, 2017, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________