DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2018; Congressional Record Vol. 163, No. 126
(House of Representatives - July 26, 2017)

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 H6437-H6463]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2018

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 473 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, 
H.R. 3219.
  Will the gentleman from New York (Mr. Donovan) kindly resume the 
chair.

                              {time}  2104


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 3219) making appropriations for the Department of 
Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2018, and for other 
purposes, with Mr. Donovan (Acting Chair) in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, 
amendment No. 42 printed in House Report 115-259, offered by the 
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley) had been disposed of.


                 Amendment No. 43 Offered by Mr. Perry

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 43 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Mr. PERRY. 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 286, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $15,000,000)''.
       Page 296, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $15,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by thanking the 
chairman of the full committee for his extraordinary work and for the 
chairman of the subcommittee for this auspicious opportunity.
  I have been listening to the arguments recently that we have had on 
the floor regarding the most recent amendments between fossil fuels and 
renewables, and I am hoping to strike a sweet spot here. I am not 
picking on fossil fuels, and I am going to talk about a renewable that 
I think everybody has an affinity for and an agreement with.
  This amendment simply increases funding for hydroelectric through the 
EERE by $15 million and decreases funding to the bureaucracy. There is 
no increase to the budget. This amendment just increases the 
appropriation for the Office of Energy and Efficiency and Renewable 
Energy because hydropower is available in every region of the country; 
2,200 hydropower plants provide America's most abundant source of 
clean, renewable electricity. I would say it is the first renewable. It 
accounts for 67 percent of domestic renewable generation and, clearly, 
7 percent of total electricity generation.
  By 2025, hydropower would create almost a million and a half new, 
good, high-paying jobs. It can be implemented in rivers, harbors, 
coastal areas, et cetera, to capture energy from currents and tides. 
Harnessing this energy will create a truly and absolutely renewable and 
green source of energy without any emissions and with little fanfare to 
everybody involved.
  Hydro is predictable year-round power output, while other renewable 
source outputs can be variable in some areas and necessitate the use of 
large battery banks and alternate power sources. For instance, 
sometimes when the wind doesn't blow, believe it or not, if you don't 
know it, there is a gas-fired generator often associated with those 
windmill farms that has to come on because base load isn't being 
serviced.
  Hydropower facilities are quiet, unobtrusive, while many people 
report that considerable noise is generated by wind power and that land 
is taken up by huge solar farms.
  Hydropower is base load energy. That means it is on all the time, 24 
hours a day, 365 days a year, just sitting there turning out the power 
so that you can hit the light switch when you come home and not wonder: 
Is the power going to be on? It backs up other intermittent sources of 
energy.

[[Page H6438]]

  Hydropower is safe. It harms neither fish nor man. It all faces a 
comprehensive and regular regulatory approval process.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. BONAMICI. I claim the time in opposition, although I am not 
opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Oregon is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of Mr. Perry's 
amendment and the power and potential of clean marine hydrokinetic 
energy, and I first want to thank Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member 
Kaptur for their leadership in supporting the Water Power Technologies 
Office. The Water Power Technologies Office invests in research and 
development that supports hydropower, pumped storage, and marine 
energy.
  Furthermore, I want to thank the chair and ranking member for 
including $30 million in the 2017 omnibus for the creation of a wave 
energy test center, which is now located at Oregon State University. 
This robust investment will help the United States lead in the field of 
marine hydrokinetic energy. The increase this amendment proposes will 
support hydropower and the development of innovative hydropower 
technologies, along with marine and hydrokinetic energy technologies. 
Development of these new technologies can offer the United States 
leadership in an emerging area of abundant renewable energy.
  Marine and hydrokinetic energy, in particular, energy from waves, 
currents, and tides, is an exciting frontier in the renewable energy 
sector. Currently, Oregon State University, University of Washington, 
and the University of Alaska Fairbanks are partnering to support the 
testing and research activities of the Northwest National Marine 
Renewable Energy Center. This center will provide visionary 
entrepreneurs with a domestic location to test wave energy devices, 
along with other technologies, rather than traveling to Scotland to use 
the European test center. Without continued Federal investment, Europe 
will remain the leader in this important work.
  When fully developed, wave and tidal energy systems could generate a 
significant amount of total energy used in the United States. As 
Congress promotes technologies that can help lower our constituents' 
energy bills, we must explore new and innovative solutions like marine 
and hydrokinetic renewable energy.
  Thank you again to the chairman and ranking member for their hard 
work and legislative leadership on this issue, and thank you to 
Representative Perry for his leadership.
  Mr. Chair, I urge support for this amendment, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, a lot of what we hear is is that our 
constituents wish that we would work together more often, and I thank 
the gentlewoman for her comments and her support; and I think it is 
just proof that we can work together for something that we agree on, 
which is clean power, the power to just power our future, and that 
comes from hydroelectricity.
  I don't know why it is not as sexy as it should be. I think it is one 
of the greatest marvels of technology starting back since the beginning 
of time and when power was first generated, and I don't understand why 
we don't rely on it more.
  To that end, literally 60,000 megawatts of preliminary permits and 
projects await final approval and are pending before FERC in 45 States 
right now. Eighty thousand--80,000--nonpowered dams in the United 
States, of which 600 have immediate hydro capability, right now could 
be producing energy.

  Mr. Chair, 80,000 nonpowered dams in the United States, just think 
about that. And the State I hail from and I am privileged to represent 
a portion of, Pennsylvania, has 678 megawatts of untapped hydropower 
right now.
  Mr. Chairman, I would just urge all of our colleagues to vote for 
this amendment.
  I, again, appreciate the chairmen of the committee and of the 
subcommittee for this opportunity, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the remaining time, 
please.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Ms. BONAMICI. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maine (Ms. 
Pingree), a strong supporter of hydropower.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much to my colleague from 
Oregon for yielding me time.
  Mr. Chairman, I, too, want to rise in support, today, of the Perry 
amendment.
  I thank my colleague from Oregon and my colleague from Pennsylvania 
for their leadership on this important renewable energy issue.
  I also want to thank the chair of the subcommittee, Mr. Simpson, whom 
I am fortunate to also serve on the Interior Committee with. Mr. 
Simpson has worked hard on this bill to increase some of the levels of 
funding above the abysmal levels that were proposed by the 
administration's budget earlier this year.
  And also, to our ranking member, Ms. Kaptur, my friend from Ohio, I 
thank her for her commitment to renewable energy and our energy future.
  The amendment before us today would provide a modest increase in 
funding to the Department of Energy's Water Power Program. It is a 
bipartisan effort, and I am pleased to be part of that. It comes from 
the fact that many parts of the country are seeking the real benefits 
of tidal energy that generates incredible power, or of hydrokinetic 
power that taps the power of flowing water.
  In response to my colleague from Pennsylvania, in Maine, we think 
tidal energy is very sexy.
  The Department of Energy supports private sector research, 
development, and implementation of hydropower, pumped storage, and 
marine tidal energy. It supports cutting-edge research and makes sure 
that the office supports all three types of water-based technologies.
  Last year, nearly 100 teams competed in a competition for an Energy 
Department-funded wave energy prize, with 20 finalists coming from 10 
States, showing the breadth of interest in this work. Congress needs to 
support multifaceted work at a level that will continue to allow for 
innovation.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge all my colleagues to support renewable energy, 
support water power, and support the Perry amendment.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this amendment and 
encourage all of you to do the same.
  As the sponsor of the amendment explained, this does not take 
additional money, cuts down on bureaucracy, and puts the dollars into 
important work, like marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge support, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  2115


          Amendment No. 44 Offered by Ms. Esty of Connecticut

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 44 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Ms. ESTY of Connecticut. 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 286, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $20,000,000)''.
       Page 288, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $40,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentlewoman 
from Connecticut (Ms. Esty) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Connecticut.
  Ms. ESTY of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my 
amendment to increase funding for the Advanced Manufacturing Office by 
$20 million.
  I want to thank my colleagues, Representative Tom Reed, John Katko, 
and Jacky Rosen for their partnership in this bipartisan amendment.
  Our amendment is about protecting and creating millions of good-
paying

[[Page H6439]]

jobs in Connecticut and across the country. Our amendment will help us 
ensure that the technologically advanced products of the future will be 
manufactured, not in China, not in India, but right here in the United 
States of America.
  The Department of Energy's Advanced Manufacturing Office is the only 
technology development office within the Federal Government that is 
dedicated to enhancing American manufacturing competitiveness. The 
Advanced Manufacturing Office works to help manufacturers improve 
energy and material efficiency, technology, and productivity.
  Unfortunately, the appropriations bill before us today cuts funding 
to the Advanced Manufacturing Office by $155.5 million from fiscal year 
2017 enacted levels, and that is a mistake.
  Manufacturing is one of the most important sectors of the U.S. 
economy. In 2016, manufacturing contributed $2.18 trillion to our 
economy and employed 12.3 million workers. In my home State of 
Connecticut, manufacturing has long been our economic backbone.
  Connecticut is home to nearly 5,000 manufacturing companies that 
provide good-paying jobs for 76,000 Connecticut residents. This 
amendment helps American manufacturers all across the country to be 
more competitive by reducing energy costs.
  Manufacturing is very energy intensive. In fact, according to the 
National Association of Manufacturers, manufacturers consume more than 
30 percent of our Nation's energy. That translates to $130 billion in 
costs to U.S. manufacturers every year.
  Adequately funding the Advanced Manufacturing Office, will help 
reduce energy costs to manufacturers, freeing up their budgets to 
invest in research and development, expand their facilities, and, most 
importantly, hire more people.
  Our amendment also helps American manufacturers become more 
competitive by addressing critical workforce needs in energy 
efficiency.
  Last year, I visited Forum Plastics, a plastic molding company based 
in Waterbury, Connecticut. I met with employees to discuss the 
expectations and challenges facing manufacturers in America today, and 
one of the topics that came up was how businesses struggle to hire 
workers with the right skills. Yet, that same year, Forum Plastics 
partnered with the Advanced Manufacturing Office to carry out an 
industrial assessment project.
  The Industrial Assessment Centers program is a tool for employers to 
recruit individuals with hands-on experience in energy efficiency.
  Mr. Chairman, now is not the time to roll back investments in 
American manufacturing. It is the time to increase our support for U.S. 
manufacturing. I know all of us in this Chamber are committed to 
promoting good-paying jobs in the communities we represent, but it is 
not enough to say we are committed.
  We need to make job creation a priority, and that means making 
American manufacturing a priority. I urge my colleagues to support our 
amendment which increases funding to the Department of Energy's 
Advanced Manufacturing Office by $20 million, fully paid for by a 
reduction in the more than $350 million plus-up to funding for the 
Office of Fossil Energy Research & Development.
  This bipartisan amendment is a win for American manufacturing and a 
win for our economy. I urge my colleagues to support our bipartisan 
amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SIMPSON. I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Idaho is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chair, first, let me say, it was not a $300-some-
odd-million plus-up in the fossil energy research. In fact, I think the 
fossil energy research account was down from last year.
  It was more than the President requested, but it is not a plus-up 
from what it was in 2017.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. The amendment 
would increase funding for the Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy by 
$20 million but has to use $40 million from the Fossil Energy Research 
& Development account as an offset.
  This bill was the result of some tough choices. I have to admit, they 
were some tough choices. It is not that I oppose the program that the 
good lady advocates for, but there were some tough choices. We had to 
prioritize research and development that will increase our energy 
independence.
  Our domestic energy resources are vast, and this bill strikes a 
balance to lay the foundations for future energy generation 
technologies, while maintaining full support for the resources we use 
most today.
  Increasing funding for EERE by diverting funding from fossil energy 
strikes the wrong balance when considering the Nation's electricity 
needs. Fossil fuels produce 65 percent of the electricity we use today 
and will continue to provide the majority of the Nation's energy needs 
in the future.
  This amendment would reduce funding for a program that ensures that 
we use our Nation's fossil fuel resources as well, and as cleanly as 
possible. For all of the reasons that team fossil talked about earlier 
tonight, I must oppose the amendment and urge my Members to do the 
same.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. ESTY of Connecticut. Mr. Chair, how much time do I have 
remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman has 30 seconds remaining.
  Ms. ESTY of Connecticut. Mr. Chair, again, I urge my colleagues to 
support this. If we can help our manufacturers be more efficient in 
their use of energy, we can help them be more competitive, hire more 
people, and develop that clean energy technology for coal.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chair, 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 question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. ESTY of Connecticut. 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 
Connecticut will be postponed.
  The Chair understands that amendment No. 46 will not be offered.


              Amendment No. 49 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 49 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. 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 296, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, in these difficult times, I want to thank 
the chairman and ranking member, Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member 
Kaptur of the subcommittee, for shepherding this legislation to the 
floor, and for their efforts, and the commitment that we all have to 
preserving America's great natural environment and resources so that 
they can serve and be enjoyed by generations to come.
  My amendment increases funding for the DOE departmental 
administration by $1 million, which should be used to enhance the 
Department's Environmental Justice program activities.
  The Environmental Justice program is an essential tool in the effort 
to improve the lives of low-income and minority communities, as well as 
the environment at large. Twenty years ago, this particular program was 
established directing Federal agencies to identify and address the 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects of their actions on minority and low-income populations.
  So we have engaged with Historically Black Colleges, minority-serving 
institutions, Tribal colleges, and other organizations to improve and 
develop the sustainability through developing

[[Page H6440]]

young people and faculty to work on these important issues.
  The crisis in Flint, Michigan, teaches us how important it is that 
minority groups and low-income communities are not placed at a 
disadvantage when it comes to environmental threats and hazards like 
lead in drinking water or nesting areas for mosquitos carrying the Zika 
virus. I particularly remember convening a Zika task force in Houston 
to ensure that areas in my community, because of the sitting water and 
a lot of heat, did not breed these mosquitos to create a devastating 
condition in some of our communities.
  This Environmental Justice program is extremely important, involving 
community education and advisory projects, community capacity building 
through technology, the Community Leaders Institute, but, more 
importantly, it works on important research.
  Mr. Chair, might I find out how much time I have remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I want to make note of the fact that in 
some of the universities that participate in this program, the chairs--
meaning the faculty chairs--are a team of world-class scholars, 
researchers, and educators from 14 Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities, one Hispanic-serving institution, who advance research, 
enhance academics, promote partnerships, and effect outreach in the 
environmental sciences.
  Finally, the Minority Serving Institutions Program that includes a 
wide array of institutions provides funding to minority-serving 
institutions to advance scientific research, student internships, 
faculty fellowships, and curriculum development.
  Mr. Chair, the more we can invest in science and research, helping to 
improve our environment--and let me make it very clear, in urban and 
rural areas. This is not an urban program only. It is urban and rural 
areas. The more we can help our communities be clean and 
environmentally safe and secure, the more we create a better quality of 
life for all people, no matter what their economic station in life or 
where they live.
  Mr. Chair, I want to thank Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur 
for shepherding this legislation to the floor and for their commitment 
to preserving America's great natural environment and resources so that 
they can serve and be enjoyed by generations to come.
  My amendment increases funding for DOE departmental administration by 
$1,000,000 which should be used to enhance the Department's 
Environmental Justice program activities.
  Mr. Chair, the Environmental Justice Program is an essential tool in 
the effort to improve the lives of low income and minority communities 
as well as the environment at large.
  Twenty years ago, on February 11, 1994, President Clinton issued 
Executive Order 12898, directing federal agencies to identify and 
address the disproportionately high and adverse human health or 
environmental effects of their actions on minority and low-income 
populations.
  A healthy environment sustains a productive and healthy community 
which fosters personal and economic growth.
  Maintaining funds for environmental justice that go to Historically 
Black Colleges and Universities, Minority Serving Institutions, Tribal 
Colleges, and other organizations is imperative to protecting 
sustainability and growth of the community and environment.
  The funding of these programs is vital to ensuring that minority 
groups are not placed at a disadvantage when it comes to the 
environment and the continued preservation of their homes.
  The crisis in Flint, Michigan teaches us how important it that 
minority groups and low-income communities are not placed at a 
disadvantage when it comes to environment threats and hazards like lead 
in drinking water or nesting areas for mosquitos carrying the Zika 
virus.
  Through education about the importance of environmental 
sustainability, we can promote a broader understanding of science and 
how citizens can improve their surroundings.
  Funds that would be awarded to this important cause would increase 
youth involvement in STEM fields and also promote clean energy, 
weatherization, clean-up, and asset revitalization. These improvements 
would provide protection to our most vulnerable groups.
  This program provides better access to technology for underserved 
communities. Together, the Department of Energy and Department of 
Agriculture have distributed over 5,000 computers to low income 
populations.
  The Community Leaders Institute is another vital component of the 
Environmental Justice Program. It ensures that those in leadership 
positions understand what is happening in their communities and can 
therefore make informed decisions in regards to their communities.
  In addition to promoting environmental sustainability, CLI also 
brings important factors including public health and economic 
development into the discussion for community leaders.
  The CLI program has been expanded to better serve Native Americans 
and Alaska Natives, which is a prime example of how various other 
minority groups can be assisted as well.
  Through community education efforts, teachers and students have also 
benefitted by learning about radiation, radioactive waste management, 
and other related subjects.
  The Department of Energy places interns and volunteers from minority 
institutions into energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. The 
DOE also works to increase low income and minority access to STEM 
fields and help students attain graduate degrees as well as find 
employment.
  Since 2002, the Tribal Energy Program has also funded 175 energy 
projects amounting to over $41.8 million in order to help tribes invest 
in renewable sources of energy.
  With the continuation of this kind of funding, we can provide clean 
energy options to our most underserved communities and help improve 
their environments, which will yield better health outcomes and greater 
public awareness.
  We must help our low income and minority communities and ensure 
equality for those who are most vulnerable in our country.
  I ask my colleagues to join me and support the Jackson Lee Amendment 
for the Environmental Justice Program.
  Mr. Chair, I ask my friends and my colleagues to support the Jackson 
Lee amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.


  Amendment No. 50 Offered by Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 50 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. 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 297, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $98,000,000) (increased by $98,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentlewoman 
from New Mexico (Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New Mexico.
  Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. Mr. Chair, my amendment 
ensures that NNSA has adequate work space to fulfil its national 
security mission. In my home State of New Mexico, over 1,000 Federal 
and contract employees at NNSA currently work in a network of old and 
rapidly deteriorating facilities on Kirtland Air Force Base in New 
Mexico.
  A portion of the existing facility includes a 60-year-old former 
military barracks, which creates a number of health, safety, and 
quality-of-life issues for its employees. These employees are involved 
in some of our Nation's most important national security work, 
including managing our Nation's nuclear deterrent and reducing global 
nuclear and radiological threats.
  The NNSA administrator, Lieutenant General Klotz, said that:

       The highly talented employees in Albuquerque are frankly 
     forced to work in facilities that are inadequate to NNSA's 
     current mission.

  Furthermore, because of the age of the buildings, NNSA is forced to 
spend approximately $6 million every year on maintenance and repairs 
just to keep them habitable.
  In fact, the $40 million worth of deferred maintenance alone on the 
old buildings is approximately one-fifth of what it would cost to build 
a new, modern, and reliable facility. So this is a perfect opportunity 
to save money in the long run.
  I strongly support NNSA's efforts to replace the existing complex 
with a single new building that will provide

[[Page H6441]]

safe, reliable, and sustainable infrastructure that improves the safety 
and working environment for approximately 1,200 employees.
  The new state-of-the-art facility will meet enhanced environmental 
standards and consolidate staff for a more efficient delivery and 
support of the important national security work at NNSA.

                              {time}  2130

  The current total project cost is $202 million, and I agree with 
Chairman Simpson that we have an obligation to ensure that every single 
taxpayer dollar for this project is used efficiently and effectively.
  I know that the chairman shares my concerns to ensure that NNSA has 
the infrastructure and resources it needs to fulfill its national 
security mission now and in the future. That is why I am pleased that 
he has agreed to work with me on this issue to ensure that we are 
fulfilling our oversight responsibilities while moving the construction 
of the Albuquerque complex project forward.
  With that, I am prepared to withdraw my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I 
am not opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Idaho is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I understand the gentlewoman's concern and 
thank her for her advocacy for this project.
  The committee has been supportive of this project and has provided 
$42 million in prior years. The bill includes an additional $18 million 
to ensure that the project moves forward, and I am happy to work with 
her as the project advances and understand this amendment will be 
withdrawn, and I appreciate that.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate 
the chairman's words and respect his work prior to this and in this 
current effort to get this space and the facility infrastructure issues 
addressed. I look forward to working with him on a variety of ideas to 
make sure that we get this project completed in a timely and effective 
manner.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time, and I withdraw my 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.


                 Amendment No. 51 Offered by Mr. Foster

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 51 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Mr. FOSTER. 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 297, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $10,000,000) (increased by $10,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Foster) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. FOSTER. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is a symbolic adjustment to 
the NNSA budget intended to raise awareness about two areas of emerging 
national security risk that I believe deserve more attention and 
investment.
  As the only Ph.D. physicist in Congress, I feel a special 
responsibility to speak out on issues of national security, especially 
when they concern emerging technological threats that Congress may not 
be sufficiently aware of.
  Any student of the history of warfare is well aware of the dangers of 
fighting the last war, and for more than 70 years, nuclear weapons have 
held center stage among threats to our national security and global 
safety because of their unique capabilities to threaten the existence 
of mankind. That threat remains, but I fear that the balance of our 
defensive investments do not adequately reflect emerging threats.
  We now appear to be in the process of deciding to spend over $1 
trillion to upgrade our nuclear weapons despite the fact that our 
existing systems are far more sufficient to deter any rational actor. 
There is no adversary of ours who is not intimidated by our nuclear 
arsenal but who will suddenly fall in line if we add just one more 
upgrade or additional weapons manufacturing capability. Put simply, 
another generation of nuclear weapons will not make us significantly 
safer.
  On the other hand, we live in a world where newly emerging and 
potentially equally great threats loom: first, bioterror, driven by 
recent breakthroughs in genetic engineering and off-the-shelf 
biotechnology; and, second, lethal autonomous weapons systems driven by 
recent breakthroughs in machine vision, facial recognition, and 
artificial intelligence. These are small, inexpensive lethal drones and 
similar devices that use machine vision and artificial intelligence to 
target individuals or groups of humans, potentially without any human 
involvement in the kill decision.
  For those of my colleagues unfamiliar with these technologies, 
perform an internet search for the term ``lethal autonomous weapons 
systems,'' sometimes abbreviated ``LAWS''; or read the recent press 
coverage of the ab initio synthesis of the horsepox virus, a close 
variant of the smallpox virus that killed millions; then search for the 
term ``biohacking.''
  For more detailed information, I urge my colleagues to request a 
classified or unclassified briefing on recent studies of these subjects 
by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
  Both of these technologies pose unique threats to our national 
security for two reasons:
  The first is because of the small physical footprint of a terror 
facility based on either of these technologies. Either a bioterror 
laboratory or a small shop to produce and program small lethal drones 
could easily fit in a basement or small apartment. There is no 
radiological signature to detect them as there is with nuclear 
material.
  The second is because of the low cost and general availability of key 
enabling technological components. The monetary investment necessary 
for a capable terror facility is in the range of hundreds of thousands 
of dollars, perhaps less.
  The relevant technologies are already in wide use in industry.
  Contrast this with the threats of nuclear proliferation, where the 
multibillion-dollar investment to enrich and separate nuclear fissile 
material pretty much limits nuclear weapons either to established 
nation-states or perhaps terrorist organizations with access to fissile 
material from poorly guarded facilities.
  Anyone who is unconvinced that we need to take these emerging threats 
seriously needs only to look at what happened in cybersecurity. One of 
the painful lessons we have learned in recent years is that everything 
evil that can be done with computer viruses has, in fact, been done. In 
large part, this is because of the low barriers to entry and the 
difficulty of attributing an attack. Both of these features are shared 
fully by both bioterror and lethal autonomous weapons systems.
  So if we are going to stay ahead of these threats, we need to be 
strategic about our investments. It is time to reconsider the wisdom of 
pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into Cold War weapons which 
contribute negligibly to our national security and past time to 
consider a much more rapid increase in investments in defensive 
measures against lethal autonomous weapons systems and against 
bioterror, because by the time they become a reality, it will be too 
late to react.
  As a leader in technology and innovation, the United States should 
act now to circumvent any danger these technologies could pose.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Idaho is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I understand the gentleman's concern on 
this issue and appreciate the fact that

[[Page H6442]]

he brought it up for discussion here tonight.
  I would note that the weapons activities accounts provides funding to 
ensure the reliability of our Nation's nuclear weapons stockpile. The 
NNSA does not use funds within this account to counter proliferation of 
biological weapons, although I understand it is an important issue, and 
I agree with them we need to address this issue.
  However, this amendment increases and decreases the same account and 
has no effect on the bill overall, so I will accept the gentleman's 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FOSTER. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment and to take the time to educate themselves about these 
emerging threats.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Foster).
  The amendment was agreed to.


               Amendment No. 52 Offered by Mr. Garamendi

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 52 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. 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 297, line 21, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(reduced by $118,017,000)''.
        Page 298, line 11, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $118,017,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Garamendi) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I think we ought to be on a roll here, given the last 
amendment being accepted on a ``yes'' vote.
  This amendment would make America more secure by focusing our very 
limited tax dollars on programs to keep nuclear material out of the 
hands of terrorists rather than excess national laboratory 
infrastructure spending.
  According to The Washington Post, the world dodged a bullet when ISIS 
failed to realize that it had the ingredients for a dirty bomb under 
its control in Mosul for more than 3 years. This underscores the 
importance of the need for U.S. leadership and resources to secure 
nuclear material around the world.
  My amendment would provide an increase of $118 million for the 
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, DNN, funding. DNN funding includes 
critical programs such as the nuclear smuggling and detection program, 
which works with partner countries to improve intelligence, law 
enforcement, and border security capabilities to detect nuclear 
material trafficking.
  It also supports programs to improve the security of radiological 
material around the world and to remove it from areas when nuclear 
materials cannot be adequately and safely secured.
  The Make America Secure Appropriations Act makes significant cuts to 
these programs which keep nuclear material out of the hands of 
terrorists and those who would then use that material to do us harm. 
For example, there is a 30 percent cut from the nuclear smuggling 
detection funding, a 79 percent cut from the highly enriched uranium 
reduction programs, and, overall, a $150 million cut to this program.
  At the same time, the underlying legislation would increase by 38 
percent, a plus-up above what the administration recommended for the 
weapons activities infrastructure recapitalization budget line. This 
increase was not requested by the administration and is not supported 
by the Senate. The underlying bill already includes a $59 million 
increase in infrastructure recapitalization spending and a $71 million 
increase over the fiscal year 2017-enacted level for maintenance and 
repair facilities.
  We can go on and on. We have heard discussions here already about the 
trillion-dollar-plus expansion of the nuclear weapons programs.
  Specifically, this money that I would move out of this particular 
infrastructure recapitalization account is for the construction of a 
new facility to build nuclear plutonium pits. These pits are presumably 
going to be needed for a weapon that is almost certainly not going to 
be built, which is the interoperable new bomb.
  The interoperable weapon is to go on existing and remodeled rockets 
for the Navy and for the Air Force, neither of whom thinks it is a 
particularly good idea. So that program, should it ever come to pass, 
could be delayed, and we could then use this $118 million now to deal 
with a known problem.
  If, in the future, we decide that we need to be able to produce 
somewhere between 30 and 80 new pits a year, there is time enough to do 
that. The account that calls for the maintenance of the existing 
facilities will provide sufficient funds to meet all of the known 
needs, with the exception of the interoperable nuclear weapon, which, 
in all probability, is not ever going to be built or needed.
  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, although I am opposed to the amendment, I 
have to admit that I do enjoy our annual discussion on this.
  I oppose this amendment because the bill already shows strong support 
for the nonproliferation programs of the NNSA. Funding for nuclear 
defense nonproliferation is $1.83 billion--$76.5 million below fiscal 
year 2017 and $16.8 million below the budget request.
  Within nonproliferation, the bill largely supports funding as 
requested, but makes a limited number of realignments within the 
account to emphasize the importance of nonproliferation research and 
development activities and to meet international commitments for 
plutonium disposition.
  Our understanding--and this is the important point. Our understanding 
is that budget request is down because NNSA still has significant 
unexpended balances in this account due to slow progress on 
international nonproliferation agreements.
  Specifically, the NNSA reported in May that it had approximately $2.2 
billion in funds available to carry out its nonproliferation mission, 
of which over $680 million is left over from prior years. For years, 
NNSA has struggled to execute funding in its nonproliferation budget 
because it could not obtain agreement from other nations to do the work 
as quickly as planned or as we would maybe like to.
  This amendment also targets funding from the weapons activities 
infrastructure recapitalization program. Created in fiscal year 2014 by 
Congress, the recapitalization program has been highly successful in 
addressing the aging and deteriorating infrastructure at NNSA sites. 
Replacing things like telephone poles, leaking fireman valves, roofing, 
and addressing other basic infrastructure needs are essential to the 
safe and continued operation of these nuclear security sites.
  The budget request proposed to cut the program, and the bill 
increases funding $118 million above the request to restore that 
program to the fiscal year 2017 level. We should not divert funding 
needed to address these urgent infrastructure needs, and I urge my 
colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 2 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. That might be sufficient, Mr. Chairman, although I 
doubt I will persuade the worthy chairman with whom we have had this 
little tussle back and forth.
  The fact of the matter is that there are two accounts to deal with 
this issue of the nuclear sites and the maintenance of them.

                              {time}  2145

  One is a maintenance facility, which is plussed-up and sufficient to 
maintain and upgrade the existing facilities, particularly the 
plutonium pit, the metallurgical facility, as well as continue the 
construction of the highly enriched uranium facilities.

[[Page H6443]]

  Those are already available and that money is in those accounts. It 
turns out that this money for recapitalization is for the construction 
of a new pit production facility. The NNSA claims that it needs that 
facility to build additional pits beyond the 20 to 30 that could be 
constructed in the refurbished existing pit.
  The need for the new pit production facility is specifically for the 
interoperable nuclear warhead, which is not likely to be needed. And 
should it be decided at a future date to be needed, there is plenty of 
time to build the facility and construct the additional nuclear 
plutonium pits. The bottom line is that this money is not needed now 
for that facility.
  Could the money be used in the nonproliferation?
  It could.
  Why were those agreements delayed?
  Because of many different reasons, but the fact of the matter is that 
those agreements are going to be going forward. The fact of the matter 
is that there is a continuing problem of loose nukes and materials 
around the world, which can cause a problem. The Mosul situation is one 
of many examples.
  The cuts that do take place in smuggling, in research, and the like 
are serious. We ought to be paying attention.
  Mr. Chairman, I look forward to the continuation of this discussion, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I would just say that this infrastructure 
need is not for a new pit facility. They would need to come to us and 
ask us what they were going to do with funding, and request funding for 
that. They did not do that. This is for infrastructure needs and 
upgrades.
  But the other thing is that I am as much a nonproliferation activist 
as anyone in this body. I think it is important work. But the reality 
is that there are $681 million unexpended from previous years, not 
because funding is not available--the money is there--but they haven't 
been able to get agreements with other countries. Unfortunately, you 
can't do work in other countries without having agreements with those 
countries.
  So, consequently, we are--I guess you could maybe say--overfunded in 
nonproliferation if we can't spend the money on that activity. That is 
the problem.
  Why would we put the money into that when we need the money in 
infrastructure and building and repairing the buildings and facilities 
that NNSA has?
  It just doesn't make any sense to me.
  I am sure if this amendment is defeated, we will have this discussion 
next year, and I hope my colleagues will vote against this.
  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. Garamendi).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. 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. 53 Offered by Ms. Rosen

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 53 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Ms. ROSEN. 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 301, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $30,000,000)''.
       Page 326, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $30,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentlewoman 
from Nevada (Ms. Rosen) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Nevada.
  Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to strip 
funding for defense nuclear waste disposal and return this money to the 
Treasury in order to reduce the deficit.
  The $30 million allocated under the appropriations bill being 
considered here tonight has the potential to be used to expand Yucca 
Mountain so that it can be used to store defense waste, in addition to 
civilian nuclear waste.
  If there is one issue a majority of Nevadans agree on, it is that we 
wholeheartedly oppose becoming the Nation's dumping ground for 
radioactive waste.
  First, for my non-Nevada friends, some history. In 1987, Congress 
amended the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and targeted Yucca Mountain, 
located less than 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, as the sole site 
for our Nation's geological repository. It is a fancy way of choosing 
Nevada as their nuclear dump.
  For over 30 years, the State of Nevada and local communities have 
rejected this misguided project on safety, public health, and 
environmental grounds. In fact, we have filed 218 contentions against 
the Department of Energy's license application, citing safety and 
environmental issues in its assessments.
  Numerous scientific studies have deemed Yucca Mountain unsafe based 
on the fact that it sits above an aquifer and is in a seismically 
active area that just experienced a 4.1 magnitude earthquake.
  Any plans involving Yucca Mountain, including the recently introduced 
Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Acts, or any proposed plans to comingle 
defense and civilian nuclear waste at Yucca, ignore the environmental, 
safety, and security concerns of Nevadans who would be forced to store 
nuclear waste that they had no role in creating.
  Using Yucca Mountain as the Nation's dumping ground would require 
transporting over 70,000 metric tons of radioactive waste, much of it 
through my district and through the heart of Las Vegas, a city that 
attracts over 43 million visitors annually and generates over $59 
billion in revenue.
  Not only does this project endanger those in Nevada, Mr. Chairman, it 
also threatens the health and safety of millions of Americans from over 
329 congressional districts across this country who live along the 
proposed transportation route.
  As if this wasn't bad enough, now the Nation's most egregious nuclear 
waste producers and even some of my colleagues across the aisle are 
suggesting that we comingle defense waste with civilian waste from 
power plants, inappropriately increasing the amount of high-level 
radioactive material dumped in Nevada by 37 percent. This means more 
nuclear material coming to Yucca, and more waste traveling through 44 
States and Washington, D.C.
  There are also concerns that this will hinder the Air Force's 
readiness and our country's ability to defend itself. Last week, the 
Las Vegas Review-Journal ran a story featuring Heather Wilson, 
Secretary of the Air Force, and her concerns with the Yucca Mountain 
project.
  She cited how it will directly impact Nellis Air Force Base's ability 
to complete its mission to train servicemembers for war, because there 
is no route across the range that would not impact testing and 
training.
  Her concerns, unfortunately, are not new. Since 2003, the Air Force 
has consistently stated that they know of no route through the Nevada 
Test and Training Range that would avoid sensitive areas or not 
negatively impact readiness activities.
  I understand that our country's nuclear waste must go somewhere, but 
this decades-old battle has proven that Yucca is not the place. We must 
stop wasting billions of taxpayer dollars by resurrecting a project 
that has been dead for over 30 years, and, instead, identify viable 
alternatives for the long-term repository in areas that are proven safe 
and whose communities consent to storage.
  Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to withdraw my amendment, with the 
understanding that we will begin a serious discussion on how to 
properly handle our country's waste, instead of continuing down the 
path of forcing this waste on my State.
  I fully understand we have to put our country's defense and civilian 
waste somewhere. But for the first time, let's bring Nevadans to the 
table and let's share the responsibility of facing the consequences of 
nuclear production.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time and withdraw my 
amendment.

[[Page H6444]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.


                Amendment No. 54 Offered by Ms. Pingree

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 54 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Ms. PINGREE. 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 325, strike lines 17 through 21.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentlewoman 
from Maine (Ms. Pingree) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Maine.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Pingree-Carbajal-
Bonamici-Langevin-Lowenthal-Cicilline-Schneider-Beyer amendment, which 
is widely supported.
  All of the cosponsors of this amendment care passionately about the 
need for ocean planning, and I commend the leadership of my colleagues 
on this issue each and every year that we fight this battle for 
sensible ocean policy.
  We need, as a Congress, to recognize the importance of our oceans and 
ocean planning. Ocean planning works, and is working already in New 
England, where we have a success story of fishermen, lobstermen, Native 
American Tribes, local communities, and other stakeholders developing 
voluntary regional ocean plans.
  I have heard from many of my constituents working in Maine's island 
communities about the importance not only of ocean planning, but of 
eco-based management of our oceans, a core part of moving forward to a 
21st century fishery.
  Our fishery is changing, and coastal communities want to be attentive 
to changes in our ecosystems to resource development and other uses for 
our oceans. For example, our plan in New England ensures that there is 
advanced ecological data available to help decisionmakers, enhance 
ocean stakeholder engagement through the collection of stakeholder-
driven information, and facilitates agency coordination.
  The language in today's underlying bill would make it even more 
difficult for Federal agencies, State, and local communities to work 
together on the future of our ocean resources.
  For those of us representing coastal districts, this rider is a bad 
addition to the bill, and we need to strike it.
  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, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Schneider).
  Mr. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong support and as a 
proud cosponsor of this amendment. I do so in defense of one of our 
most magnificent natural resources: the Great Lakes.
  The Great Lakes contain a fifth of the world's and 95 percent of our 
Nation's surface water. The Lakes are an important asset to our economy 
and the quality of life of our Nation, and in my district in 
particular.
  The National Ocean Policy also helps protect the vitality of our 
Great Lakes ecosystem. However, section 505 of this bill will undermine 
our National Ocean Policy and the ability of agencies to coordinate 
with States, local governments, and other agencies to protect these 
beautiful waters. That is why I support striking section 505.
  We have a profound obligation to be responsible stewards of the 
environment and to pass on a clean, healthy, and dynamic environment 
for future generations.
  Mr. Chair, I support the Pingree amendment.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  While there may be instances--and I am sure there are--in which 
greater coordination would be helpful in ensuring our coastal resources 
are available for future generations, any such coordination must be 
done carefully to protect against Federal overreach.
  As we saw with the Obama administration's WOTUS rule to redefine 
waters of the United States, thorough and strong Congressional 
oversight is needed to ensure that we protect private property rights.
  Unfortunately, the way the Obama administration developed the 
National Ocean Policy increased the opportunities for Federal 
overreach. The implementation plan is so broad and so sweeping that it 
may allow the Federal Government to affect agricultural practices, 
mining, energy producers, fishermen, and anyone else whose actions may 
have an impact on the oceans.
  The facts is that the previous administration did not work with 
Congress. This is their National Ocean Policy. They never brought it to 
Congress.
  If you are going to do something this sweeping, you need to have 
congressional input. They never came to Congress to develop its plan, 
and they had even refused to provide relevant information to Congress. 
So we can't be sure how sweeping it actually could be if left 
unchecked.

                              {time}  2200

  That is why I support the language of the underlying bill and, 
therefore, oppose this amendment. But I understand their concern. But 
why not bring it to Congress? Why not have Congress enact the National 
Ocean Policy instead of just relying on the executive branch to do 
whatever they want to do? That is the problem the Natural Resources 
Committee has with this. It is a problem I have with this, and that is 
why I oppose this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, if my good colleague could guarantee me he 
could give me the votes on the floor, I would be happy to bring a bill 
like that forward to Congress.
  Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to my colleague from California (Mr. 
Lowenthal).
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, my district is a poster child for the 
need for ocean coordination and information sharing. In my district, we 
have the busiest port complex in North America, we have offshore 
drilling, we have San Clemente Island, which is a naval training ground 
where they have a ship-to-shore firing range. We have abundant wildlife 
in the district. On top of that, sea level rise and extreme weather 
threatens neighborhoods and businesses all along the coast of my 
district.
  With so much activity happening, it simply makes sense to have the 
various stakeholders at the table, to make sure ships come in and out 
of port safely, to ensure that our thriving economy stays thriving, and 
to give the military space to train. We want these collaborations to 
happen because we want to have a sustainable ocean economy.
  By developing regional plans and having a framework for multi-
stakeholder involvement, we can promote a robust ocean economy that 
also conserves our precious ocean resources. The country and my 
district needs a comprehensive approach to our ocean resources, which 
the National Ocean Policy provides.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Maine has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I will just say it is kind of interesting 
that I don't disagree with anything Ms. Pingree is saying. The problem 
is, there is a process, and Congress needs to be involved.
  The last administration did not involve Congress. If it is a good 
policy, why don't we just let the administration do it? If you can't 
get the votes on the floor, doesn't that tell you something?
  Maybe you need to go and work this out and bring the policy to the 
floor. But if we are just going to let the administration do that, I 
don't know, maybe we will let this administration just enact a tax 
policy because we have a tough time doing it here in Congress. I don't 
know, maybe we will let them enact the healthcare policy because we 
can't get together on the floor to see what to do about our healthcare 
system, so let's just let the administration do it all.
  It is exactly what you are doing with this. You bring an actual ocean 
policy to the floor, if I think it is a good bill

[[Page H6445]]

and necessary, I will vote for it. I can't tell you what I will vote 
for yet because I haven't seen it.
  But just because Congress hasn't acted doesn't give the 
administrative branch of government the right to interject itself and 
take on the legislative branch of government's responsibility.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, with all due respect, I think there are 
frequently moments when the administration overrides the opinion of the 
Congress or don't always agree and the administration gets their way. 
Take the decision the administration made this morning on military 
policy, which was contrary to the vote we took just this week on the 
appropriations process.
  Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Carbajal).
  Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chair, I want to thank all of my colleagues for 
their leadership and work on this important amendment to strike this 
harmful rider, to prevent implementation of the National Ocean Policy.
  The National Ocean Policy ensures we are able to implement marine 
planning efforts based on management components of the National Ocean 
Policy. It also allows coordination between Federal agencies to make 
sure they are working in a collaborative manner to improve our ocean's 
health.
  This brings all stakeholders together, including conservationists, 
fishermen, scientists, shipping companies, and those who live and work 
in our ocean communities, and it will allow them to have a voice in 
finding solutions for effective management of our oceans.
  Healthy sustainable ecosystems and economic growth are not mutually 
exclusive. That is why we need to make sure we strike this harmful 
rider.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman from Maine has expired.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chair, I will just say, the usurpation by the 
administrative branch of government over Congress happens with both 
Republican and Democratic administrations. I remember someone standing 
up and saying: Well, if Congress won't do it, I have a pen and a phone.
  This is Congress surrendering our responsibility, and even though you 
might like the outcome of what they do, it is the wrong thing to do, 
and Congress needs to stand up at times and take back our 
responsibility than just saying: Well, I don't really like the way it 
was done, but I like the policy, so I will just support it. And that is 
what we are doing here. That is the problem with the National Ocean 
Policy.
  Again, I would encourage the supporters of this, and who knows, I 
might be one of them, to bring it to Congress. Let's debate it. Let's 
have a good healthy debate on this floor. Go through the committee 
process, go through the regular order, and then it is something that we 
might be able to support in the appropriations process.
  Other than that, I would urge my colleagues to vote against this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, as the designee of Ranking Member Lowey, I 
move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Ohio is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the gentlewoman's 
amendment to support the growth of vibrant coastal economies and 
creation of fisheries and agriculture jobs.
  The National Ocean Policy is helping agencies and States collaborate 
to reduce illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, and one can 
just take a look that the ocean policy supports almost 2 million 
fisheries-related jobs in our country and $5.3 billion in commercial 
fish landings, as well as enhanced tourism, and the National Ocean 
Policy doesn't cost us anything.
  I just want to remind people that our country currently imports 91 
percent of consumed seafood, with half coming from foreign agriculture. 
So this policy is extraordinarily important.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. 
Cicilline) for the purpose of entering into a colloquy.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding, and I 
rise today to speak in strong support of the amendment offered by my 
colleague, Congresswoman Pingree, which would strike the harmful 
provision that undermines the importance of the National Ocean Policy.
  For over 7 years, the National Ocean Policy has helped guide ocean 
management through spurring coordination among government agencies. 
Ocean planning and coordination is an important aspect in supporting 
economic growth, protecting coastal habitats, and strengthening coastal 
communities.
  The National Ocean Policy does not create any regulations, supersede 
current regulations, or modify any agency's established mission, 
jurisdiction, or authority. Rather, it helps coordinate the 
implementation of existing regulations by Federal agencies to establish 
a more efficient and effective decisionmaking process.
  Throughout the northeast, the Regional Ocean Council allows our 
States to pool resources and businesses to have a strong voice in 
decisions that will impact their communities and facilitate 
coordination with Federal partners.
  I am proud to say that the Northeast Regional Ocean Council is the 
first in the Nation to release a draft regional ocean plan. My home 
State of Rhode Island, the ocean State, has benefited greatly from the 
National Ocean Policy. With help from NOP, the Block Island Wind Farm 
project was successfully completed and today is capable of powering an 
estimated 17,000 homes.
  At a time when our oceans are facing significant challenges and 
changes, maintaining coordination and planning is necessary in 
continuing to strengthen our country's coastal communities and ocean 
industries. Allowing Federal agencies to coordinate implementation of 
over 100 ocean laws and giving State and local governments a voice in 
the ocean planning process is smart policy, and I urge my colleagues to 
support this amendment and strike this ill-advised provision.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, may I ask how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Ohio has 2 minutes remaining.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island 
(Mr. Langevin).
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, the establishment of a National Ocean Policy was a 
landmark step for our country. I particularly want to commend Senator 
Sheldon Whitehouse from Rhode Island for his leadership on this issue.
  Ocean planning just makes sense, as we have seen in Rhode Island 
during implementation of our Special Area Management Plan. Instead of 
haphazard policymaking or turning the ocean into a political football, 
we brought all stakeholders to the table, commercial and recreational 
fishermen, energy development companies, conservationists, and other 
local interests.
  The National Ocean Policy builds on this type of collaboration. It is 
a bottom-up approach, and it empowers local communities who use our 
oceans.
  I want to echo the words also of my colleague, the Congressman from 
Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), in support of this amendment, and I urge 
my colleagues to allow this forward-thinking approach to continue. I 
thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman so much for coming to 
the floor tonight, and I want to thank all of our colleagues who have 
spoken out so eloquently on the importance of National Ocean Policy in 
supporting the Pingree, et al. 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 Maine (Ms. Pingree).
  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 gentlewoman from Maine will 
be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 55 Offered by Mr. Kihuen

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 55 
printed in House Report 115-259.

[[Page H6446]]

  

  Mr. KIHUEN. 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 326, strike lines 1 through 7.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentleman from 
Nevada (Mr. Kihuen) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nevada.
  Mr. KIHUEN. Mr. Chairman, my amendment strikes language in the bill 
that would prohibit the closure of the Yucca Mountain project, which 
includes the storage of high-level nuclear waste in my district.
  As you may know, in 1987, Nevada was targeted as our Nation's nuclear 
waste dump through the ``Screw Nevada'' bill. In the 30 years since the 
bill passed, Congress has wasted $3.7 billion of taxpayer money.
  Yucca Mountain sits in a seismically active area less than 100 miles 
away from Las Vegas, which holds an urban area with over 2 million 
residents. Mr. Chairman, just last week, there was an earthquake 33 
miles away from Yucca Mountain. This place is not safe for our nuclear 
waste.
  Moreover, the city sees tens of thousands of visitors traveling to 
Las Vegas each and every year, many of whom are your constituents from 
your districts. In 2016 alone, over 40 million visitors traveled to Las 
Vegas.
  I have grave concerns with the transportation of nuclear waste to 
Yucca Mountain should this project continue against the will of my 
constituents. This project will not just impact my constituents. It 
impacts constituents in 329 congressional districts in 44 different 
States and Washington, D.C. Putting a nuclear repository in our 
backyard means that this high-level nuclear waste must travel through 
your backyards first.
  Your constituents will see high-level nuclear waste transported 
through their communities on rail and truck. A simple car crash or 
train derailment would leave your constituents at risk and cost our 
taxpayers more money to clean up the mess.
  As it stands, Mr. Chairman, this transportation plan also damages our 
national security and the ability of the Nevada Test and Training 
Range, the largest air and ground range in the contiguous United 
States, to meet and train our servicemembers.

                              {time}  2215

  Mr. Chairman, I have been to Yucca Mountain. I have driven through 
the desert that is home to the bighorn sheep and desert tortoises and 
ancient petroglyphs and relics of the westward expansion. It is clear 
that reopening Yucca Mountain threatens the health and safety of 
Nevadans and Americans from across the country.
  Our State, which has no nuclear energy-producing facilities, should 
not be the dumping ground for the rest of the country's nuclear waste. 
And the bottom line is this: If any of my colleagues would support this 
bill to bring Yucca Mountain nuclear waste to our State, then I am sure 
you support bringing it to your State. I am sure we can find a location 
in your State, and I would love to work with you on that. I am sure you 
wouldn't like your neighbors bringing their trash to your backyard. 
Don't bring it to my backyard either. Don't bring it to my 
constituents. Don't bring it to Nevada.
  I urge your support for my amendment. Prevent billions and billions 
of dollars, taxpayer dollars, being wasted by continuing to pursue the 
Yucca Mountain project.
  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 (Mr. Walker). The gentleman from Idaho is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I would tell the gentleman that they have 
brought a lot of nuclear waste to the State of Idaho. We process it 
there. It was Rocky Flats that was, they say, cleaned up. It wasn't 
cleaned up; it was moved to Idaho because we got most of their stuff 
there. That is kind of what happens.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose this amendment. I think we all 
understand why my colleagues from Nevada oppose Yucca Mountain, their 
position on Yucca Mountain; however, I cannot support this amendment. 
It is time to move forward with the Yucca licensing process.
  The previous administration ignored the law. I repeat that--ignored 
the law. Ignoring our obligation to take responsibility for this spent 
fuel, and breaking trust with 32 States stopped this process in its 
tracks.
  I don't think I have to state why that happened. It wasn't because of 
science or anything else. We all know why they stopped the licensing 
process at Yucca Mountain.
  The decision has already cost taxpayers $6 billion in claims, and the 
Department of Energy estimates at least another $24 billion in claims.
  This administration has taken swift action to put us back on track, 
and the budget request proposed in this bill includes $150 million for 
Yucca licensing efforts. Licensing efforts will continue to involve 
experts in geochemistry, hydrology, geology, seismology, volcanology, 
and more to ensure that Yucca Mountain, already one of the most studied 
pieces of land on Earth--I would say the most studied piece of land on 
Earth. There were 52 or 53 National Academy of Sciences studies on 
Yucca Mountain that have been done. But it will get a careful review 
from all aspects of its license applications.
  Once that application is finished, all Members of this body and of 
the Senate will have the opportunity to decide whether we move forward 
to construct and use the facility. But killing the process at this 
point is shortsighted, and, therefore, I oppose the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KIHUEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Rosen), my esteemed colleague.
  Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Chairman, I want to echo the sentiments of my 
colleague from Nevada (Mr. Kihuen) by making one thing perfectly clear: 
Nevadans are completely against becoming the Nation's nuclear dumping 
ground. And make no mistake, that is exactly what this appropriations 
bill does.
  Without Mr. Kihuen's amendment, of which I am proud to be a 
cosponsor, Congress will tie the hands of this administration by 
explicitly prohibiting, even considering, closing Yucca Mountain or 
conducting a technical review before licensing activities begin.
  You heard that right. The underlying bill forbids any funds from 
being used to conduct activities that preclude Yucca Mountain from 
becoming the Nation's dumping ground for radioactive waste, no matter 
the science, no matter the evidence.
  And we already have the evidence that bringing America's nuclear 
waste to Yucca is bad for Nevadans and bad for Americans. We know that 
Yucca is unsafe for nuclear waste because it is seismically active and 
sits above an aquifer. And with 70,000 metric tons of radioactive waste 
through my district and through the heart of Las Vegas, those visitors 
from all across the country and the world will be exposed.
  Mr. KIHUEN. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I would just say in response: Then change 
the law. The law is that Yucca Mountain is the waste repository for 
high-level nuclear waste. All we are asking is to continue the 
licensing process.
  As I said during my opening statement, Congress will have a chance to 
vote on whether to proceed with the construction of this facility. That 
is the reality. But we have got to get off the dime and start moving 
and handling this nuclear waste or it is going to cost us billions and 
billions and billions more.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Kihuen).
  The amendment was rejected.


              Amendment No. 56 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 56 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

[[Page H6447]]

  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of division D, before the short title, insert 
     the following:
       Sec. __.  The amounts otherwise provided by this Act are 
     revised by reducing the amount made available for ``Corps of 
     Engineers-Civil--Investigations'', and increasing the amount 
     made available for the same account, by $3,000,000.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I am going to take this opportunity 
just to show this picture to my colleagues on the floor of the House 
and the headline that says: ``Urban Flooding in Houston is on the 
Rise.''
  I clearly just used the city of Houston by coincidence, but I will 
tell you that this is what we are facing, really, across America.
  The opening sentence of the article says: ``Before you can fix a 
problem, you need to know what's causing it.''
  My amendment is just that. My amendment--as I thank Chairman Simpson 
and Ranking Member Kaptur for their work on this legislation in doing 
the best that we can under the circumstances of trying to preserve the 
balance--speaks to the need for robust funding for the U.S. Army Corps 
of Engineers' investigations account by redirecting $3 million for 
increased funding for postdisaster watershed assessment studies, like 
the one that has been contemplated in many areas around the country.
  As the Federal agency that collects and studies basic information 
pertaining to river and harbor, flood and storm damage reduction, shore 
protection, aquatic ecosystem restoration, and conducts detailed 
studies, plans, and specifications for river and harbor and flood and 
storm damage reduction, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plays a 
critical role in building, maintaining, and expanding the most critical 
of the Nation's infrastructure.
  When questioning the Army Corps of Engineers about a certain area in 
my community covering a number of bayous, which we are called The Bayou 
City--Sims Bayou, Greens Bayou, Brays Bayou, White Oak Bayou, Hunting 
Bayou, and Clear Creek Bayou--it is the same all over the Nation: the 
Army Corps of Engineers said they need to study the issue to know how 
to best resolve it.
  My amendment is just that. It is resources to be directed to ensure 
that we are allowed to study issues so that we can focus the dollars 
correctly as we attempt to work collaboratively with our local 
communities.
  I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I make this point: 
such a study is certainly needed, given the frequency and severity of 
historic-level flood events in many parts around our Nation and in the 
area in which I live.
  On April 15, 2016, an estimated 240 billion gallons of water fell in 
the Houston area over a 12-hour period.
  Let me be very mindful, this is not an earmark. It simply says that 
we should have the resources to study these issues so that we can 
direct moneys in the right way.
  Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Texas has 2\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me conclude my remarks by 
indicating that I believe this particular amendment will be helpful in 
general to, in essence, provide funding for the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers' investigations account and ensuring that a postdisaster 
watershed assessment can result.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Ms. Kaptur in particular. We have 
spoken about this for probably over a 2-year period. I think the very 
fact that my particular area can be cited as an example of what happens 
when you have urban flooding is just an example.
  Over this past summer, we know that we have had some serious loss of 
life when rivers have overflowed or areas where water is and people 
have been recreating have overflowed, and so the idea of saving lives 
is part of my amendment as well.
  Mr. Chair, I want to thank Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur 
for shepherding this legislation to the floor and for their commitment 
to preserving America's great natural environment and resources so that 
they can serve and be enjoyed by generations to come.
  My amendment speaks to the need for robust funding for the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers ``Investigations'' account by redirecting $3 million 
for increased funding for post-disaster watershed assessment studies, 
like the one that is being contemplated for the Houston/Harris County 
metropolitan area.
  As the federal agency that collects and studies basic information 
pertaining to river and harbor, flood and storm damage reduction, shore 
protection, aquatic ecosystem restoration, and conducts detailed 
studies, plans, and specifications for river and harbor, and flood and 
storm damage reduction, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plays a 
critical role in the building, maintaining, and expanding of the most 
critical of the nation's infrastructure.
  We understand this very well in my home state of Texas and the 
Eighteenth Congressional District that I represent.
  The Army Corps of Engineers has been working with the Harris County 
Flood Control District since 1937 to reduce the risk of flooding within 
Harris County.
  Current projects include 6 federal flood risk management projects: 
Sims Bayou, Greens Bayou, Brays Bayou, White Oak Bayou, Hunting Bayou, 
and Clear Creek.
  In addition to these ongoing projects, the Army Corps of Engineers 
operates and maintains the Addicks and Barker (A&B) Detention Dams in 
northwest Harris County.
  Mr. Chair, I am pleased that the bill provides that the Secretary of 
the Army may initiate up to six new study starts during fiscal year 
2018, and that five of those studies are to consist of studies where 
the majority of the benefits are derived from flood and storm damage 
reduction or from navigation transportation savings.
  I am optimistic that one of those new study starts will be the 
Houston Regional Watershed Assessment Flood Risk Management Feasibility 
study.
  Such a study is certainly needed given the frequency and severity of 
historic-level flood events in recent years in and around the Houston 
metropolitan area.
  On April 15, 2016, an estimated 240 billion gallons of water fell in 
the Houston area over a 12 hour period, which resulted in several areas 
exceeding the 100 to 500 year flood event record.
  The areas that experience these historic rainfalls were west of I-45, 
north of I-10, and Greens Bayou.
  Additionally, an estimated 140 billion gallons of water fell over the 
Cypress Creek, Spring Creek, and Addicks watershed in just 14 hours.
  The purpose of the Houston Regional Watershed Assessment is to 
identify risk reduction measures and optimize performance from a multi-
objective systems performance perspective of the regional network of 
nested and intermingled watersheds, reservoir dams, flood flow 
conveyance channels, storm water detention basins, and related Flood 
Risk Management (FRM) infrastructure.
  Special emphases of the study, which covers 22 primary watersheds 
within Harris County's 1,756 square miles, will be placed on extreme 
flood events that exceed the system capacity resulting in impacts to 
asset conditions/functions and loss of life.
  Mr. Chair, during the May 2015 Houston flood, 3,015 homes were 
flooded and 8 persons died; during the April 2016 Houston flood, 5,400 
homes were flooded and 8 deaths recorded.
  The economic damage caused by the 2015 Houston flood is estimated at 
$3 billion; the 2016 estimate is being compiled and is estimated to be 
well above $2 billion.
  Mr. Chair, minimizing the risk of flood damage to the Houston and 
Harris County metropolitan area, the nation's 4th largest, is a matter 
of national significance because the region is one of the nation's 
major technology, energy, finance, export and medical centers:
  1. Port of Houston is the largest bulk port in the world;
  2. Texas Medical Center is a world renowned teaching, research and 
treatment center;
  3. Houston is home to the largest conglomeration of foreign bank 
representation and second only to New York City as home to the most 
Fortune 500 companies; and
  4. The Houston Watershed Assessment study area sits within major 
Hurricane Evacuation arteries for the larger Galveston Gulf Coast 
region.
  I ask my colleagues to join me and support Jackson Lee Amendment No. 
56.
  I thank Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur for their work in 
shepherding this bill to the floor.

                    [From the Houston Public Media]

                Urban Flooding in Houston Is on the Rise

                         (By Marissa Cummings)

       Before you can fix a problem, you need to know what's 
     causing it.

[[Page H6448]]

       Dr. Sam Brody, Professor at A&M Galveston, is doing exactly 
     that.
       He focuses on urban flooding and says Houston is the poster 
     child.
       ``The bigger driver of this urban flood problem is human 
     development, it's the spread of impervious surfaces and I 
     calculated the Houston region increased its pavement by 25 
     percent over a 15 year period from 1996 to 2010,'' says 
     Brody.
       He is also contributing to national research that will help 
     alleviate urban flooding across the U.S.
       Stephen Costello, Houston's Flood Czar, agrees with Brody's 
     assessment.
       Part of the solution he says is investing in innovative 
     infrastructure.
       ``But there has to be a commitment on the part of the 
     community to invest in infrastructure,'' Costello says. ``And 
     that's what the voters should be looking at saying `OK, so 
     let's make sure we continue to invest in the infrastructure,' 
     and that's where the public needs to get involved.''
       Although, we cannot stop flooding from happening, Costello 
     says we need to mitigate and reduce the risk.

  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee 
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas 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 115-259 on 
which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 4 by Mr. Perry of Pennsylvania.
  Amendment No. 5 by Mr. Griffith of Virginia.
  Amendment No. 7 by Mr. Takano of California.
  Amendment No. 23 by Mr. King of Iowa.
  Amendment No. 38 by Ms. Castor of Florida.
  Amendment No. 39 by Mr. Norcross of New Jersey.
  Amendment No. 44 by Ms. Esty of Connecticut.
  Amendment No. 52 by Mr. Garamendi of California.
  Amendment No. 54 by Ms. Pingree of Maine.
  Amendment No. 56 by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                  Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Perry

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 107, 
noes 314, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 416]

                               AYES--107

     Abraham
     Allen
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barr
     Barton
     Biggs
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Buck
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Carter (GA)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Comer
     Cramer
     Culberson
     Davidson
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Ferguson
     Flores
     Franks (AZ)
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Harris
     Hensarling
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hunter
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kelly (MS)
     King (IA)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     McCaul
     McKinley
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Norman
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Renacci
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Smith (MO)
     Stewart
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Zeldin

                               NOES--314

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amash
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Barletta
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Bergman
     Beyer
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Black
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Carter (TX)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crawford
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Emmer
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Faso
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gianforte
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Handel
     Harper
     Hartzler
     Hastings
     Heck
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins (LA)
     Higgins (NY)
     Hill
     Himes
     Holding
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Hultgren
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jenkins (KS)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Joyce (OH)
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Kustoff (TN)
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (MN)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Long
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Mast
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McSally
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nolan
     Norcross
     Nunes
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reed
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rosen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Sanchez
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Smucker
     Soto
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Stivers
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Trott
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Young (IA)

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Aderholt
     Blum
     Costello (PA)
     Cummings
     Hollingsworth
     Jeffries
     Loudermilk
     Murphy (PA)
     Napolitano
     Royce (CA)
     Ryan (OH)
     Scalise

                              {time}  2248

  Mrs. BLACK, Messrs. RICE, HOLDING, TIPTON, GUTHRIE, ROSKAM, and EMMER 
changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. FERGUSON, BROOKS of Alabama, JENKINS of West Virginia, PERRY, 
MESSER, CARTER of Georgia, and GARRETT changed their vote from ``no'' 
to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I was unavoidably detained. 
Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 416.

[[Page H6449]]

  



                Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Griffith

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Griffith) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the 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 116, 
noes 309, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 417]

                               AYES--116

     Abraham
     Allen
     Amash
     Babin
     Banks (IN)
     Barr
     Barton
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Buck
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Carter (GA)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Collins (GA)
     Comer
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Davidson
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Flores
     Franks (AZ)
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Harper
     Harris
     Hensarling
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hunter
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kelly (MS)
     King (IA)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCaul
     McKinley
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Norman
     Olson
     Palmer
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Renacci
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Smith (MO)
     Stewart
     Taylor
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                               NOES--309

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Aguilar
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Bacon
     Barletta
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Bergman
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Black
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Carter (TX)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Cole
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Emmer
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gianforte
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Handel
     Hartzler
     Hastings
     Heck
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins (NY)
     Hill
     Himes
     Holding
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Hultgren
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jenkins (KS)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Joyce (OH)
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Kustoff (TN)
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (MN)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Long
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Sean
     Marino
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McSally
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nolan
     Norcross
     Nunes
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reed
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rosen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Sanchez
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Smucker
     Soto
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Stivers
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Tenney
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Trott
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yarmuth
     Yoder

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Costello (PA)
     Cummings
     Hollingsworth
     Jeffries
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Napolitano
     Ryan (OH)
     Scalise


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2253

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


                 Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Takano

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Takano) 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. All Members are reminded we are in a 2-minute vote 
series. Please stay close to the floor.
  This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 191, 
noes 236, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 418]

                               AYES--191

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amash
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Farenthold
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Hultgren
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Loudermilk
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Matsui
     McCaul
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Nolan
     Norman
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Russell
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Slaughter
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--236

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman

[[Page H6450]]


     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Capuano
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes (KS)
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gabbard
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gottheimer
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Neal
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Norcross
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Rutherford
     Sanford
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Costello (PA)
     Cummings
     Hollingsworth
     Jeffries
     Napolitano
     Scalis


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2257

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. LOUDERMILK. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 418, I mistakenly voted 
``yes'' when I intended to vote ``no.''


              Amendment No. 23 Offered by Mr. King of Iowa

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 178, 
noes 249, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 419]

                               AYES--178

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Ferguson
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly (MS)
     King (IA)
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Noem
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Sanford
     Schweikert
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stewart
     Taylor
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tipton
     Trott
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (IA)

                               NOES--249

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amodei
     Barletta
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bucshon
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     Denham
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duffy
     Ellison
     Emmer
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Faso
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gianforte
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Joyce (OH)
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     LaHood
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (MN)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Marino
     Mast
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Newhouse
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rosen
     Roskam
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Stivers
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Tenney
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiberi
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Costello (PA)
     Cummings
     Hollingsworth
     Jeffries
     Napolitano
     Scalise


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2300

  Messrs. GAETZ and JONES changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

[[Page H6451]]

  



           Amendment No. 38 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 181, 
noes 246, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 420]

                               AYES--181

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amash
     Barragan
     Bass
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blum
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Crist
     Crowley
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DelBene
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young (IA)

                               NOES--246

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Beatty
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     DeLauro
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes (KS)
     Esty (CT)
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Himes
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Kaptur
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Schneider
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Veasey
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Costello (PA)
     Cummings
     Hollingsworth
     Jeffries
     Napolitano
     Scalise


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2303

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


                Amendment No. 39 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 186, 
noes 241, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 421]

                               AYES--186

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amash
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blum
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brooks (AL)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Crist
     Crowley
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DelBene
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Rice (SC)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young (IA)

                               NOES--241

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta

[[Page H6452]]


     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     DeLauro
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes (KS)
     Esty (CT)
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Himes
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Kaptur
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Larson (CT)
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Richmond
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Schneider
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Costello (PA)
     Cummings
     Hollingsworth
     Jeffries
     Napolitano
     Scalise


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2306

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


          Amendment No. 44 Offered by Ms. Esty of Connecticut

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Ms. Esty) 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 CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 203, 
noes 224, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 422]

                               AYES--203

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amash
     Bacon
     Barragan
     Bass
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blum
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brooks (AL)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Faso
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Mast
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reed
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Rice (SC)
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Upton
     Vargas
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young (IA)

                               NOES--224

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Beatty
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Correa
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Ferguson
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Renacci
     Richmond
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Valadao
     Veasey
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Costello (PA)
     Cummings
     Hollingsworth
     Jeffries
     Napolitano
     Scalise


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2309

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


               Amendment No. 52 Offered by Mr. Garamendi

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

[[Page H6453]]

  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 180, 
noes 247, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 423]

                               AYES--180

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amash
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Suozzi
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--247

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cooper
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crist
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gottheimer
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hoyer
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Norman
     Nunes
     O'Halleran
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Ruppersberger
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Sanford
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Swalwell (CA)
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Costello (PA)
     Cummings
     Hollingsworth
     Jeffries
     Napolitano
     Scalise


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2312

  Ms. KAPTUR changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Amendment No. 54 Offered by Ms. Pingree

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Maine 
(Ms. Pingree) 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 192, 
noes 235, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 424]

                               AYES--192

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--235

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson

[[Page H6454]]


     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Sanford
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Costello (PA)
     Cummings
     Hollingsworth
     Jeffries
     Napolitano
     Scalise


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2315

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


              Amendment No. 56 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 234, 
noes 192, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 425]

                               AYES--234

     Abraham
     Adams
     Aguilar
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Carter (TX)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Collins (GA)
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Fitzpatrick
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hartzler
     Hastings
     Heck
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins (LA)
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Hurd
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Marchant
     Matsui
     McCaul
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McKinley
     McNerney
     McSally
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mooney (WV)
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Olson
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Rice (SC)
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Stivers
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Tenney
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Trott
     Tsongas
     Upton
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Weber (TX)
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young (IA)

                               NOES--192

     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cole
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes (KS)
     Ferguson
     Fleischmann
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gottheimer
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hensarling
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Maloney, Sean
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Norman
     Nunes
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Richmond
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Sanford
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Taylor
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Valadao
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walters, Mimi
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Costello (PA)
     Cummings
     Hollingsworth
     Jeffries
     Napolitano
     Scalise
     Torres


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  2320

  Messrs. THOMAS J. ROONEY of Florida, KATKO, HIGGINS of Louisiana, 
JENKINS of West Virginia, and MOONEY of West Virginia 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. 57 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Walker). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 57 printed in House Report 115-259.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. 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 division D, before the short title, insert 
     the following:
       Sec. __.  The amounts otherwise provided by this Act are 
     revised by reducing the amount made available for ``Corps of 
     Engineers-Civil--Construction'', and increasing

[[Page H6455]]

     the amount made available for the same account, by 
     $100,000,000.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I again thank the chairman and the 
ranking member of the subcommittee for this very critical work.
  My amendment speaks to the need for robust funding for the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers' construction account by redirecting $100 million 
for increased funding for critical construction projects like those 
projects that are current and future projects throughout the Nation.
  As a Federal agency that collects and studies basic information 
pertaining to river and harbor, and flood and storm damage reduction, 
it is important that the Army Corps of Engineers and the construction 
unit have the funding to focus its resources around the Nation again.
  The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plays a critical role in the 
building, maintaining, and expanding of the most critical of the 
Nation's infrastructures.
  The Energy and Water Development, and Related Agencies Subcommittee 
has an important responsibility, and it is to ensure the safety of the 
Nation's waterways.
  Some of these waterways are in and around many of our States, 
particularly in the State of Texas. Not only do we have a concept of 
bayous, but, for example, we are surrounded in many parts by the Gulf. 
We have an enormous amount of water in rivers, and the Army Corps of 
Engineers is particularly important as it relates to flooding.
  But we have seen flooding across America. So this particular 
amendment is to ensure that resources are there as Americans face 
unusual flooding that has been occurring over the last decades.
  I will give you an example. During May 2015, in the Houston flood, 
3,015 homes were flooded and eight people died. During the April 2016 
Houston flood, 5,400 homes were flooded and eight deaths were recorded. 
The economic damage caused by the 2015 Houston flood is estimated at $3 
billion.
  I want my colleagues to know that this amendment is not for a region 
or an area. It is really to help the Nation.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to conclude by simply thanking the 
committee and staff and, again, reminding individuals that we can save 
lives through the work of the Army Corps of Engineers in stopping 
flooding that impacts not only my region of the country, but really 
across the country.
  I conclude with one final statement: We in our community are entering 
hurricane season. This will be a very important amendment as we enter 
hurricane season all over the Nation.
  Mr. Chair, I want to thank Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur 
for shepherding this legislation to the floor and for their commitment 
to preserving America's great natural environment and resources so that 
they can serve and be enjoyed by generations to come.
  My amendment speaks to the need for robust funding for the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers ``Construction'' account by redirecting $100 million 
for increased funding for critical construction projects, like those 
current and future projects proposed for the Houston/Harris County 
metropolitan area.
  As the federal agency that collects and studies basic information 
pertaining to river and harbor, flood and storm damage reduction, shore 
protection, aquatic ecosystem restoration, and conducts detailed 
studies, plans, and specifications for river and harbor, and flood and 
storm damage reduction, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer plays a 
critical role in the building, maintaining, and expanding the most 
critical of the nation's infrastructure.
   We understand this very well in my home state of Texas and the 
Eighteenth Congressional District that I represent.
  The Army Corps of Engineers has been working with the Harris County 
Flood Control District since 1937 to reduce the risk of flooding within 
Harris County.
  Current projects include 6 federal flood risk management projects:
  1. Sims Bayou
  2. Greens Bayou
  3. Brays Bayou
  4. White Oak Bayou
  5. Hunting Bayou, and
  6. Clear Creek.
  In addition to these ongoing projects, the Army Corps of Engineers 
operates and maintains the Addicks and Barker (A&B) Detention Dams in 
northwest Harris County.
  Such a study is certainly needed given the frequency and severity of 
historic-level flood events in recent years in and around the Houston 
metropolitan area, it is clear that much more needs to be done to 
minimize the vulnerability of the nation's 4th largest metropolitan 
area and economic engine from the flood damage.
  On April 15, 2016, an estimated 240 billion gallons of water fell in 
the Houston area over a 12 hour period, which resulted in several areas 
exceeding the 100 to 500 year flood event record.
  The areas that experienced these historic rain falls were west of I-
45, north of I-10, and Greens Bayou.
  Additionally, an estimated 140 billion gallons of water fell over the 
Cypress Creek, Spring Creek, and Addicks watershed in just 14 hours.
  Mr. Chair, during the May 2015 Houston flood, 3,015 homes were 
flooded and 8 persons died; during the April 2016 Houston flood, 5,400 
homes were flooded and 8 deaths recorded.
  The economic damage caused by the 2015 Houston flood is estimated at 
$3 billion; the 2016 estimate is being compiled and is estimated to be 
well above $2 billion.
  Mr. Chair, minimizing the risk of flood damage to the Houston and 
Harris County metropolitan area, the nation's 4th largest, is a matter 
of national significance because the region is one of the nation's 
major technology, energy, finance, export and medical centers:
  1. Port of Houston is the largest bulk port in the world;
  2. Texas Medical Center is a world renowned teaching, research and 
treatment center;
  3. Houston is home to the largest conglomeration of foreign bank 
representation and second only to New York City as home to the most 
Fortune 500 companies; and
  4. The Houston Watershed Assessment study area sits within major 
Hurricane Evacuation arteries for the larger Galveston Gulf Coast 
region.
  I ask my colleagues to join me and support Jackson Lee Amendment No. 
57.
  I thank Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur for their work in 
shepherding this bill to the floor.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask support for the Jackson Lee amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.


              Amendment No. 58 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 58 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. 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 division D (before the short title), insert 
     the following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act for 
     ``Department of Energy--Energy Programs--Science'' may be 
     used in contravention of the Department of Energy 
     Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is a very simple 
amendment that promotes STEM education, which is really a vital part of 
the future of this Nation.
  In particular, my amendment says: ``None of the funds made available 
by this act for `Department of Energy--Energy Programs--Science' may be 
used in contravention of the Department of Energy Organization Act.''
  This amendment was approved and adopted just in the last session. 
Twenty years ago, on February 11, we were directed to identify and 
address the disproportionately high and adverse human health or 
environmental effects of their actions on minority and low-income 
populations.
  The Department of Energy ceased to provide equal access in these 
opportunities for underrepresented groups in STEM, including 
minorities, Native Americans, and women.
  Mr. Chairman, women and minorities make up 70 percent of college 
students, but only 45 percent of undergraduates

[[Page H6456]]

are STEM degree holders. This large pool of untapped talent is a great 
potential source of STEM professional, but it also deprives the United 
States of its best minds to be able to help it in the 21st century.
  As the Nation's demographics are shifting and now more children under 
the age of 1 are minorities, it is critical that we close the gap in 
the number of minorities who seek system opportunities.
  Mr. Chairman, there are still a great many scientific riddles left to 
be solved. And perhaps one of these days, a minority engineer or 
biologist will come up with some of the solutions.
  As many have done in the past, the larger point is that we need more 
STEM educators and more minorities to qualify them. My amendment turns 
our importance to the importance of energy and science education 
programs, funded in part by this bill, and will help to ensure that 
members of unrepresented communities are not placed at a disadvantage 
when it comes to environmental sustainability, preservation, and 
health.

                              {time}  2330

  Mr. Chairman, in closing, let me take note of some of the colleagues 
that I have had the privilege of being neighbors to. NASA's Johnson 
Space Center is, if I might say, one of the neighbors of my community, 
great respect for the astronauts; Major Bolden, who serves as head of 
NASA; and Mae Jemison is my neighbor, the first African-American woman 
who went into space. I want more of those individuals coming from our 
Nation's schools, and I ask my colleagues to support this amendment 
that will encourage those in low-income communities and minorities, 
Native Americans, and others to join in and support the opportunities 
for STEM education.
  Mr. Chair, I want to thank Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur 
for shepherding this legislation to the floor and for their commitment 
to preserving America's great natural environment and resources so that 
they can serve and be enjoyed by generations to come.
  Jackson Lee Amendment No. 58 simply provides that:
  ``None of the funds made available by this Act for `Department of 
Energy--Energy Programs--Science' be used in contravention of the 
Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.).''
  This amendment was approved and adopted in identical form on April 
29, 2015, during the 114th Congress as an amendment to H.R. 2028, the 
Energy and Water Resources Appropriations Act of 2016.
  Mr. Chair, twenty years ago, on February 11, 1994, President Clinton 
issued Executive Order 12898, directing federal agencies to identify 
and address the disproportionately high and adverse human health or 
environmental effects of their actions on minority and low-income 
populations.
  The Department of Energy seeks to provide equal access in these 
opportunities for underrepresented groups in STEM, including 
minorities, Native Americans, and women.
  Mr. Chair, women and minorities make up 70 percent of college 
students, but only 45 percent of undergraduate STEM degree holders.
  This large pool of untapped talent is a great potential source of 
STEM professionals.
  As the nation's demographics are shifting and now most children under 
the age of one are minorities, it is critical that we close the gap in 
the number of minorities who seek STEM opportunities.
  I encourage Energy Secretary Perry to surpass the commitment of his 
predecessors' toward increasing the nation's economic competitiveness 
and enabling more of our people to realize their full potential.
  Mr. Chair, there are still a great many scientific riddles left to be 
solved--and perhaps one of these days a minority engineer or biologist 
will come-up with some of the solutions.
  The larger point is that we need more STEM educators and more 
minorities to qualify for them.
  The energy and science education programs funded in part by this bill 
will help ensure that members of underrepresented communities are not 
placed at a disadvantage when it comes to the environmental 
sustainability, preservation, and health.
  Through education about the importance of environmental 
sustainability, we can promote a broader understanding of science and 
how citizens can improve their surroundings.
  Through community education efforts, teachers and students have also 
benefitted by learning about radiation, radioactive waste management, 
and other related subjects.
  The Department of Energy places interns and volunteers from minority 
institutions into energy efficiency and renewable energy programs.
  The DOE also works to increase low income and minority access to STEM 
fields and help students attain graduate degrees as well as find 
employment.
  With the continuation of this kind of funding, we can increase 
diversity, provide clean energy options to our most underserved 
communities, and help improve their environments, which will yield 
better health outcomes and greater public awareness.
  But most importantly businesses will have more consumers to whom they 
may engage in related commercial activities.
  My amendment will help ensure that underrepresented communities are 
able to participate and contribute equitably in the energy and 
scientific future.
  I ask my colleagues to join me and support Jackson Lee Amendment No. 
58.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask for support of the Jackson Lee amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 59 Offered by Mr. Gosar

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 59 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  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:

       At the end of division D (before the short title), insert 
     the following:
       Sec. ___.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to prepare, propose, or promulgate any regulation or 
     guidance that references or relies on the analysis contained 
     in--
       (1) ``Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon for 
     Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866'', 
     published by the Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of 
     Carbon, United States Government, in February 2010;
       (2) ``Technical Support Document: Technical Update of the 
     Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under 
     Executive Order 12866'', published by the Interagency Working 
     Group on Social Cost of Carbon, United States Government, in 
     May 2013 and revised in November 2013;
       (3) ``Revised Draft Guidance for Federal Departments and 
     Agencies on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the 
     Effects of Climate Change in NEPA Reviews'', published by the 
     Council on Environmental Quality on December 24, 2014 (79 
     Fed. Reg. 77801);
       (4) ``Technical Support Document: Technical Update of the 
     Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under 
     Executive Order 12866'', published by the Interagency Working 
     Group on Social Cost of Carbon, United States Government, in 
     July 2015;
       (5) ``Addendum to the Technical Support Document on Social 
     Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive 
     Order 12866: Application of the Methodology to Estimate the 
     Social Cost of Methane and the Social Cost of Nitrous 
     Oxide'', published by the Interagency Working Group on Social 
     Cost of Greenhouse Gases, United States Government, in August 
     2016; or
       (6) ``Technical Support Document: Technical Update of the 
     Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under 
     Executive Order 12866'', published by the Interagency Working 
     Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, United States 
     Government, in August 2016.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, 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 today to offer a commonsense 
amendment that will protect American jobs and the economy by 
prohibiting funds from being used to implement the Obama 
administration's flawed Social Cost of Carbon, or SCC, valuation. This 
job-killing and unlawful guidance sneakily attempts to pave the way for 
cap-and-trade-like mandates.
  Congress and the American people have repeatedly rejected cap-and-
trade proposals. Knowing that he could not lawfully enact a carbon tax 
plan, President Obama attempted to circumvent Congress by playing loose 
and fast with the Clean Air Act to unilaterally implement this unlawful 
new requirement under the guise of guidance.
  The Obama administration continuously used the SCC valuation models, 
which can be easily manipulated, to try and justify new job-killing 
regulations.
  Although President Trump issued an executive order in March to 
disband the Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse 
Gases, Federal

[[Page H6457]]

agencies continue to work on the SCC valuation.
  My amendment is necessary to strengthen the intent of President 
Trump's executive order while also ensuring that it is Congress, not 
the executive branch, which sets tax and environmental policy.
  The committee wisely issued guidance in the bill report to delay the 
promulgation of SCC regulations until a new working group is convened. 
My amendment explicitly prohibits funds from being used to implement 
the deeply flawed Social Cost of Carbon guidance in the bill text.
  The House has a clear, consistent, and strong record of opposition to 
the Social Cost of Carbon. My colleagues voted in favor of my amendment 
in FY17 appropriations by a clear majority of 230-188.
  In fact, the House has decisively voted 10 times to block, defund, or 
oppose the Social Cost of Carbon since 2013. My amendment ensures this 
Chamber's position remains consistent and crystal clear in FY18.
  Roger Martella, a self-described lifelong environmentalist and career 
environmental lawyer, testified at the May 2015 House Natural Resources 
Committee hearing on the revised SCC guidance and the flaws associated 
with the Social Cost of Carbon model, stating that the ``'Social Cost 
of Carbon' estimates suffer from a number of significant flaws that 
should exclude them from the NEPA process.''
  Amongst these flaws are, one, that the ``projected costs of carbon 
emissions can be manipulated by changing key parameters such as 
timeframes, discount rates, and other values that have no relation to a 
given project undergoing review.''
  Two, ``OMB and the other Federal agencies developed the draft Social 
Cost of Carbon estimates without any known peer review or opportunity 
for public comment during the development process.''
  Three, ``OMB's draft Social Cost of Carbon estimates are based 
primarily on global rather than domestic costs and benefits.''
  Four, ``there is still considerable uncertainty in many of the 
assumptions and data elements used to create the draft Social Cost of 
Carbon estimates, such as the damage functions and modeled time 
horizons.''
  Mr. Martella's testimony was spot on. Congress, not Washington 
bureaucrats, should dictate our country's climate change policy. The 
sweeping and costly changes that the Social Cost of Carbon metric would 
impose are not only misguided and unwise, they are also based on 
fundamentally flawed policies that sidestepped Congress, did not go 
through the normal regulatory process, and received no public comment.
  Worse yet, the model utilized to predict the Social Cost of Carbon 
can be easily manipulated to arrive at the desired outcome.
  Regardless of one's positions on climate change, my colleagues surely 
must respect the constitutional role of the legislative branch and 
oppose bureaucratic efforts to circumvent Congress to impose an 
extremist environmental agenda that is not based on best available 
science.
  Congress must provide certainty to business and consumers that the 
costly and scientifically bankrupt Social Cost of Carbon valuation will 
not creep its way into our regulatory process.
  My amendment provides that certainty.
  Over the last 2 years, this effort has received support from the 
American Energy Alliance, Americans for Limited Government, Americans 
for Tax Reform, Arch Coal, Competitive Enterprise Institute, the 
Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, FreedomWorks, National 
Mining Association, the National Taxpayers Union, and Taxpayers 
Protection Alliance.
  Congress, not anonymous Washington bureaucrats, should dictate our 
country's tax and climate change policy. I urge my colleagues to 
support my amendment to, once again, block the flawed Social Cost of 
Carbon.
  I commend the chairman and the committee for their efforts on this 
legislation, and I urge support of my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Ohio is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I think the gentleman has a point of view 
that I do not support, but in terms of this amendment, it really is not 
necessary. It is redundant. On March 28 of this year, Executive Order 
No. 13783, signed by President Donald Trump, has rescinded every one of 
the analyses that the gentleman referenced in his proposed amendment. 
So this amendment does less than nothing. It has already been dealt 
with through executive order.
  I would just encourage my colleagues to let's move the agenda along 
this evening where we will have significant debate perhaps on other 
matters.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment because 
it is redundant at this point, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I want to reiterate even though President 
Trump issued an executive order in March to disband the Interagency 
Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, Federal agencies 
continue to work on the SCC valuation. So I, at the very least, would 
expect everybody to support this.
  Mr. Chairman, 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. 60 Offered by Ms. DelBene

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 60 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Ms. DelBENE. 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 division D, before the short title, insert 
     the following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available in this division 
     may be used for the procurement of anchor chain that is not 
     subject to the restrictions in section 225.7007-1 of title 
     48, Code of Federal Regulations.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentlewoman 
from Washington (Ms. DelBene) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Washington.
  Ms. DelBENE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an important 
amendment to this year's Energy and Water Development Appropriations 
bill. It fixes a serious problem that must be addressed to protect 
hardworking Americans in my district and across the country.
  Both parties can agree that our Nation should be spending taxpayer 
dollars on goods manufactured here at home, not overseas, whenever we 
can. Doing so not only supports American jobs in our communities but 
also reinforces our national security. Even President Trump called for 
strengthening enforcing laws that promote American industry and 
American workers. So I hope my colleagues from both sides of the aisle 
can come together on this issue.
  Particularly in these uncertain times, it is imperative that we 
protect American production capabilities by supporting U.S. 
manufacturers.
  Every year since 1991, Congress has included a provision in the 
Department of Defense Appropriations bill to require that military 
agencies purchase anchor chain from American businesses. For the last 2 
years, the House and Senate have supported an amendment of mine 
clarifying that this requirement applies to the Army Corps of 
Engineers. Unfortunately, the Corps has continued to ignore clear 
congressional intent and has made several acquisitions of foreign-made 
anchor chain from countries like China and Korea.
  Until the Army Corps follows the policy, I will keep fighting to 
support U.S. manufacturers and their workers, and I hope the whole 
Chamber will join me in this effort.
  My amendment strengthens the existing language in this bill to better 
protect the critical production capability, support our manufacturing 
industry, and put American workers first.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment, 
and I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H6458]]

  

  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, I recognize the underlying bill has 
language on this issue, but I understand that the requirement may not 
be as comprehensive as my colleague supports. I am concerned that the 
amendment before us may have unintended consequences. If my colleague 
would withdraw the amendment today, I will commit to working together 
as this bill moves through the legislative process to see if we can 
address her concerns in a manner acceptable to everyone. Otherwise, I 
will have to oppose the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman 
from Ohio.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the intent of the 
gentlewoman's amendment. I am very glad to hear what the gentlewoman is 
saying. She is trying to do everything she can to support American-made 
products and particularly American-made anchor chain. I would be 
willing to work with the chairman and the gentlewoman as the process 
goes forward to ensure we purchase American-made products. I just 
wanted to express that support. I thank the gentleman for his offer.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, if the gentlewoman is willing to withdraw 
the amendment, we will work together to see if we can solve this.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. DelBENE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's willingness 
to work with me on this important issue and also Representative Kaptur 
for her support.
  Our Nation can't afford to lose its critical production capability. 
We should not allow American workers to be left behind, so I look 
forward to working with the gentleman and the gentlewoman.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time, and I withdraw my 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.


                amendment no. 61 offered by mr. burgess

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 61 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of division D (before the short title) insert 
     the following new section:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available in this division 
     may be used--
       (1) to implement or enforce section 430.32(x) of title 10, 
     Code of Federal Regulations; or
       (2) to implement or enforce the standards established by 
     the tables contained in section 325(i)(1)(B) of the Energy 
     Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(1)(B)) with 
     respect to BPAR incandescent reflector lamps, BR incandescent 
     reflector lamps, and ER incandescent reflector lamps.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Burgess) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to 
prevent the distortion of the free market by the Federal Government.
  Since its passage in 2007 of the Energy Independence and Security 
Act, I have heard from virtually tens of thousands of constituents 
about the language in that act and how it will take away consumer 
choice when constituents are deciding which lightbulbs they will use in 
their homes. Mr. Chairman, they are right.
  Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time, I want to point out this exact 
amendment has been accepted for the past 6 years by the House. Three of 
those years it was accepted by voice vote. It was included in the 
annual appropriations legislation signed into law by President Obama 
every year since its first inclusion in 2011, and has been a priority 
of the Republican Conference since its adoption into law. It allows 
consumers to continue to have a choice and to have a say about what 
type of lightbulb they will put into their homes. Congress should fight 
to preserve the free market. It is common sense.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Ohio is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, with all the respect I have for Congressman 
Burgess, I oppose this damaging rider which would block the Department 
of Energy from implementing or enforcing commonsense energy efficiency 
standards for lightbulbs.
  This rider was a bad idea when it was first offered 7 years ago, and 
it is even more unsupportable now. Why do I say that? Because every 
claim made by proponents of the rider have been proven wrong.
  Number one, we have been told, including by Dr. Burgess, that the 
energy efficiency standards would ban incandescent lightbulbs. That is 
simply false. You can go to the store today and see shelves of modern 
energy efficient incandescent lightbulbs that meet the standard, and 
they are the same as the old bulbs except they last longer, use less 
electricity, and save consumers money.
  Then we heard for years that the energy efficiency standards restrict 
consumer choice.

                              {time}  2345

  If you have shopped for lightbulbs lately, which I have, you know 
that isn't true. In fact, modern incandescent bulbs, compact 
fluorescent lightbulbs, and LEDs of every shape, size, and color are 
now available.
  Consumers have never had more choice, and the efficiency standard 
spurred innovation that dramatically expanded options for consumers. I 
am amazed how many shelves lightbulbs now occupy in the stores.
  Critics of the efficiency standards claim that they would cost 
consumers money. In fact, the opposite is true. When the standards are 
in full effect, the average American family will save about $100 per 
year. That is pretty good. That is $12.5 billion in savings for 
consumers and businesses nationwide every year. That is $12.5 billion. 
But this rider threatens those savings. That is why consumer groups 
have consistently opposed this rider.
  Here is the reality. The 2007 consensus energy efficiency standards 
for lightbulbs were enacted with bipartisan support and continue to 
enjoy overwhelming industry support. U.S. manufacturers are already 
meeting the efficiency standards.
  The effect of the rider is to allow foreign manufacturers to sell 
old, inefficient lightbulbs in the United States that violate the 
efficiency standards. That is unfair to domestic manufacturers who have 
invested millions of dollars in U.S. plants to make efficient bulbs 
that meet the standards.
  Why on Earth would we want to pass a rider that favors foreign 
manufacturers who ignore our laws and penalize U.S. manufacturers who 
are following our laws?
  But it gets even worse. The mere existence of this rider poses and 
additional threat to U.S. manufacturing. The bipartisan 2007 Energy 
bill required the Department of Energy to establish updated lightbulb 
efficiency standards by January 1 of this year. It also provided that, 
if final updated standards are not issued by then, a more stringent 
backstop standard of 45 lumens per watt automatically takes effect, and 
incandescent lightbulbs currently cannot meet this backstop standard.
  Well, we are well into 2017, and the Burgess lightbulb rider has 
remained on the books. So, earlier this year, the Department of Energy 
had to go forward with finalizing the 45-lumens-per-watt backstop 
standard.
  Approving this rider year after year is ultimately what blocked the 
Department of Energy from issuing the required efficiency standards in 
time to avoid such stringent measures. Ironically, it is this rider 
that would effectively ban the incandescent lightbulb in 2020.
  The Burgess rider directly threatens existing lightbulb manufacturing 
jobs in the United States. It would stifle innovation and punish 
companies that have invested in domestic manufacturing. This rider aims 
to reverse years of technological progress, only to kill jobs, increase 
electricity bills for our consumers, and worsen pollution.

[[Page H6459]]

  It is time to choose common sense over rigid ideology. It is time to 
listen to the manufacturing companies, consumer groups, and efficiency 
advocates who all agree that this rider is harmful.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge all Members to vote ``no'' on the Burgess 
lightbulb rider, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I will disagree on the economics that were 
just presented. But apart from the economics of the lightbulb mandate, 
that is, in fact, only part of the story.
  With the extreme expansion of Federal powers undertaken in the last 
administration, when the Democrats were in charge of Congress for 4 
years, Americans have just now begun to see how far the Constitution's 
Commerce Clause has been manipulated from its original intent. The 
lightbulb mandate is a perfect example of this manipulation.
  The Commerce Clause was intended by our Founding Fathers to be a 
limitation on Federal authority, not a catchall in order to allow for 
any topic to be regulated by Washington. Indeed, it is clear that the 
Founding Fathers never intended for this clause to be used to allow the 
Federal Government to regulate and pass mandates on consumer products 
that do not pose a risk to either human health or safety.
  Mr. Chairman, in December of 2007, when this bill was first passed, 
the columnist George Will observed on television one Sunday morning 
that it is the job of the Federal Government to defend the borders and 
deliver the mail. But instead of keeping up with those two tasks, we 
instead decided to ban the incandescent bulb. It was wrong in 2007. It 
is wrong in 2017.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of 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 Texas (Mr. Burgess).
  The amendment was agreed to.


               Amendment No. 62 Offered by Mrs. Blackburn

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 62 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  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 division D (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 473, 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, first of all, I want to begin by 
thanking the committee for their hard work on this appropriations bill.
  Every year, I come to this floor through the appropriations process 
to present amendments calling for 1 percent across-the-board cuts. So 
many years I have come down here to talk about how the spending 
continues to increase. Indeed, our budget does increase. But I have to 
tell you, the chairman and his team have done an incredible job this 
year.
  The outlays that we see in this bill this year are $209 million--
think about that--less than the budget authority from last year. That 
is significant, and it should be recognized and should be praised, 
because that is the type of work that we need to see.
  Now, I do continue to present the 1 percent across-the-board 
amendment because we are facing a time in our Nation where 1 percent 
makes a difference, just as we are seeing from the good work that they 
have done.
  Passing this amendment for the 1 percent across-the-board spending 
reduction would save us an additional $376 million. It is important to 
do because our Nation is facing $20 trillion in debt. Because of that, 
we have to ask ourselves: Is it important to spend some of the money 
that is being spent on programs that we see taking place in the 
Department of Energy?
  It causes us to look at these programs and talk about priorities, 
where we should spend those precious dollars that are not Federal 
dollars. They are taxpayer dollars that are coming out of the pockets 
of hardworking men and women.
  Indeed, we have, many times, quoted Admiral Mullins' comments from 
July 6, 2010, that the greatest threat to our Nation's security is our 
Nation's debt. Because of that, I recognize and applaud the good work 
that has been done, but I encourage support for my amendment and the 
continued honing and prioritizing of what takes the taxpayer money that 
is spent by this body.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  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, let me first say that I compliment the 
gentlewoman for her consistency. She is a true budget hawk in trying to 
make sure that we ultimately balance this budget. It is tough work to 
do that.
  We have actually, as she mentioned, reduced spending in this bill 
over last year. Could we reduce it another 1 percent across the board? 
The problem is we have to choose some priority in the bill.
  The highest priority we had was our Nation's defense, the nuclear 
weapons program. Even though the overall bill is down $206 million, the 
defense activities are actually up nearly a billion dollars.
  We then have to look at the infrastructure of this Nation and the 
fact that we have deteriorating infrastructure, and Congress has told 
us that each year we have to meet what is called the WRDA target. We 
have to spend with the Army Corps of Engineers to meet the 
infrastructure of our harbors, dams, and inland waterways and restore 
those things, because it is very important to our commerce and 
something the Congress supports greatly.
  So when we have had to increase the Army Corps of Engineers funding 
over what was spent last year and then we have had to increase weapons 
activity, that means the Department of Energy has been significantly 
reduced over what they were last year.
  We have had to make some very hard choices. We have cut the EERE, 
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, program in half from $2 billion 
to $1 billion, roughly.
  We have had to eliminate the ARPA-E program, a program that I happen 
to support, but we just don't have the money for it.
  We have had to eliminate the loan guarantee program, a program that, 
again, I support, but we just don't have the money for it.
  So we have made some significant reductions while prioritizing basic 
science research and those types of activities within the Department of 
Energy. I think we have done a good job, given a pretty skinny budget. 
We have made tough choices. That is okay. That is what we do all the 
time in the Appropriations Committee.
  The reality is, if we are ever going to balance this budget, if 
anybody looks at the numbers, right now we are spending about 70 
percent of our total Federal budget on mandatory programs. We have been 
reducing discretionary spending over the years. As a portion of the 
total budget, it has gone down every year.
  If we don't get a hold of mandatory spending--Medicare, Medicaid, 
Social Security, and interest on the debt--within 10 years we will have 
enough money for our mandatory programs and defense, nothing else--
zero.
  We are not going to balance this budget by reducing discretionary 
spending. Keeping control of it, you bet, that is what we have been 
doing. That is what the Appropriations Committee has been doing since 
2010, or earlier. We have actually been reducing spending. It is very 
important that we do that. But we have to get a hold of mandatory 
spending if we are going to balance the budget.
  So while I appreciate what the gentlewoman is trying to do, I agree 
with her, we need to balance this budget. We need to balance this 
budget. Unfortunately, this is not the way to do it.
  So I have to oppose this amendment and hope my colleagues would 
oppose it also.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page H6460]]

  

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I will tell you every comment that Mr. 
Simpson made about the mandatory spending is something that I agree 
with. Yes, we have to do that. But just as we in Congress have reduced 
our Legislative Branch budget by about 20 percent over the last few 
years, and just as our Appropriations Committee has done a wonderful 
job of pulling back on the spending that is done to discretionary, we 
need to give that same challenge to the bureaucracy, to those rank-and-
file Federal employees and challenge them to go save a penny on a 
dollar out of what they are appropriated. Find a way to yield savings 
to the work that they do and help us with this process to rein in 
spending.
  Mr. Chairman, I encourage support of the amendment, and 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. 63 Offered by Mr. Perry

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 63 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Mr. PERRY. 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 division D (before the short title), insert 
     the following:
       Sec. ___.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to implement or enforce the final rule published by 
     the Secretary of Energy entitled ``Energy Conservation 
     Program: Test Procedures for Central Air Conditioners and 
     Heat Pumps'' published on January 5, 2017 (82 Fed. Reg. 
     1426).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to thank the Appropriations 
Committee for the extraordinary work they have done in a very limited 
amount of time.
  This amendment would prohibit the use of funds to implement or 
enforce the final rule published by the former Secretary of Energy, 
entitled: ``Test Procedures for Central Air Conditioners and Heat 
Pumps.''
  Mr. Chairman, this is simply an example of too much Washington, too 
much government. I am sure it was well-intended, but I am not sure if 
the good idea fairies in Washington really realized fully what they 
did.

                              {time}  0000

  Certainly we want to have test standards and so on and so forth, but 
the one-size-fits-all approach that comes out of Washington misses some 
folks and can cause some irreparable damage to businesses all around 
the country.
  And all around the country there are small manufacturers that are 
trying to build some air-conditioners. In particular, there is one in 
the district that I represent that builds custom-made air-conditioners 
and heat pumps for skyscrapers and high-rise buildings.
  If I can picture the scene, the original units are put in when the 
buildings are being constructed. So there are cranes available, there 
are openings in the walls and in the structure, and they just move the 
stuff in, and then they close it all up.
  In 10, 15, 20, 30 years later when they go to replace it, well, the 
walls are in, the windows are in, the people are in, the offices are 
in. There is no crane available, and they have to piece this thing 
together through the elevator and into the closet. So this company, 
like other ones around the country, make custom-made ones, each one for 
a specific application--each one.
  But the Department of Energy, and this rule in particular, says that 
this company must test each model that they make for these efficiency 
standards--each one--an arduous test taking months, if not years, in 
documentation for one application.
  Again, I am sure the Department of Energy was well-intended. However, 
this rule is going to put a business out. They work in the city of 
York, a fine city in central Pennsylvania, right downtown where we want 
manufacturing to happen, where people can walk to work. These folks are 
trying. They are struggling to survive in this economy, and the only 
thing that is going to put them out is this regulation, Mr. Chairman.
  While well-intended, it is not going to be helpful. These folks are 
trying to do the right thing, but the government is getting in the way.
  Believe it or not, Consumer Reports actually recommended against 
buying some of these systems under this testing rule because the 
systems had higher costs and poor repair records.
  Believe it or not, Mr. Chairman, the free market actually fixes most 
of this stuff. Most of us want to buy more efficient things that are 
cheaper, that are easier to maintain, and have a better record. This is 
Consumer Reports talking. This isn't Perry's record. This is Consumer 
Reports talking.
  Let us not put this company out of business. Let us not put these 
companies out of business. Let us be responsible. I urge passage.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Ohio is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this particular 
amendment.
  I say to the gentleman: For the company in your district, the 
regulations include the opportunity for waiver. And I would hope that 
the company in your district would be able to work that out.
  The amendment that the gentleman proposes seeks to prohibit the 
Department of Energy from implementing testing procedures for the 
energy efficiency standards set for heat pumps and air-conditioners.
  I, as the consumer, whether I am buying a heat pump, a furnace, a 
refrigerator--and every American who now shops looks for those--that is 
like the sticker. That is what you really look for, and you want to 
know how much you are going to pay every year for what that product 
will cost you for energy. And the better product you have, and you are 
able to put that on a label and it is verified by the Department of 
Energy, that helps sales.
  The original standards that were created were supported and have been 
supported by the Edison Electric Institute, the association which 
represents all investor-owned utilities. The amendment, by the way, is 
opposed by the Air Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute, 
which represents manufacturers of HVAC systems that employ over 1.3 
million Americans. And industry opposes the amendment, 
environmentalists oppose it, because it would cost an average--a 
cumulative cost to Americans of $12.2 billion over 30 years.
  So there is a lot of opposition to this. It is important to note that 
these standards were negotiated in a collaborative process by industry 
groups, environmental nonprofits, and consumer advocates with the 
Department of Energy. A rider like this one damages the integrity of 
the negotiated rulemaking process, which is designed to provide 
certainty and voice to the industry and education and information to 
consumers.
  Test procedures are simple and important. The Department of Energy 
develops them to make sure companies are rating their product 
accurately so consumers don't get stuck paying higher bills than they 
expect, so you know what you buy.
  Let's be clear. This amendment would effectively nullify the 
efficiency standards for heating and cooling systems, in spite of the 
fact that these standards project that it will save billions of dollars 
over the period that they are applied, and that is equivalent to having 
1 million fewer homes connected to the grid over the same period. It is 
an enormous savings.
  If there is a particular company that is unfairly impacted by these 
rules, there are outlets for regulatory relief through waivers, as I 
have mentioned, and this amendment would neuter

[[Page H6461]]

those standards and thereby allow cheap imports to undercut American 
products by exploiting the lack of standards.
  We don't want to go back to that. I look for those yellow labels. To 
protect American manufacturers, to save Americans money on their 
utility bills, and to reduce air pollution, I strongly oppose this 
amendment, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
  The gentleman may have a good intention in offering this amendment, 
but I don't think you want to take away the benefits to the American 
people for one company in your district when that company, in fact, can 
negotiate and receive a waiver. I would just ask my colleagues to vote 
``no.''
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, we are in agreement that the regulations 
have to be in place. I, too, like the yellow sticker, just like she 
does; and somehow the yellow stickers are in place without this new 
rule. They are there right now. You have been seeing them for years. 
This is new--this is a new regulation.
  I would contend that, yeah, the manufacturers have gotten on board 
and they have negotiated this rule. Because what choice did they have, 
right?
  The Federal Government is going to regulate. They are going to do it. 
You either get in the game and play ball or you know what happens to 
the bat. Right? They didn't want to be in that position, so they took 
the best they could.
  I am telling you and it is my contention that the free market is 
going to figure this out because we all want the most efficient, the 
most cost-effective, and the most maintenance-effective, whether it is 
an air-conditioner, whether it is a car, or whether it is an electric 
toothbrush.
  We don't need the Federal Government telling us to do it. By the way, 
this company has applied for a waiver, years in the making. They 
literally have the president of the company spending almost, he said, 
85 percent of his time dealing with Federal regulation compliance.
  The president of the company is the guy who wants to hire these 125 
people, go make sales, and produce things. Instead, all he is doing is 
dealing with the Federal Government. Somehow, someway we all got to 
this point.
  It feels pretty cool in the Capitol right now, right? It feels pretty 
cool in the House of Representatives.
  The yellow labels were there before this regulation ever happened.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask and urge the Members to vote in favor of 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 Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. KAPTUR. 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 Pennsylvania 
will be postponed.


                  Amendment No. 64 Offered by Mr. Budd

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 64 
printed in House Report 115-259.
  Mr. BUDD. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Francis Rooney), 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 division D (before the short title), 
     insert the following:

       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to implement, administer, or enforce the prevailing 
     wage requirements in subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, 
     United States Code (commonly referred to as the Davis-Bacon 
     Act).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentleman 
from North Carolina (Mr. Budd) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina.
  Mr. BUDD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the Davis-Bacon Act hinders economic growth and 
increases the Federal deficit. It imposes enormous burdens, stifles 
contractor productivity, ignores skill differences for different jobs, 
and imposes rigid craftwork rules.
  The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the Davis-Bacon 
Act will raise Federal construction costs by $13 billion between 2015 
and 2023.
  Now, wages are often set at or above the union scale, despite the 
fact that only 13 percent of the private construction workforce is even 
unionized nationwide, Mr. Chairman.

                              {time}  0010

  The Davis-Bacon wage determinations have also been known to be lower 
than the current market rate, which is equally problematic and 
especially detrimental for local contractors. It is just erratic.
  The GAO, the Government Accountability Office, has repeatedly 
criticized DOL's Davis-Bacon wage determination process for its lack of 
transparency in the published wage rates and its tendency to gather 
erroneous data through unscientific wage surveys.
  Repealing the DBA would allow the government to build more 
infrastructure and create 155,000 new construction-related jobs at the 
very same cost to the taxpayers. In fact, repealing Davis-Bacon would 
have saved the Federal Government $10.9 billion, and that was back in 
2011.
  This amendment would uphold the government's responsibility to 
deliver quality infrastructure improvements at the best possible price 
to the taxpayers, which is certainly what we owe them. It is imperative 
that all levels of government guarantee the general public that their 
tax dollars are being spent in the most effective way possible.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Francis Rooney) 
for his work on this amendment, and I withdraw my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.
  The Chair understands that amendment No. 65 will not be offered.


                Amendment No. 70 Offered by Mr. Mitchell

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Perry). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 70 printed in House Report 115-259.
  Mr. MITCHELL. 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 division D (before the short title), insert 
     the following:
       Sec. ___.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to delay the release of the Great Lakes and 
     Mississippi River Interbasin Study (GLMRIS) Brandon Road 
     Study.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 473, the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Mitchell) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chairman, I rise today as an advocate of the Great 
Lakes. It is with that spirit I propose my amendment to prevent funds 
to be used to further delay the release of the Brandon Road Study.
  Anyone who has spent time in my home State of Michigan or any of the 
Great Lakes States knows the beauty and importance of the lakes. In 
addition to their majesty, the Great Lakes supply 90 percent of the 
United States freshwater supply. Thirty million people live at the 
Great Lakes Basin, and they are all impacted by the quality of our 
lakes, whether as a water source, source of business, recreational 
opportunity, or the lakes' inherent value as a natural wonder. Any risk 
to the Great Lakes is a significant problem, no matter how you measure 
that risk.
  One of the threats facing our lakes is the potential entry of 
invasive species, the most pressing of which, at this time, is the 
threat of Asian carp entering the Great Lakes.
  Asian carp have no natural predators in the lakes, meaning once they 
enter the Great Lakes, there is no way to stop their spread. Their 
unrestrained growth would disrupt the entire ecosystem.
  In addition to the damage to native wildlife in the lakes, the 
introduction of Asian carp would damage several multibillion-dollar 
industries, including the fishing and boating industries which support 
countless jobs in my

[[Page H6462]]

home State of Michigan and the Great Lakes.
  Given the threat imposed by invasive species, the Army Corps of 
Engineers has been studying the best way to prevent introduction of the 
Asian carp into the Great Lakes Basin. Their study, the Brandon Road 
Study, was initially slated to be released on February 28 but has been 
delayed until further notice.
  Delaying this study impedes the ability of all interested parties to 
develop a long-term strategy to thwart this threat. The continued 
delays create a great risk, yet no reason for delaying that release has 
been provided.
  In late June, a live Asian carp was caught in the Illinois waterway 
about 2 miles below the T.J. O'Brien Lock and Dam, 9 miles from Lake 
Michigan. This is the first time an Asian carp has been discovered in 
such close proximity to our lakes.
  Though further study is necessary to determine how this carp entered 
the area, it is an alarming warning that the window is quickly closing 
to prevent large-scale devastation to the Great Lakes' ecosystem.
  The best way to mitigate the damage of Asian carp in our lakes is to 
stop it from happening altogether. For several months, members of the 
Great Lakes Task Force have requested the release of the Brandon Road 
Study, to no avail. I stand here today to again call on the Army Corps 
to release the study, which we have already paid for and they have 
conducted.
  My amendment would prevent the Corps from using any more money--our 
money--to delay the release of the study.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment for the 
sake of the Great Lakes and for the well-being of our entire region.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition, although I do not oppose the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Ohio is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment 
offered by my friends, Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Huizenga and, I have no 
doubt, many fellow travelers from the Great Lakes delegation on both 
sides of the aisle. I find it somewhat unusual that it is the last 
amendment this evening after midnight. I wish it had come up about 6 
o'clock on the evening news.
  This is an issue we know well, as Mr. Huizenga, Mr. Mitchell, and 
certainly our chairman, Mr. Simpson, has heard a great deal about this 
now, and our ranking members on the full committee as well.
  We introduced a bill last month with the same ultimate effect of 
preventing the spread of Asian carp into the Great Lakes. The Great 
Lakes represent a $7 billion fishery, deeply threatened by these 
critters, Asian carp, that shouldn't even be in this country but began 
their movement up the Mississippi River when they were brought in to do 
bottom cleaning in Mississippi in the special fish tanks that were set 
up down there many years ago as bottom feeders. There was some type of 
storm and they hopped out. The walls were breached, and they began 
their journey up the Mississippi until now. They are within just a few 
miles of Lake Michigan.
  Just a few weeks ago, a 28-inch Asian carp was caught beyond the 
protective barriers, which is a temporary solution, only 9 miles from 
Lake Michigan. Yet, even in this time of greatest danger, the Brandon 
Road Study, which Congressman Mitchell outlined, which merely 
identifies options for preventing Asian carp from reaching the Great 
Lakes, has not been released by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
  This amendment would prevent the administration from expending any 
more funds to further delay the release of this study for public 
comment.
  My colleagues should know that this study is already completed. After 
working on it for years at a cost of nearly $7 million, it now sits on 
a shelf at the Corps, and they are unwilling to release it for reasons 
we do not understand.
  Asian carp represent a serious economic and environmental threat to 
the entire Great Lakes. These mean critters are voracious eaters. They 
destroy native species and overwhelm their new ecosystems. They have 
gotten into the Ohio River, and they have gotten into rivers near 
Peoria. They eat up everything in their sight. They completely upend 
native ecosystems, and it is truly terrifying what they will do to our 
lakes, as you can see in this photograph. They are prolific, they are 
large, and they are predatory.

  We should be aggressively pursuing action to prevent the spread of 
the Asian carp to the Great Lakes, yet the roadmap to getting there is 
locked in bureaucratic purgatory.
  Finally, I would like to point out that this is not a partisan issue. 
Our substantively similar bill has 15 Republican and 16 Democratic 
cosponsors, who represent the vast majority of the Great Lakes 
coastline. In these hyperpartisan times, our constituents are united in 
their love for the Great Lakes, their desire to protect them, and their 
understanding of how vital they are to the future of this country and 
continent.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge support for this amendment from all of my 
colleagues in order to save the national treasures that are the Great 
Lakes.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank Congressman Mitchell and Congressman Huizenga 
for taking the lead this evening from the great Wolverine State--and we 
Buckeyes don't often say that, do we--for embracing what is truly 
important to all of us, and I urge my colleagues to support the 
Mitchell-Huizenga amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of Chairman Frelinghuysen, 
I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Idaho is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, while I would like to support this 
amendment, unfortunately, I can't. But, believe me, I understand and 
have learned from Ms. Kaptur and the members of the Great Lakes States 
when I was chairman of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies 
Subcommittee. And now she sits on the Interior, Environment, and 
Related Agencies Subcommittee with me, and they have all come and 
talked to me about this problem.
  This, unfortunately, pits kind of one State against another, and what 
I am trying to do is find a solution to this, because I happen to agree 
with these individuals that it seems rather silly that we go out and 
ask for a report to be done and then can't seem to get it released--not 
only the final report, we can't even get a draft report released that 
will go out for comment. That doesn't make any sense to me.

                              {time}  0020

  But I know that there are Members who also have concerns about that, 
but that is, frankly, why you release a draft report, so that you can 
get the comments.
  During full committee consideration on the Energy and Water bill, we 
discussed a similar amendment that was offered by Ms. Kaptur, my 
ranking member, Mr. Joyce, and Mr. Moolenaar; and I committed to them 
at the time that I would work with all interested parties and Members 
to try to move these efforts forward, and I am happy to reiterate that 
commitment now.
  What I am asking is if the gentleman will withdraw the amendment, 
give me a chance, and I commit to try to get this report out, because I 
think it needs to get done, and I think, together, we can convince the 
Army Corps and maybe the administration that it needs to get done. So 
that would be my request.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chair, in deference to Mr. Simpson, I will work 
with him and others in the Great Lakes Legislative Caucus to see if we 
can't move forward on this issue.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time, and I withdraw my 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.

[[Page H6463]]

Mitchell) having assumed the chair, Mr. Perry, 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. 3219) 
making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 2018, and for other purposes, had come to no 
resolution thereon.

                          ____________________