Volume 157, No. 143 covering the 1st Session of the 112th Congress (2011 - 2012) was published by the Congressional Record.
The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“TRANSPARENCY IN REGULATORY ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS ON THE NATION ACT OF 2011” mentioning the Environmental Protection Agency was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H6426-H6447 on Sept. 23, 2011.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
TRANSPARENCY IN REGULATORY ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS ON THE NATION ACT OF
2011
The Committee resumed its sitting.
Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Dent
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 printed in House Report 112-213.
Mr. DENT. 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 9, after line 20, insert the following:
(I) ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry and Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants'', published at 75 Fed. Reg. 54970 (September 9, 2010).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 406, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. DENT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This amendment simply adds the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, NESHAP or Cement MACT, to the covered rules within H.R. 2401. Reasonable efforts to limit the emissions of hazardous pollutants by cement manufacturing facilities are most certainly appropriate, but EPA has failed to craft effective and efficient regulations.
These NESHAP standards will be very, very difficult and extremely costly for domestic cement manufacturers to meet, severely jeopardizing the ability of an essential American basic industry to remain competitive with foreign importers. Including NESHAP and H.R. 2401 will allow the loss of American jobs and the weakening of domestic manufacturers' global competitiveness to become key considerations during the completion of the rulemaking process.
We must understand the impacts of these rules on jobs and our manufacturing competitiveness. Here now are some simple, basic facts about the American cement industry, and I represent the largest cement-
producing district in America. I'm cochair of the Cement Caucus along with cosponsor Mike Ross of Arkansas. This industry employs about 13,000 Americans. Four thousand of those jobs have been lost since 2008. There are 97 cement plants in America producing today, and there's a presence in nearly every State as well, I might add. Cement is an absolutely essential basic industry in American manufacturing. It plays a major role in the development of our Nation's infrastructure.
I think we need to better understand some of this background, too, regarding these NESHAP rules.
NESHAP, of course, amends EPA's maximum achievable control technology, or MACT, and performance standards for cement kilns. And this is utilizing an unrealistic pollutant-by-pollutant approach for application of MACT. MACT requirements are designed to direct industries toward the pollution control technology used by the best performers in a certain industry sector. It cobbles together a range of different performance characteristics applicable to different pollutants without determining if it is feasible or even possible for any one kiln to comply with all of these standards.
The truth is there is not a single cement manufacturing plant in America that can comply with all of these standards simultaneously. The chemical composition, too, of key cement inputs, such as limestone, vary from region to region. Consequently, NESHAP will have disproportionate impacts on different manufacturing locations across the country simply based on the type of limestone being used in the process of manufacturing cement.
We should talk, too, about the impacts on the domestic cement industry: $2.2 billion worth of compliance costs, and that's an EPA estimate; $3.4 billion in compliance costs, and that's the industry estimate. So there's a lot of cost here. We're in the billions.
There are numerous plants. There are estimates that from 12 to 18 of these plants across the country may be idle or permanently shut down. And these are massive facilities with tremendous capital investment. And we believe that the national price for Portland cement may increase by 5.4 percent. Domestic production will fall by 11 percent. Thousands of high-quality jobs could or would be lost.
One major domestic cement producer has already publicly announced that, due to other regulatory uncertainties of this NESHAP and other pending regulations, it is halting construction of a new state-of-the-
art cement kiln, suspending over $350 million in new investment and the creation of over 1,500 construction jobs.
With respect to global emissions, what will this mean? The reduction of domestic production of cement will naturally lead to an increase in our Nation's reliance on foreign cement. And I can assure you those foreign producers are not going to be complying with the NESHAP rules. So this is going to shift overseas production and will likely increase global greenhouse emissions in two ways:
First, transporting cement to the U.S. from international markets will require tremendous amounts of fossil fuels, substantially increasing the amount of carbon emitted per unit of cement used; and
Second, foreign suppliers will be manufacturing in countries with little or no environmental protections.
So it's critically important that EPA produce realistic and achievable regulations. Including NESHAP in H.R. 2401 will help EPA take into account the economic impact of its flawed regulations, and a more thorough economic analysis will lead to a better final rule.
Finally, I wanted to say one thing. The Federal stimulus law is actually helping to finance the construction of a cement importation terminal in Staten Island, New York City, designed to displace many cement workers in my district and all across the northeastern United States, using Federal money to create a handful of jobs while displacing many in basic industry and manufacturing. That's got to stop.
Pass this amendment, and then pass the underlying bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman from Pennsylvania has expired.
Mr. RUSH. I claim time in opposition for purposes of debate.
The ACTING Chair. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. RUSH. Thank you.
Many organizations are on record opposing the TRAIN Act or opposing efforts to block rules to reduce pollution from the country's dirtiest power plants.
Numerous public health groups, including the American Lung Association, the American Public Health Association, the American Thoracic Society, Physicians for Social Responsibility, and Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America all sent a letter to Congress expressing their support for full implementation of the Clean Air Act and opposing
``all efforts to weaken, delay, or block progress toward the continuing implementation of this vital law.''
The American Public Health Association stated that it opposes the TRAIN Act because it is ``ill-conceived legislation that would prevent EPA from protecting the public's health from dangerous and deadly air pollution.''
The National Association of Clean Air Agencies opposes this bill as well. NACAA sent a letter expressing its concern that the TRAIN Act would ``create regulatory delays that could lead to thousands of premature deaths, remove important regulatory tools upon which States and localities depend, impose additional costs on government as well as small businesses, create regulatory uncertainty, cause job losses and defund an important and cost-effective air pollution control program.''
{time} 1020
Groups representing millions of individual Americans who believe in protecting our environment strongly oppose this bill and other efforts to weaken clean air protections. These groups include the League of Conservative Voters, the Sierra Club, National Resources Defense Council, Environment America, the National Audubon Society, the Environmental Defense Fund, and the Union of Concerned Scientists. They stated in a letter to Congress that ``sacrificing tens of thousands of American lives will not create more jobs. Poisoning the air our children and our families breathe will not stimulate the economy.''
Three hundred sportsmen's organizations representing our Nation's hunters, anglers, and the businesses that depend on our wildlife and natural resources support the EPA's effort to cut mercury pollution, and I quote them with these words. They said: ``Strongly oppose any effort to weaken the Clean Air Act.''
The Evangelical Environment Network has been running radio ads expressing their opposition to efforts to block the Mercury and Air Toxics rule. Mercury can damage the developing brain of fetuses and children, causing learning disabilities and neurological problems. The president of this group stated: ``We believe that mercury offers a significant potential for hindering our children from developing a pure and wonderful life.''
The Obama administration strongly opposes the TRAIN Act. The administration plans to veto this legislation if it ever reaches the President's desk, as the bill would undermine decades of progress in cleaning up the Nation's air quality by--and this is a quote from the Obama administration--``blocking EPA's ability to move forward with two long-overdue Clean Air Act rules.''
Americans don't support weakening the Clean Air Act or blocking efforts to reduce dangerous air pollution from power plants. The widespread opposition to the TRAIN Act makes that perfectly clear.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this horrendous bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. RUSH. 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. 7 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 printed in House Report 112-213.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 10, after line 12, insert the following new subsection
(and redesignate accordingly):
(f) Exclusion From Review.--Notwithstanding subsection (e), the Committee may not include in the analyses conducted under section 3 consideration of any rule or guideline promulgated in compliance with Executive Order 12866 (58 Fed. Reg. 51735, relating to regulatory planning and review) or the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
Beginning on page 11, line 17, strike section 5 (and redesignate accordingly).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 406, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2401 is a toxic bill that attempts to dismantle any government regulation to protect our Nation's public health and environment.
To set the stage for my brief remarks, let me cite to the American public Executive Order 12866, which says: ``Each agency shall assess both the costs and the benefits of the intended regulation, and recognizing that some costs and benefits are difficult to quantify, propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its cause.''
Now, we've been operating under that particular provision for a substantial period of time. And quite frankly, Congress' decisions with reference to the Clean Air Act, signed by President Richard Nixon in 1970, came about as a result of continuing arguments from industry that cleaning up air pollution was too expensive or not feasible.
This bill forbids the Environmental Protection Agency from finalizing both the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule and, importantly, the Cross-State Air Pollution rule requiring coal-fired power plants without modern pollution controls to install controls, to reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants, fine particulates, and the pollutants that cause smog and acid rain.
In the Rules Committee, I spoke about being in Lavigny in Poland and watching the pollution that was destroying the Black Forest in another country, in Germany. We've had that take place in our States, where one State is offering emissions that come down on another State's population, and therefore the Cross-State Air Pollution rule said that coal-fired plants should install modern pollution controls. And guess what? Sixty percent of them, including one of the largest producers of electricity in this country--Exelon in Illinois--do favor these same rules that are being sought to be delayed. And they favor them for the reason that, among other things, it has produced jobs and it has cured the problems that have been pointed out by the American Lung Association and countless other organizations that favor the Clean Air Act and are opposed to delaying further two particularly important measures that would allow for pollution to continue to be cleaned up.
Port Everglades in Florida, right outside my constituency, for all of the years that I have lived there--and that nears 50--this coal-powered plant has been producing emissions. Over the course of time, they have reduced those emissions. And Florida Power & Light recently indicated that they're going to do everything that they can to meet the emissions standards rather than sit up and try and oppose them because they recognize, one, that they do have all of the juice--if you can call electricity that.
And in the final analysis, those of us that benefit from it are going to wind up paying more. But to pay more to make sure that children don't have asthma and to make sure that people don't have lung pollution and to make sure that lakes don't go dead from mercury or that fish don't have in them more mercury than they rightly should for food consumption, then I'm willing to pay more; and I believe most Americans are as well in order that we will have clean air.
I ask for support of my amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WHITFIELD. I have great admiration for the gentleman from Florida, who is always eloquent in his remarks.
{time} 1030
He started off his support of his amendment by saying that we are trying to dismantle any regulation. I would like to remind everyone, once again, that this bill applies to 14 EPA regulations and we do not delay in any way 12 of them. And on the other two, we delay one of them, both of them, 6 months after the final report is due.
Now, he had mentioned that Exelon supported the new EPA regulations. Exelon is a company that we all admire and respect, but it's a nuclear energy company, so there's nothing in these regulations that has any impact on them, as far as I know. But all of these regulations are trying to drive the coal industry out of business, that still provides 50 percent of all the electricity in America.
Now, in the TRAIN Act, we simply ask this independent government agency, composed of Obama administration appointees, to examine the cumulative impact of all of these rules, because EPA has never been quite this aggressive. And I might add that the two rules that we asked to delay for further analysis, an independent research group said that the annualized cost would be almost $18 billion that utilities would have to spend to buy equipment that may not be able to even then achieve the standards because the technology is not available.
The issue is not about mercury. The utilities do a great job of cleaning up mercury. EPA itself said that its Utility MACT would only benefit--the benefit of the Utility MACT would be only .004 percent attributable to mercury because 99 percent of mercury in America comes from nature and from outside other countries that the trade winds bring in to our country. So utilities don't object to the mercury part of this.
But they're now adding hydrogen fluoride and hydrogen chloride, of which there is no technology available to achieve the standard that EPA is setting.
So because of the cost, because of the unique vulnerability of our economy today, 12 of these regulations we don't delay at all. We just say, let's study the cumulative impact, which the President asked for in his Executive order that he issued recently. He said we need to look at the cumulative impact. That's what we're trying to do.
This amendment would basically say, you don't look at the cumulative impact, you just take the existing studies that have been made. I would also say that EPA didn't even do any study on the greenhouse gas, which we're only trying to analyze the full cost of that.
For those reasons, I would respectfully oppose the gentleman's amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida will be postponed.
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed in House Report 112-213.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. 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 10, after line 24, insert the following:
(g) Additional Analyses.--The Committee shall conduct or commission studies to identify pollution control policies that should be adopted and implemented by the United States to provide domestic job growth and ensure that the Nation is internationally competitive in the $5 trillion global energy industry for clean energy technology development and manufacturing.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 406, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, Deutsche Bank, the biggest bank in Europe, recently issued a report on global clean energy investment opportunities in which it stated, ``Countries with more TLC, transparency, longevity, and certainty, in their climate policy frameworks will attract more investment and build new clean industries, technologies, and jobs faster than their policy-lagging counterparts.''
The TRAIN Act is one more step in the wrong direction by the same Republican House which has held over 110 anti-environmental votes. This unprecedented assault on the environment has devastating consequences for our economy. As the Deutsche Bank report said, ``Germany and China have emerged as global leaders in low carbon technologies and investment. The net effect is that while Congress stumbles, the U.S. stands to fall behind.''
This investor report, from Europe's largest bank, identified several policy failures that are impeding job growth here at home. First, Congress has not established a carbon reduction target, or required polluters to pay for the cost of greenhouse gas pollution. Congress does not have a national renewable standard or even an energy efficient standard. The Deutsche Bank report notes that the lack of these regulations and incentives has actually forced investors to make investments elsewhere, including in China and other countries, rather than here at home in America. As a result, we have lost solar and other advanced technology market share to our competitors.
My simple amendment to the TRAIN Act establishes a simple process to identify ``policies that should be adopted and implemented by the United States to provide domestic job growth, and to ensure that our Nation is internationally competitive in the $5 trillion global energy industry for clean energy technology, development, and manufacturing.'' Business leaders have urged Congress to adopt both a regulatory framework and a system of incentives to spur clean energy job creation. In addition to the regulation the Deutsche Bank identified as supporting investment, American entrepreneurs have called on Congress to expand public financing for clean energy.
This month members of the American Energy Innovation Council visited Capitol Hill to express their strong support for just that concept. This group included venture capitalist John Doerr, former Lockheed Martin CEO Norm Augustine, and Bill Gates of Microsoft. The American Energy Innovation Council recently issued a report which stated, ``As business leaders, we feel that America's current energy system is deficient in ways that cause serious harm to our economy, our national security, and our environment. To correct these deficiencies, we must make a serious commitment to modernizing our energy system with cleaner and more efficient technologies.''
This Republican House is an anchor that's dragging down the American economy. It's continued obsession with austerity and opposition to any economic recovery programs, including clean energy, mean that America falls behind while China surges ahead. We cannot afford to let China and Germany dominate industries such as clean technology.
My simple amendment will establish a process to start restoring American leadership in this important sector for economic growth. Rather than repealing commonsense public health standards, we ought to be focused on measures like my amendment, which support high-tech job growth.
I ask my colleagues to vote for this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WHITFIELD. While I have great regard for the gentleman from Virginia, I must rise to oppose this amendment.
In his 2008 convention speech, Barack Obama promised to create 5 million green energy jobs. An article in The New York Times headlines,
``Where the Jobs Aren't,'' talks about all the government money that's being spent to subsidize green energy today. They gave an example of one government program that provided $300 million to a company. They created 150 jobs at what turned out to be a cost of $2 million for every job.
{time} 1040
The reason that solar and wind are not taking off is they are too expensive and too inefficient. Having said that, I recognize that they have a part in our economy and that they have a part in producing electricity, but they can never be the base load. That cannot be attained. We cannot provide enough electricity without coal, nuclear, and natural gas.
Now, this amendment gives special attention to the green energy field. I would remind everyone, once again, that renewable energy subsidies increased over the last 3 years by 186 percent: from $5 billion to $14 billion. Renewables saw, by far, the largest increase in Federal benefits. Wind alone received a tenfold increase in subsidies: from $476 million to almost $5 billion. Solar increased by a factor of 6: from $179 million to $1.2 billion.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Will the gentleman yield for a question?
Mr. WHITFIELD. Let me just finish this one sentence.
So these strategies can't work without government support. I don't object to government supporting them, but they do not need to get even more special privileges from this amendment.
I would be happy to yield to the gentleman.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I would inquire as to what would be the comparable number for oil and gas and coal in the United States. You talk about the growth trend; but in absolute numbers, is it not true that actually the fossil fuels industry gets $70 billion a year?
Mr. WHITFIELD. The direct expenditure for coal was $42 million last year, and for wind it was $3.556 billion.
I will tell you that oil and gas and coal are willing to give up all of their subsidies if green energy wants to give up their subsidies, because they're getting a lot more than anyone else.
At this point, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. I would inquire of the Chair how much time is left on this side.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. To conclude on this matter, I have enormous respect for my colleague on the other side; but to oppose a simple study to require that we look at the benefits of clean energy technology, I find that very troubling. That resistance, sadly, is going to impede American growth and competitiveness and is actually going to cost us jobs.
There is no question that in the coal industry, in particular, we've kind of reached a plateau. In fact, in Kentucky, we've lost a lot of jobs relative to, say, 30 years ago; whereas, as my colleague from Massachusetts pointed out last night, in wind energy, just in the last 4 years, we're up to 80,000 jobs. It's a fast-growing, lucrative part of our economy. It's clean, and it actually concretely helps create jobs.
That's a worthwhile thing to study if not to invest in, and I regret the fact that the manager on the other side finds even a study something to be resisted.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WHITFIELD. Once again, I oppose the amendment.
Green energy is getting every benefit possible from this administration--money, studies, and in every other way. It will never be able to meet the base load of our electricity needs. Therefore, unless we can continue to have low-cost electricity, we're not going to compete in the global marketplace, and we're going to continue to lose jobs. The EPA is making direct attacks against an industry. For that reason, I respectfully oppose the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia will be postponed.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9 printed in House Report 112-213.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. 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 11, line 10, strike ``90'' and insert ``120''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 406, 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 of Texas. I rise today to support my amendment. I call my amendment ``Can We All Get Along?'' It is an amendment simply to ask that all of those who are impacted by this proposed legislation have an expanded time to be able to present their views.
It is a ``can we all get along?''-type amendment because it is important to note again that those of us who come from different States, whether it's Illinois or Texas, recognize that the Environmental Protection Agency and the Clean Air Act were formulated under a bipartisan Congress and were signed, as my colleague reminded us, by President Richard Nixon. Republicans and Democrats voted for the Clean Air Act and for the Environmental Protection Agency's jurisdiction.
It's important to note that there is not only a value in what the EPA does but that there are organizations, such as the American Lung Association, the American Thoracic Society, the Physicians for Social Responsibility, the American Public Health Association, and the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, which need their input and are concerned about this legislation.
So my concern as we move forward on the transparency and regulatory analysis of impact is how much time has been given for the public comment. My State, in fact, has been impacted for the lack thereof of public comment. I believe that there are civilians who are not businesses who should be protected and given the opportunity to have input.
For example, it's important to note that the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule, which I don't think my colleagues can in any way dissuade me from believing, has been the basis of preventing 17,000 premature deaths, 11,000 heart attacks, 120,000 cases of aggravated asthma, 12,000 hospital and emergency room visits, 11,000 cases of bronchitis, and 850,000 missed days.
The idea of putting a superlayer over the already existing regulatory scheme, to me, sounds like we are adhering to the supercommittee concept, which many of us, by way of absolute necessity, voted on during the debt ceiling debate; but we realize that the responsibility of the purse strings is in the United States House of Representatives. Well, the law has given authority to the EPA and to the Clean Air Act as its authorizing aspect to be able to control and balance.
I believe we should create jobs; but the question becomes whether or not the TRAIN Act, in the format of adding another layer of review, actually does that--or does it create another level of bureaucracy that we neither want nor need? At a time when these regulations will both decrease health costs and can create thousands of jobs, why would my colleagues propose a bill that would only slow job growth?
It has been 260 days. I think we should, as I started out, get along, try to create jobs, recognize the value of the EPA, find a way to be able to resolve the present conflict on the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule but not eliminate the authority and the oversight of the Environmental Protection Agency.
What I would say to my colleagues is that the EPA has protected all of our constituents. Therefore, I think it's important to pass this amendment because it's about constituents. It's about constituents no matter what side of the aisle they're on. This is an amendment that moves the public comment from 90 days to 120 days. There may have been some who wanted to comment who cannot comment because they did not have the amount of time.
So I would ask my colleagues to support this ``can we all get along?'' amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WHITFIELD. I claim time in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WHITFIELD. First, I would like to say to the gentlelady from Texas, who does such a great job on all of these issues, that we do not intend in any way to remove any of the authority of the EPA to regulate the Cross-State Transport Rules. As a matter of fact, of the 14 rules that we're examining that EPA has issued, 12 of them we do not delay in any way. On the Air Transport Rule, we simply go back to the original Air Transport Rule of which EPA talked about all of the marvelous benefits. The EPA defended it in court. The environmental groups supported it: 67 and 53 percent reductions in SO2 and NOX emissions. That will remain in effect.
As far as the gentlelady's amendment, we would be happy to accept it, because I think it's a good amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1050
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Let me indicate to the gentleman first of all that I thank him for accepting the amendment, and I conclude my remarks by saying that my asking for a roll call vote is not in any way a reflection of my lack of acceptance, but I am just so gratified for this timeframe that I hope that the gentleman will encourage those to support the amendment.
Therefore, let me say to the gentleman--I finish on this note--there is some thought that we are putting in another regulatory scheme, but I think the important point from my perspective is that there was value when Richard Nixon signed the bill on how do we find a way to make this work so that we save lives and we create jobs.
I think my amendment provides the opportunity for that kind of input, and I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment #4 to H.R. 2401,
``The Transparency in Regulatory Analysis of Impacts on the Nation Act,'' which extends the public comment period from 90 days to 120 days.
The Transparency in Regulatory Analysis of Impacts on the Nation
(TRAIN) Act establishes a committee to conduct studies and review the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations based upon the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard Rule (MATS) and the Cross State Air Pollution (CSAP) Rule promulgated. This committee is composed of Administration officials from different federal agencies and under H.R. 2401 will analyze the effect of the regulations on the economy, U.S. competitiveness in the global market, employment, and energy production and cost. In effect this is creating more regulations and more bureaucracy at time when Republicans are calling for all of us to tighten our belts. So now before us is a Super Committee for the Budget and again we are going to have a Super Committee for Clean Air. We already have an agency charged with protecting our air. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been up to the task for 40 years. According to the EPA, the pollution reductions required by the rule they have proposed will yield health benefits of $120 to $280 billion per year, which is 150 to 350 times the cost. I have always been a stalwart for a firm balance between the needs of the energy industry and our environment. But then there is just plain common sense. The TRAIN Act goes overboard. It is a extreme response that does not add value to ensuring Clean Air.
The argument proposed by some of my colleagues has been that this will cost jobs. Implementing regulations will create jobs. Old power plants and other utilities will have to hire workers in order to fulfill the requirements of the regulation. The EPA has determined that this will not be overly burdensome to the industry. We as a body must ensure that the regulations issued by the EPA will not destroy any industry but at the same token TRAIN is too extreme. It creates the very bureaucracy that we neither need nor want. At a time when these regulations will both decrease health costs and can create thousands of jobs, why would my colleagues propose a bill that will only slow job growth. It has been 260 days and the Republicans, who have been in the majority, have not presented a clear and consistent job growth package. Instead time and time again they have put forth measures to cut Medicare and social security at a time when so many of our constituents are dependent upon those resources to cover health costs and living expenses.
The TRAIN Act, which I could easily consider a bill like a steam train and it steams right through the power of the EPA to regulate clean air, requires that the committee publicly publish its initial findings and then provide the public with 90 days to comment. If this flawed bill is going to pass at least my amendment is an attempt to take into account the number of interested parties who may wish to give their input and extends the public comment period from 90 days to 120 days. I have offered this amendment to ensure that everyone who wishes to comment will have ample opportunity to do so.
My home state of Texas was not initially included in the Cross State Air Pollution Rule. When my state was added, there was no time provided for public input, a courtesy that was extended to the other 6 states included in the Cross State Air Pollution Rule. Stakeholders throughout Texas were afforded no opportunity to discuss the impact of including Texas at the last minute. Had there been opportunity for public comment, the EPA and stakeholders would have been able to work together towards a consensus.
The proposed regulations have different impacts on different stakeholders, and it is extremely important that everyone's point of view is considered. An open dialogue that encourages frank and productive communication can foster compromise.
As the Representative for Houston, the country's energy capital, I am committed to creating an environment in which the energy industry and regulating agencies can work together.
For more than 40 years the EPA has been charged with protecting our environment. There has been a consistent theme of chipping away at the ability of the EPA to protect our air. We have to consider the long term costs to public health if we fail to establish reasonable measures for clean air.
Outdoor air pollution is caused by small particles and ground level ozone that comes from car exhaust, smoke, road dust and factory emissions. Outdoor air quality is also affected by pollen from plants, crops and weeds. Particle pollution can be high any time of year and are higher near busy roads and where people burn wood.
When we inhale outdoor pollutants and pollen this can aggravate our lungs, and can lead us to developing the following conditions; chest pain, coughing, digestive problems, dizziness, fever, lethargy, sneezing, shortness of breath, throat irritation and watery eyes. Outdoor air pollution and pollen may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases, such as asthma. There are serious costs to our long term health. The EPA has promulgated rules and the public should be allowed to weigh in to determine if these rules are effective.
The purpose of having so many checks and balances within the EPA is to ensure that the needs of industries and the needs of our communities are addressed. Providing a time for individuals to support or oppose any regulations is a meaningful first step. This bill is a step in the wrong direction.
The EPA has spent years reviewing these standards before attempting to issue regulations. In terms of the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard (MATS) Rule the new standard will significantly reduce mercury and toxic air pollution from power plants and electric utilities. The EPA estimates that for every year this rule is not implemented, mercury and toxic air pollution will have a serious impact on public health. Think for a moment about the lives that can be saved. We are talking about thousands of health complications and deaths. What more do we need to know. According to the EPA this rule would prevent the following: 17,000 premature deaths; 11,000 heart attacks; 120,000 cases of aggravated asthma; 12,000 hospital and emergency room visits; 11,000 cases of bronchitis; and 850,000 missed work days.
The second rule that is targeted by this bill is the Cross State Air Pollution (CSAP) Rule. As a Representative from the State of Texas, I have a few reservations about the rules implementation in my home state; however, the rule can be more fairly implemented.
This rule will significantly cut sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions released into the atmosphere. The regulation impacts 27 states where power plant emissions cause poor air quality that affects neighboring states. It is important to know that the EPA designed this rule again by keeping the lives of our families, our children, our communities and the environment in mind. According to the EPA this rule when implemented will prevent up to 34,000 premature deaths, 15,000 heart attacks, and 400,000 cases of aggravated asthmas.
Sometimes we can get caught up in the numbers and forget the people behind each. If these rules are allowed to be implemented there are 51,000 more people who will be able to spend another day, week, month or year with their families. These are our friends and family members who with the implantation of these rules can enjoy another cup of coffee.
The prolonged or indefinite delay of these life saving regulations threaten the very air that Americans, our constituents, breathe. I cannot speak for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, but I certainly do not want to repeal regulations that protect the 18th Congressional District's access to clean air.
The analysis required by this legislation is focused solely on the impact of EPA regulations on economic competitiveness, fuel prices, and employment without taking into consideration the public health benefits of the regulations. The Mercury and Air Toxics Standard Rule will significantly reduce mercury and toxic air pollution from power plants and electric utilities.
The Cross State Air Pollution Rule will significantly cut sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions released into the atmosphere. The regulation impacts 27 states where power plant emissions cause poor air quality that affects neighboring states.
My amendment will not affect the intent of the bill; it merely ensures that should this ill conceived measure pass that there is plenty of time given for our constituents who live in states affected by mercury and toxic pollution and cross state air pollution to weigh in on the public health aspects of these regulations.
I have offered this amendment not only to benefit those who live in states that would be affected by these regulations, but also to ensure that the industry being regulated has ample time to provide their input. Throughout my tenure in Congress, I have worked tirelessly to foster better relationship between the energy industry and regulating agencies. With an open dialogue and productive communication, we can forge compromise that will protect the environment without harming economic growth, and the intent behind this amendment is to do just that.
As the Representative of the 18th Congressional District of Houston, Texas, I can attest to the importance of a healthy energy industry. My district is the energy hub of Texas and is recognized worldwide for its energy industry, particularly for oil and natural gas, as well as biomedical research and aeronautics. Renewable energy sources--wind and solar--are also growing economic bases in Houston.
I understand the economic impacts of regulation, but we must also act responsibly. We cannot ignore the public health risks associated with breathing polluted air, nor can we pretend that these emissions do not exacerbate global warming. Alternatively, we certainly do not want to hinder job creation and economic growth.
Lest we forget that since 1999, Houston has exchanged titles with Los Angeles for the poorest air quality in the Nation. The poor air quality is attributed to the amount of aerosols, particles of carbon and sulfates in the air. The carcinogens found in the air have been known to cause cancer, particularly in children. The EPA is the very agency charged with issuing regulations that would address this serious problem. This bill may very well jeopardize the air that we breathe, the water that we drink, our public lands, and our public health by deep funding cuts in priority initiatives.
The least that can be done is to extend the opportunity for the committee formed by this bill to hear the concerns of the public. I am sure this will certainly go a long way to encourage robust discussion on health, job creation and economic improvements without putting the environment or the American people at risk.
I encourage my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment in order to strike a balance between the EPA and the energy industry, forge compromise that will protect the environment without harming economic growth by extending the public comment period from 90 to 120 days. My amendment does not change the intent of the bill, it creates the opportunity for communication and consensus.
September 21, 2011.
Dear Representative: On behalf of the undersigned public health and medical organizations, we write to state our strong opposition to any efforts under consideration by the U.S. House of Representatives that hinder the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) ability to protect health through the implementation the Clean Air Act.
Majority Leader Eric Cantor's August 29, 2011 memo to House Republicans specifically called for passage of bills including H.R. 2401, which would indefinitely delay the EPA's proposal to reduce mercury and other toxics from power plants and would block implementation of the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, a finalized rule that is expected to prevent the premature deaths of thousands of Americans each year and to make it easier for states downwind of pollution sources to achieve healthful air for their residents. The memo also signals plans with H.R. 2250 and H.R. 2861, which would delay EPA efforts to reduce mercury and other toxics from industrial facilities and cement plants. Further, it signals plans to thwart EPA's ability to propose a health standard for particulate matter, calling for passage of HR 1633, a bill that would block the completion of the review of the health effects associated with deadly soot or particulate matter and prevent EPA from even proposing a standard and receiving public comment on that standard.
We urge you to oppose this plan and ask that you, instead, support protecting public health. This Rep. Cantor-led effort would impact EPA's ability to implement the Clean Air Act: a law that protects public health and reduces health care costs for all by preventing thousands of adverse health outcomes, including: cancer, asthma attacks, strokes, emergency department visits, hospitalizations and premature deaths. A rigorous, peer reviewed analysis, The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act from 1990 to 2020, conducted by EPA, found that the air quality improvements under the Clean Air Act will save $2 trillion by 2020 and prevent at least 230,000 deaths annually.
Additionally, the public supports EPA's efforts to implement and update the Clean Air Act. A recent bipartisan survey, which was conducted for the American Lung Association by the Republican firm Moore Information and Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research indicate that those pushing riders or otherwise interfering with EPA are out of touch with voters. The survey shows that over seventy percent of voters do not want Congress to stop the EPA from setting stricter pollution limits and sixty-six percent of voters would prefer that EPA set pollution standards, not Congress.
We believe that in an ironic twist, the Majority Leader's memo lays out an agenda that will expose the public to levels of air pollution that can make them sick or kill them. This agenda will certainly drive up health costs for all as people continued to be exposed to life-threatening air pollution. We ask you to support full implementation of the Clean Air Act and oppose all efforts to weaken, delay or block progress toward the continued implementation of this vital law.
Sincerely,American Lung Association.American Thoracic Society.Physicians for Social Responsibility.American Public Health Association.
Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America.
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 ayes appeared to have it.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. 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.
amendment no. 10 offered by mr. whitfield
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10 printed in House Report 112-213.
Mr. WHITFIELD. I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Strike section 5 and insert the following: SEC. 5. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO CERTAIN RULES.
(a) Cross-State Air Pollution Rule/Transport Rule.--
(1) Earlier rules.--The rule entitled ``Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals'', published at 76 Fed. Reg. 48208 (August 8, 2011), and any successor or substantially similar rule, shall be of no force or effect, and shall be treated as though such rule had never taken effect.
(2) Continued applicability of clean air interstate rule.--In place of any rule described in paragraph (1), the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (in this section referred to as the ``Administrator'') shall continue to implement the Clean Air Interstate Rule.
(3) Additional rulemakings.--
(A) Issuance of new rules.--The Administrator--
(i) shall not issue any proposed or final rule under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) or section 126 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), 7426) relating to national ambient air quality standards for ozone or particulate matter (including any modification of the Clean Air Interstate Rule) before the date that is 3 years after the date on which the Committee submits the final report under section 4(c); and
(ii) in issuing any rule described in clause (i), shall base the rule on actual monitored (and not modeled) data and shall, notwithstanding section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), allow the trading of emissions allowances among entities covered by the rule irrespective of the States in which such entities are located.
(B) Implementation schedule.--In promulgating any final rule described in subparagraph (A)(i), the Administrator shall establish a date for State implementation of the standards established by such final rule that is not earlier than 3 years after the date of publication of such final rule.
(4) Definition of clean air interstate rule.--For purposes of this section, the term ``Clean Air Interstate Rule'' means the Clean Air Interstate Rule and the rule establishing Federal Implementation Plans for the Clean Air Interstate Rule as promulgated and modified by the Administrator (70 Fed. Reg. 25162 (May 12, 2005), 71 Fed. Reg. 25288 (April 28, 2006), 72 Fed Reg. 55657 (Oct. 1, 2007), 72 Fed. Reg. 59190
(Oct. 19, 2007), 72 Fed. Reg. 62338 (Nov. 2, 2007), 74 Fed. Reg. 56721 (Nov. 3, 2009)).
(b) Steam Generating Unit Rules.--
(1) Earlier rules.--The proposed rule entitled ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants From Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units and Standards of Performance for Fossil-Fuel-Fired Electric Utility, Industrial-Commercial- Institutional, and Small Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating Units'' published at 76 Fed. Reg. 24976 (May 3, 2011), and any final rule that is based on such proposed rule and is issued prior to the date of the enactment of this Act, shall be of no force and effect, and shall be treated as though such proposed or final rule had never been issued. In conducting analyses under section 3(a), the Committee shall analyze the rule described in section 3(e)(1)(E) (including any successor or substantially similar rule) as if the preceding sentence did not apply to such rule.
(2) Promulgation of final rules.--In place of the rules described in paragraph (1), the Administrator shall--
(A) issue regulations establishing national emission standards for coal-and oil-fired electric utility steam generating units under section 112 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7412) with respect to each hazardous air pollutant for which the Administrator finds such regulations are appropriate and necessary pursuant to subsection (n)(1)(A) of such section;
(B) issue regulations establishing standards of performance for fossil-fuel-fired electric utility, industrial-commercial-institutional, and small industrial-commercial-institutional steam generating units under section 111 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 111); and
(C) issue the final regulations required by subparagraphs
(A) and (B)--
(i) after issuing proposed regulations under such subparagraphs;
(ii) after consideration of the final report submitted under section 4(c); and
(iii) not earlier than the date that is 12 months after the date on which the Committee submits such report to the Congress, or such later date as may be determined by the Administrator.
(3) Compliance provisions.--
(A) Establishment of compliance dates.--In promulgating the regulations under paragraph (2), the Administrator--
(i) shall establish a date for compliance with the standards and requirements under such regulations that is not earlier than 5 years after the effective date of the regulations; and
(ii) in establishing a date for such compliance, shall take into consideration--
(I) the costs of achieving emissions reductions;
(II) any non-air quality health and environmental impact and energy requirements of the standards and requirements;
(III) the feasibility of implementing the standards and requirements, including the time needed to--
(aa) obtain necessary permit approvals; and
(bb) procure, install, and test control equipment;
(IV) the availability of equipment, suppliers, and labor, given the requirements of the regulations and other proposed or finalized regulations; and
(V) potential net employment impacts.
(B) New sources.--With respect to the regulations promulgated pursuant to paragraph (2)--
(i) the date on which the Administrator proposes a regulation pursuant to paragraph (2)(A) establishing an emission standard under section 112 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7412) shall be treated as the date on which the Administrator first proposes such a regulation for purposes of applying the definition of a new source under section 112(a)(4) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 7412(a)(4));
(ii) the date on which the Administrator proposes a regulation pursuant to paragraph (2)(B) establishing a standard of performance under section 111 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7411) shall be treated as the date on which the Administrator proposes such a regulation for purposes of applying the definition of a new source under section 111(a)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 7411(a)(2));
(iii) for purposes of any emission standard or limitation applicable to electric utility steam generating units, the term ``new source'' means a stationary source for which a preconstruction permit or other preconstruction approval required under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) has been issued after the effective date of such emissions standard or limitation; and
(iv) for purposes of clause (iii), the date of issuance of a preconstruction permit or other preconstruction approval is deemed to be the date on which such permit or approval is issued to the applicant irrespective of any administrative or judicial review occurring after such date.
(C) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to restrict or otherwise affect the provisions of paragraphs (3)(B) and (4) of section 112(i) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7412(i)).
(4) Other provisions.--
(A) Establishment of standards achievable in practice.--The regulations promulgated pursuant to paragraph (2)(A) of this section shall apply section 112(d)(3) of the Clean Air Act
(42 U.S.C. 7412(d)(3)) in accordance with the following:
(i) New sources.--With respect to new sources:
(I) The Administrator shall identify the best controlled similar source for each source category or subcategory.
(II) The best controlled similar source for a category or subcategory shall be the single source that is determined by the Administrator to be the best controlled, in the aggregate, for all of the hazardous air pollutants for which the Administrator intends to issue standards for such source category or subcategory, under actual operating conditions, taking into account the variability in actual source performance, source design, fuels, controls, ability to measure pollutant emissions, and operating conditions.
(ii) Existing sources.--With respect to existing sources:
(I) The Administrator shall identify one group of sources that constitutes the best performing 12 percent of existing sources for each source category or subcategory.
(II) The group constituting the best performing 12 percent of existing sources for a category or subcategory shall be the single group that is determined by the Administrator to be the best performing, in the aggregate, for all of the hazardous air pollutants for which the Administrator intends to issue standards for such source category or subcategory, under actual operating conditions, taking into account the variability in actual source performance, source design, fuels, controls, ability to measure pollutant emissions, and operating conditions.
(B) Regulatory alternatives.--For the regulations promulgated pursuant to paragraph (2) of this section, from among the range of regulatory alternatives authorized under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), including work practice standards under section 112(h) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 7412(h)), the Administrator shall impose the least burdensome, consistent with the purposes of such Act and Executive Order 13563 published at 76 Fed. Reg. 3821 (January 21, 2011).
Strike subparagraph (A) of section 3(e)(1) and insert the following:
(A) The Clean Air Interstate Rule (as defined in section 5(a)(4)).
Strike subparagraph (B) of section 3(e)(1) and insert the following:
(E) ``National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone'', published at 73 Fed. Reg. 16436 (March 27, 2008).
On page 13, line 17, in the matter before paragraph (1) in section 6(a), strike ``for fiscal year 2012''.
On page 13, line 18, in section 6(a)(1), insert ``for fiscal year 2012,'' before ``$3,000,000''.
Strike paragraph (2) in section 6(a) and insert the following:
(2) to the Environmental Protection Agency--
(A) for fiscal year 2012, $1,000,000; and
(B) for fiscal year 2013, $500,000.
Strike subsection (b) in section 6 and insert the following:
(b) Offset.--Effective October 1, 2011, section 797(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, as amended by section 2(e) of the Diesel Reduction Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-364), is amended--
(1) by striking ``2012'' and inserting ``2014'';
(2) by inserting ``$45,500,000 for fiscal year 2012,
$49,500,000 for fiscal year 2013, and'' after ``to carry out this subtitle''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 406, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky.
Mr. WHITFIELD. Thank you.
It's already been stated today that the TRAIN Act examines 14 EPA regulations. On 12 of them, we do not delay in any way, but we do ask for a study of the cumulative impact on jobs, on American competitiveness, on the price of electricity and the reliability of electricity.
We do that because we are in a very fragile time in our economy. We have high unemployment, we've been unable to get out of it; and in order to do it, we have to have some certainty on these regulations. Business people tell us they are not investing right now because of uncertainty about health care, uncertainty about the new financial regulations and uncertainty about the plethora of EPA regulations coming down the road.
So although we don't touch 12 regulations, the two that we are concerned about--and the reason we're concerned about them--is that they are the most expensive ever issued by EPA. Independent analysts have indicated that there will be a net, after including job gains, a net loss of almost 1.4 million jobs.
My amendment would do this: it would provide that the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule has no legal force or effect, and it does direct EPA to continue to apply the Clean Air Interstate Rule, which is in effect today.
As I had indicated earlier, EPA, when they adopted CAIR, they talked about the billions of dollars in health benefits, 17,000 premature deaths that they would prevent, 22,000 nonfatal heart attacks that they would prevent; and I could go on and on and on. And EPA defended the CAIR Act in court. The environmental groups supported the CAIR Act.
Our air transport rules and regulations are still going to be in effect; and we simply say that for at least 3 years, EPA cannot change the CAIR Act, but during that time do a more detailed analysis of the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule because of the enormous cost, the enormous impact on jobs and so forth.
The amendment also requires that the proposed Utility Maximum Achievable Control Technology rule has no legal force in effect and that any subsequent Utility MACT rule be issued no sooner than 1 year after the study called for in the TRAIN Act. So we simply ask the EPA to repropose the utility rule.
Now, people are saying, oh my gosh, if we don't have this utility rule in effect, mercury is going to do all of these horrible things.
I would remind everyone once again EPA says that 99 percent of the mercury in America comes from nature and from trade winds coming in from other countries. And EPA itself said Utility MACT benefits by mercury reductions of that whole bill would be .004 percent.
I would also say that utility companies have no problem with mercury. They're doing a good job on that, and they can do even better. But the two gases that they are asking them to regulate have never been regulated before--I had the name of them awhile ago and I can't remember them--but the technology is not available to meet the requirements of the Utility MACT. So you are asking these companies to spend this money, provide this uncertainty, and so that's what my amendment does. It basically delays the implementation of the Utility MACT, asks for a reproposal, and it also maintains the existing CAIR air transport rule.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WAXMAN. I rise in strong opposition to this Whitfield amendment, Mr. Chairman.
The amendment is objectionable from the standpoint of public health and the legislative process. Throughout the debate on this bill, Mr. Whitfield has claimed that his bill just requires a study and delays two rules for further analysis.
Well, the indefinite delay of these two rules is terrible for public health, but this amendment would be a disaster because this amendment nullifies these two critical EPA rules to cut air pollution from old, dirty power plants by requiring them to install modern pollution technology.
First, the EPA amendment abolishes EPA mercury air toxics proposal by requiring EPA to start scratch on a rule that's long overdue. There are two rules at stake. The EPA mercury air toxic rule, which was opposed by EPA, would prevent 17,000 deaths, 11,000 heart attacks, 120,000 cases of aggravated asthma, and 850,000 lost workdays each year. Now, that doesn't even include the benefits that are harder to put a dollar figure on such as reducing toxic air pollution that can lead to birth defects and developmental delays.
The EPA rule would also prevent 91 percent of the mercury in burned coal from being emitted into the air. Mercury is dangerous in tiny amounts. It's a powerful neurotoxin that can damage the developing brain, leading to learning disabilities and developmental delays in children.
We heard about the delay in letting this rule go forward that was in the bill, but this amendment negates these benefits and ensures that power plants will not have to reduce their emissions of toxic air pollution, including mercury, for at least 7 years.
The amendment also tosses aside the way EPA has long been setting these emission limits for toxic air pollution for two decades, and it replaces it within an entirely new approach for power plants that is completely unworkable. It guarantees years of litigation and, according to the EPA administrator, may well prevent EPA from ever requiring power plants to clean up their mercury pollution.
So this isn't just a delay, as we were told, for further study. It may well lead to no rule ever being put in place to stop these mercury emissions that cause such terrible public health disasters. The Whitfield amendment also nullifies the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, which is designed to reduce emissions from power plants that cause ozone and particulate matter violations in downwind States.
{time} 1100
Well, this rule has tremendous health benefits. The EPA cross-state rule will prevent 34,000 deaths, 15,000 heart attacks, 400,000 cases of aggravated asthma, and 1.8 million lost days of work each year.
The Whitfield amendment negates these benefits and ensures that power plants will not have to reduce their pollution for at least 8 years. But this new rule may ensure that it will never happen. The EPA administrator testified that the language in the amendment barring reliance on modeling likely will block EPA from ever issuing another cross-state pollution rule to address ozone and particulate problems in downwind States.
These are two radical proposals, and they're coming to the floor without a single day of hearings in the Energy and Commerce Committee. The amendment's sponsor, Mr. Whitfield, is the chairman of the relevant subcommittee. But he didn't ask for a single day of testimony or debate on these proposals. Instead he took a bill that asked for a lot more analysis before rules go into effect, and then just dropped this amendment on that bill because it was a moving train. He didn't insist that the TRAIN Act was requiring a study. He insisted it was only going to do a study, and now it is preventing them from implementing anything.
Today we have 10 minutes of debate whether this body should eliminate two critical EPA rules that prevent premature death, asthma attacks, and other respiratory diseases and fundamentally alter the Clean Air Act. I find that inexcusable, both on the substance and the process.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
The gentleman from Kentucky has 30 seconds remaining.
Mr. WHITFIELD. I would just say that the two gases I was trying to think of are hydrogen chloride and hydrogen fluoride. Those are the real problems in this Utility MACT: the lack of technology, the unachievability of the standards, and that's why this amendment is asking that the implementation be delayed for 3 years of this air transport rule.
With that, I urge Members to support my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kentucky will be postponed.
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Latta
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11 printed in House Report 112-213.
Mr. LATTA. 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:
After section 5, insert the following new section (and redesignate the subsequent section accordingly):
SEC. 6. CONSIDERATION OF FEASIBILITY AND COST IN ESTABLISHING
NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS.
In establishing any national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard under section 109 of the Clean Air Act
(42 U.S.C. 7409), the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall take into consideration feasibility and cost.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 406, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support my amendment to H.R. 2401. This amendment should be one of the most noncontroversial EPA-related votes this House has faced in quite awhile because it doesn't repeal any EPA rules or regulations and it doesn't block the EPA from doing anything. It simply requires the EPA administrator to consider the implementation costs and feasibility of compliance when setting National Ambient Air Quality Standards. We all want clean air.
The Clean Air Act required the EPA to review these standards in 5-
year intervals and make revisions or set new standards if appropriate. Under current law, the EPA administrator is forbidden from taking the economic consequences of these rules under consideration when setting these standards, which means every 5 years the EPA is required to create new regulations, but does not have the legal authority to consider how they will affect the economy.
This approach to regulation is a contributing factor to why unemployment numbers refuse to budge in many parts of our country and we have millions of Americans still looking for jobs. Last year the EPA decided to voluntarily review the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone despite being a full 3 years away from review of the Clean Air Act's requirements in 2013.
The standards they discussed would have had a devastating effect on my home State of Ohio, putting every one of the 33 counties monitored into a state of nonattainment status, as well as over 85 percent of the other counties monitored nationwide. States and localities not in attainment are required to meet expensive and complex regulatory requirements, more stringent permitting requirements, and comply with a number of other antigrowth measures.
Fortunately, President Obama realized the urgency of this situation and asked the EPA not to propose a more stringent standard. Perhaps if the EPA administrator had considered the cost and feasibility of the tighter standard, we would have avoided the situation entirely. Now with this amendment we have the opportunity to make sure it doesn't happen in the future.
I sent the President a letter commending his decision and requesting his support of the amendment in helping to get it passed both here in the House and in the Senate. Now I'm requesting your support.
This is not a Republican idea or a Democrat idea. Considering the economy and the well-being of the unemployed Americans who are looking for jobs, it is the right thing to do.
I urge support of the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Woodall). The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise not just in opposition, but strong opposition to this amendment. The bill as reported by the Energy and Commerce Committee is a bad bill for air quality and public health, but this bill appears doomed to get even worse as we continue to amend it on the floor.
If the Latta amendment were adopted, it would eviscerate a cornerstone of the Clean Air Act without a single committee hearing to discuss the implications of this action, and that's nothing short of reckless policymaking.
The Clean Air Act requires EPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards based on the science of how air pollution affects health and the environment. EPA scientists and an independent scientific advisory committee then recommend health-based standards. That is peer-reviewed, and they look at the impact of air pollution on health overall, and then on sensitive groups, such as children and the elderly, because we don't want a society where the sensitive people like the children and the elderly can't live with the rest of us.
These national air quality standards essentially identify the level of ambient air pollution that's safe for people to breathe. With these health-based standards as the goalposts, States develop plans to control pollution and meet these goals. Cost is front and center in this planning. States can identify which pollution-control measures are most cost effective and rule out measures that produce more costs than benefits.
The Latta amendment turns this whole approach upside down. The amendment would require EPA to consider industry cost up front when determining what level of air pollution is safe for human health. That's like a doctor basing your diagnosis on the cost of the treatment. If the treatment is expensive, the doctor would tell you that you're healthy. For a doctor, that would be malpractice. It's no different here.
The Latta amendment would allow polluters to override scientists and require EPA to set air quality standards based on profits rather than the public health. The scientific determination of what is safe to breathe doesn't depend on the cost of cleaning up the pollution.
My Republican colleagues throughout the debate on this bill have been happy to come to the floor and talk about the tremendous progress in reducing air pollution in this country. That's true, but it doesn't mean we no longer have a need for the tools that got us here and that job is already done. We've made progress because Congress enacted a strong and effective Clean Air Act. If we weaken the law, air quality will suffer. And anyone who thinks that the air is clean enough isn't thinking about the kids who can't play outside on a summer day without risking a potentially life-threatening asthma attack.
For 40 years--and we are celebrating the 40th anniversary of the Clean Air Act--the essential basis of the law was to set health-based standards as our goals.
{time} 1110
Despite the progress we've made, that job isn't done on air pollution. The Latta amendment, if it becomes law, would reverse decades of progress in cleaning up the smog and soot pollution that triggers asthma attacks, heart attacks, other respiratory diseases, and the mercury pollution that causes brain damage and learning disabilities in children.
It is preposterous that we have only 10 minutes to debate this fundamental change to the Clean Air Act that would upend 40 years of progress.
I urge my colleagues to vote this amendment down based on its impact on public health as well as the mockery it makes of the legislative process.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LATTA. I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Denham).
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 2\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. DENHAM. Mr. Chairman, I rise on this amendment and in support of the underlying TRAIN Act.
The TRAIN Act is a bipartisan plan to analyze cumulative economic impacts of EPA's regulations to better understand how these policies affect American manufacturing, energy prices, and private industry's ability to create jobs.
The question that Americans want to know is: Why are our jobs leaving? Why aren't we making things? This bill will help us to define that.
Here today in support of the TRAIN Act are Jennifer Fraser and Jeff Rose from Vantage Data Centers, a NextGen data center and a small business from my State of California that has become an industry leader in performance efficiency and environmental stewardship. Since its inception in 2010, Vantage has sought to minimize electricity consumption at their data centers, as electricity is far and away their greatest cost.
The price of electricity has caused many companies in their industry to flee to other countries with a more welcoming business climate and cheaper electricity prices. Despite this existing competitive disadvantage for the United States, the EPA proposes new Utility MACT standards that will raise electricity prices and will have an adverse effect on even an environmentally friendly data center like Vantage and force more jobs overseas.
The EPA has proposed regulation after regulation that would stifle job creation, hurt American economic competitiveness abroad, and increase energy prices on families already strained by the tough economy. The House Republican jobs agenda focuses on removing these barriers to job creation and includes necessary reforms like the TRAIN Act.
The support of job creators like the National Association of Manufacturers, the Association of Builders and Contractors, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Small Business Entrepreneurship Council further proves the need for the TRAIN Act to ensure that the administration does not continue to hamper the economic recovery and job creation of private industry.
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair would remind all Members not to refer to occupants of the gallery.
Mr. WAXMAN. May I inquire how much time is left on each side?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 1 minute remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 30 seconds remaining.
Mr. WAXMAN. I urge my colleagues to vote against this Latta amendment. This is a radical, extreme amendment that reverses the Clean Air Act which was signed by President Nixon, has been enforced by Democratic and Republican administrations, voted almost unanimously on a bipartisan basis in the House and the Senate, and it would strip away the goalposts of achieving health-based standards.
I think to have only 10 minutes to debate on this extreme proposal is an affront to the legislative process. I urge my colleagues to vote
``no.''
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Chairman, I urge passage of this amendment.
When we were all back in our districts in August, I went to 18 different plants and facilities in my district, and the number one issue out there against creating jobs was EPA regulations. EPA. That's all I heard. EPA, EPA, EPA.
We're not going to move this country forward unless we get these regulations under control, and it's about time that they start looking at what they have to do under this amendment to make sure that we've got things back on course. I mentioned this yesterday in committee that we've lost 180,000 manufacturing jobs alone, in the Energy and Commerce Committee, since earlier this year. We've got to get this economy moving.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio will be postponed.
Amendment No. 12 Offered by Ms. Richardson
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12 printed in House Report 112-213.
Ms. RICHARDSON. 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 13, line 16, strike ``(a) Authorization.--''.
Beginning on page 13, line 23, strike subsection (b) of section 6.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 406, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Richardson) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is intended to strike the provision that reduces the amount of funding to implement the Diesel Emissions Reduction program.
Five years ago, Congress passed the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act as a part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The program was authorized at
$200 million per year for 5 years. In 2011, the Congress acted responsibly, and in light of our fiscal crisis situation, we reduced that amount by a hundred million per year.
This amendment brings into question whether it makes sense to reduce a proven successful program that is not increasing regulations, as my former colleague just mentioned, but in fact is helping companies to be able to meet those regulations in a cost-effective way.
DERA has helped fund more than 360 retrofit projects to date, which has reduced well over 1.6 million tons of emissions and provided more than $4 billion in public health benefits while employing thousands of workers who manufacture, sell, and repair diesel vehicles and their components in each of our States.
Recognizing today's budgetary challenges, industry, environmental, and public sector representatives support the return of full-year 2008 funding levels for DERA, or $50 million for 2012.
The United States relies upon diesel power to transport commuters, tourists, and students, harvest our crops, build infrastructure, and move our freight. New clean diesel technology is reaching near zero emissions but fleet turnover will take us many more years to come. Emissions from older diesel vehicles and equipment can be reduced, and we can help to make that happen.
Some of our program results have been 119 projects affecting more than 14,000 diesel-powered vehicles and equipment, new State clean diesel grant programs in over 50 States, 2,200 tons of particulate matter emissions reduced, 580 million benefits to health, and--this is a very important one--3.2 million gallons of fuel that has been saved per year by implementing this program.
This is why in the last Congress I introduced legislation that extended DERA for 5 more years. The legislation received bipartisan support on both sides of the aisle and was signed by the President.
In February during debate on H.R. 1, there was an amendment put forward by a Representative on the other side of the aisle that would have eliminated full funding for DERA. The amendment in the continuing resolution at that time was soundly defeated by both of us, both sides of the aisle, 352 Members. In fact, the chairman of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, Mr. Simpson, called the cuts to DERA--and I'm talking about my colleague from the other side--the wrong choice. I'm here to present that this cut is still the wrong choice.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Nebraska is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. TERRY. I believe that the gentlelady from California's amendment is heartfelt and sincere to the DERA program but irresponsible as it's produced here today. There are costs associated with the EPA going forward with the studies that we are requesting of them.
Under our rules of the House, there's PAYGO rules. We must offset those costs. This is one of those tough decisions made to offset the costs. So the first line of irresponsibility would be it will add to the deficit but for this offset.
{time} 1120
The second line of irresponsibility would be, well, it may feel responsible. And this really is a poison pill because if the offset is eliminated, they get to kill the whole bill because of that. So it's not as innocent an amendment as it is portrayed on the surface. The real issue of this bill in entirety must stand.
As previous speakers have said, Mr. Chairman, and rightfully so, the EPA is a rogue agency. They are producing rules in a fast and furious manner that greatly affects this Nation's ability to generate electricity. This bill just wraps three of them together and says, take a step back and do a cost analysis, as the President has asked of agencies. This agency, though, as headed by Ms. Jackson, has said to us in our committee that she will not be beholding or follow the President's own executive order to look at the cost benefit analysis. They say, as we have heard here today, their modeling says that they can reduce asthma so, therefore, no cost benefit analysis.
But there are real effects that I'm concerned with here, and the reason why I do believe this needs to be studied before implemented is we need to slow down the EPA and Lisa Jackson and their attempts to do a cap program without Congress' involvement or approval. They couldn't get it done legislatively, so she's doing it by rule and edict from the EPA.
This rule will add significant costs to the ability of small generators to generate electricity, which will force them to shut down without any path forward to replace that. In fact, they haven't even done a study on reliability to determine if electricity can be wheeled into the areas that the plants will have to shut down.
In fact, there are two plants near my district in Nebraska: Grand Island and Fremont. Grand Island is saying that these rules of the EPA are fast and furious and without any cost benefit analysis will force the Grand Island plant to close. How will they get their electricity? They will have to find a creative way to do it; yet there's been no study on reliability. Secondly, in Fremont, Nebraska, they say what they'll do is just lower their plant level, just do a minimum amount of electricity. Where are they going to make that up?
This is a directive. This is part of the radical environmentalist agenda being placed on America by one agency and one person, Lisa Jackson. We need to slow this down and take a hard look at it.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chairman, I find it interesting that the gentleman would say that this might be irresponsible. What I heard of the comments was I didn't talk about the legislation within itself. We're talking about the amendment of how this is going to be paid for. And so the question before the House is going to be, is it appropriate to take additional funds to use DERA as the whipping boy time and time again for a program that is helping what my colleague from the other side is saying?
I would actually say that DERA is responsible. What's irresponsible is continuing to put the health of Americans in jeopardy. I will repeat the quote for my colleagues from the chairman of the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies, Mr. Simpson. He called the cuts to DERA ``the wrong choice.'' We have already been responsible, and DERA has already paid its fair share, and it's being cut as other programs have been cut. The question is, is it right to continue to deplete this program?
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I think it's interesting that she didn't refute the point that if the PAYGO is eliminated, hers passes, they raise a point of order and kill the bill, which is the real impetus behind this amendment.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. TERRY. No.
I think it's also interesting--you have the right to close--that the President's budget, for which there was no pushback by this other side of the aisle, zeroed it out. Ours didn't. We're just cutting it by $4 million, and it's a tough choice. We agree.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chairman, in closing, I would say, I think I've said twice now, the issue that we have before us is the question of this amendment whether DERA is the appropriate funding source that would be considered for the offset. That's the question that we have before us.
It's interesting that Mr. Whitfield himself has benefited from this program. In Kentucky, the construction ports utilized $1.16 million to retrofit 73 pieces of nonroad construction equipment. Also, the Kentucky Association General Contractors benefited from retrofitting 87 pieces of equipment. I would say to you it's irresponsible to have the American public driving on our highways and roads and going through our airports breathing this air.
What I've reached out to the other side is that it's important. We're talking about EPA regulations. Why would we reduce funding of a program that helps companies to meet the regulations? It's counterintuitive and it doesn't make sense.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' for the Richardson amendment; and the Richardson amendment is intended for exactly that, to eliminate cutting this program.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Richardson).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Ms. RICHARDSON. 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 California 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 112-213 on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Welch of Vermont.
Amendment No. 2 by Mr. McNerney of California.
Amendment No. 3 by Ms. Moore of Wisconsin.
Amendment No. 4 by Mrs. Capps of California.
Amendment No. 5 by Mr. Kinzinger of Illinois.
Amendment No. 6 by Mr. Dent of Pennsylvania.
Amendment No. 7 by Mr. Hastings of Florida.
Amendment No. 8 by Mr. Connolly of Virginia.
Amendment No. 9 by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas.
Amendment No. 10 by Mr. Whitfield of Kentucky.
Amendment No. 11 by Mr. Latta of Ohio.
Amendment No. 12 by Ms. Richardson of California.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote after the first vote in this series.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Welch
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Vermont
(Mr. Welch) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 173, noes 236, not voting 24, as follows:
AYES--173
AckermanAndrewsBacaBaldwinBarrowBass (CA)BecerraBerkleyBerman Bishop (GA)Bishop (NY)BlumenauerBoswellBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brown (FL)ButterfieldCappsCapuanoCardozaCarnahanCarneyCarson (IN)Castor (FL)ChandlerCicillineClarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnConnolly (VA)CooperCostaCostelloCourtneyCrowleyCuellarCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (IL)DeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDeutchDicksDingellDoggettDoldDonnelly (IN)DoyleEdwardsEllisonEngelEshooFarrFattahFilnerFrank (MA)FudgeGaramendiGibsonGonzalezGreen, GeneGrijalvaGutierrezHahnHanabusaHastings (FL)HeinrichHigginsHimesHincheyHinojosaHochulHoltHoyerInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Johnson (IL)Johnson, E. B.JonesKeatingKildeeKindKissellKucinichLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)LevinLewis (GA)LipinskiLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLujanLynchMaloneyMarkeyMcCarthy (NY)McCollumMcDermottMcGovernMcIntyreMcNerneyMeehanMeeksMichaudMiller (NC)Miller, GeorgeMooreMoranMurphy (CT)NadlerNapolitanoNealOlverPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaynePelosiPerlmutterPetersPingree (ME)PlattsPolisPrice (NC)QuigleyRangelReyesRichardsonRichmondRothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRuppersbergerRushRyan (OH)Sanchez, Linda T.Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchraderSchwartzScott (VA)Scott, DavidSerranoSewellShermanSiresSlaughterSmith (NJ)Smith (WA)StarkSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)TierneyTonkoTownsTsongasVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalz (MN)Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)Woolsey
NOES--236
AdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAltmireAmashAmodeiAustriaBachusBarlettaBartlettBarton (TX)Bass (NH)BenishekBergBiggertBilbrayBilirakisBishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBonnerBono MackBorenBoustanyBrady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)BuchananBucshonBuerkleBurgessBurton (IN)CalvertCampCampbellCansecoCantorCapitoCarterCassidyChabotChaffetzCobleCoffman (CO)ColeConawayCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCritzCulbersonDavis (KY)DenhamDentDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDreierDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEmersonFarentholdFincherFitzpatrickFlakeFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFoxxFranks (AZ)FrelinghuysenGalleglyGardnerGarrettGerlachGibbsGingrey (GA)GohmertGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Griffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuintaGuthrieHallHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HayworthHeckHensarlingHergerHerrera BeutlerHoldenHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterIssaJenkinsJohnson (OH)Johnson, SamJordanKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)KlineLabradorLambornLanceLandryLankfordLathamLaTouretteLattaLewis (CA)LoBiondoLongLucasLuetkemeyerLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackManzulloMarchantMarinoMathesonMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMcCotterMcHenryMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMicaMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMulvaneyMurphy (PA)MyrickNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeOlsonOwensPalazzoPaulsenPearcePencePetersonPetriPittsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuayleRahallReedRehbergRenacciRibbleRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRoss (AR)Ross (FL)RoyceRunyanRyan (WI)SchillingSchmidtSchockSchweikertScott (SC)Scott, AustinSensenbrennerSessionsShimkusShusterSimpsonSmith (NE)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStearnsStiversStutzmanSullivanTerryThompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonWalbergWaldenWalsh (IL)WebsterWestWestmorelandWhitfieldWilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoodallYoderYoung (FL)Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--24
BachmannChuClarke (MI)CohenConyersGiffordsGreen, AlHannaHironoHondaHurtJackson Lee (TX)Johnson (GA)KapturLee (CA)MatsuiPaulReichertScaliseShulerSpeierWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1155
Messrs. AMODEI, OLSON, Mrs. BLACK, Mr. McHENRY, and Ms. GRANGER changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mr. CARNEY and Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas 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. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chair, today I was unavoidably detained and missed the following vote:
Welch (VT)/Rush (IL) Amendment to H.R. 2401. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this amendment.
Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I was unable to cast my vote today on the Welch amendment to H.R. 2401, the TRAIN Act. Had I cast my vote I would have voted ``yea.''
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. McNerney
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
(Mr. McNerney) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 184, noes 229, not voting 20, as follows:
AYES--184
AckermanAmodeiAndrewsBacaBaldwinBarrowBass (CA)BecerraBerkleyBermanBilbrayBishop (GA)Bishop (NY)BlumenauerBoswellBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brown (FL)ButterfieldCappsCapuanoCardozaCarnahanCarneyCarson (IN)Castor (FL)ChandlerCicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCohenConnolly (VA)CooperCostelloCourtneyCritzCrowleyCuellarCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (IL)DeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDeutchDicksDoggettDonnelly (IN)DoyleEdwardsEllisonEngelEshooFattahFilnerFitzpatrickFortenberryFrank (MA)FudgeGaramendiGibsonGonzalezGreen, AlGreen, GeneGrijalvaGutierrezHahnHanabusaHannaHastings (FL)HeckHeinrichHigginsHimesHincheyHinojosaHochulHoldenHoltHoyerInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Jackson Lee (TX)Johnson (GA)Johnson (IL)Johnson, E. B.KapturKeatingKildeeKindKissellKucinichLanceLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)Lee (CA)LevinLewis (GA)LipinskiLoBiondoLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLujanLynchMaloneyMarkeyMathesonMatsuiMcCarthy (NY)McCollumMcDermottMcGovernMcIntyreMcNerneyMeeksMichaudMiller (NC)Miller, GeorgeMooreMoranMurphy (CT)NadlerNapolitanoOlverPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaulsenPaynePelosiPerlmutterPetersPingree (ME)Price (NC)QuigleyRangelReyesRichardsonRoss (AR)Rothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRuppersbergerRushRyan (OH)Sanchez, Linda T.Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchraderSchwartzScott (VA)Scott, DavidSerranoSewellShermanSiresSlaughterSmith (NJ)Smith (WA)StarkSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)TierneyTonkoTownsTsongasVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalz (MN)Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)Woolsey
NOES--229
AdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAltmireAmashAustriaBachusBarlettaBartlettBarton (TX)Bass (NH)BenishekBergBiggertBilirakisBishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBonnerBono MackBorenBoustanyBrady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)BuchananBucshonBuerkleBurgessBurton (IN)CalvertCampCansecoCapitoCarterCassidyChabotChaffetzCobleCoffman (CO)ColeConawayCostaCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCulbersonDavis (KY)DenhamDentDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDoldDreierDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEmersonFarentholdFincherFlakeFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFoxxFranks (AZ)FrelinghuysenGalleglyGardner GarrettGerlachGibbsGingrey (GA)GohmertGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Griffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuintaGuthrieHallHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HayworthHensarlingHergerHerrera BeutlerHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIssaJenkinsJohnson (OH)Johnson, SamJonesJordanKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)KlineLabradorLambornLandryLankfordLathamLaTouretteLattaLewis (CA)LongLucasLuetkemeyerLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackManzulloMarchantMarinoMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMcCotterMcHenryMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMeehanMicaMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMulvaneyMurphy (PA)MyrickNealNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeOlsonOwensPalazzoPearcePencePetersonPetriPittsPlattsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuayleRahallReedRehbergRenacciRibbleRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRoss (FL)RoyceRunyanRyan (WI)SchillingSchmidtSchockSchweikertScott (SC)Scott, AustinSensenbrennerSessionsShimkusShusterSimpsonSmith (NE)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStearnsStiversStutzmanSullivanTerryThompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonWalbergWaldenWalsh (IL)WebsterWestWestmorelandWhitfieldWilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoodallYoderYoung (FL)Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--20
BachmannCampbellCantorChuConyersDingellFarrGiffordsHironoHondaPaulPolisReichertRichmondScaliseShulerSpeierWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1202
Messrs. HANNA and FITZPATRICK changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Ms. Moore
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 337, noes 76, not voting 20, as follows:
AYES--337
AckermanAdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAndrewsAustriaBacaBachusBaldwinBarlettaBarrowBarton (TX)Bass (CA)Bass (NH)BecerraBenishekBergBerkleyBermanBiggertBilbrayBilirakisBishop (GA)Bishop (NY)Bishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBlumenauerBonnerBono MackBorenBoswellBoustanyBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brown (FL)BuchananBucshonBuerkleBurgessBurton (IN)ButterfieldCalvertCampCampbellCantorCapitoCappsCapuanoCardozaCarnahanCarneyCarson (IN)CarterCassidyCastor (FL)ChaffetzChandlerCicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCobleCohenColeConawayConnolly (VA)CooperCostaCostelloCourtneyCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCritzCrowleyCuellarCulbersonCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (IL)Davis (KY)DeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDenhamDentDeutchDiaz-BalartDicksDoggettDoldDonnelly (IN)DoyleDreierDuffyEdwardsEllisonEmersonEngelEshooFarentholdFarrFattahFilnerFincherFitzpatrickFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFoxxFrank (MA)FrelinghuysenFudgeGalleglyGaramendiGardnerGarrettGerlachGibbsGibsonGingrey (GA)GonzalezGoodlatteGosarGrangerGreen, AlGreen, GeneGriffin (AR)GrijalvaGrimmGuintaGuthrieGutierrezHahnHallHanabusaHannaHastings (FL)HayworthHeinrichHensarlingHerrera BeutlerHigginsHimesHincheyHinojosaHochulHoldenHoltHoyerHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterInsleeIsraelIssaJackson (IL)Jackson Lee (TX)Johnson (GA)Johnson (IL)Johnson (OH)Johnson, E. B.Johnson, SamJonesJordanKapturKeatingKellyKildeeKindKissellKlineKucinichLanceLandryLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)LathamLaTouretteLattaLee (CA)LevinLewis (GA)LipinskiLoBiondoLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLucasLuetkemeyerLujanLynchMaloneyManzulloMarchantMarinoMarkeyMatsuiMcCarthy (CA)McCarthy (NY)McCaulMcCollumMcCotterMcDermottMcGovernMcIntyreMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMcNerneyMeehanMeeksMichaudMiller (MI)Miller (NC)Miller, GeorgeMooreMoranMurphy (CT)Murphy (PA)MyrickNadlerNapolitanoNealNunesNunneleeOlsonOlverOwensPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaulsenPaynePelosiPencePerlmutterPetersPetersonPetriPingree (ME)PlattsPoseyPrice (GA)Price (NC)QuigleyRangelRehbergRenacciReyesRibbleRichardsonRichmondRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoss (AR)Rothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRuppersbergerRushRyan (OH)Ryan (WI)Sanchez, Linda T.Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchillingSchmidtSchockSchraderSchwartzSchweikertScott (VA)Scott, AustinScott, DavidSerranoSewellShimkusShusterSimpsonSiresSlaughterSmith (NE)Smith (NJ)Smith (WA)StarkStiversSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)ThornberryTiberiTierneyTiptonTonkoTownsTsongasTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalbergWaldenWalz (MN)Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWestWhitfieldWilson (FL)Wilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoolseyYoderYoung (FL)Young (IN)
NOES--76
AltmireAmashAmodeiBartlettBrady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)CansecoChabotCoffman (CO)DesJarlaisDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersFlakeFranks (AZ)GohmertGowdyGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Griffith (VA)HarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HeckHuelskampJenkinsKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)LabradorLambornLankfordLewis (CA)LongLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackMathesonMcClintockMcHenryMicaMiller (FL)Miller, GaryMulvaneyNeugebauerNoemNugentPalazzoPearcePittsPoe (TX)PompeoQuayleRahallReedRohrabacherRoskamRoss (FL)RoyceRunyanScott (SC)SensenbrennerSessionsSmith (TX)SoutherlandStearnsStutzmanTerryThompson (PA)Walsh (IL)WebsterWestmorelandWoodall
NOT VOTING--20
BachmannChuConyersDingellGiffordsHergerHironoHondaHurtPaulPolisReichertScaliseShermanShulerSpeierSullivanWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1206
Mr. JONES changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Mr. HURT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 729, 730, I was inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall 729 and ``yes'' on rollcall 730.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mrs. Capps
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 195, noes 221, not voting 17, as follows:
[Roll No. 731]
AYES--195
AckermanAltmireAndrewsBacaBachusBaldwinBarrowBass (CA)BecerraBerkleyBermanBishop (GA)Bishop (NY)BlumenauerBorenBoswellBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brown (FL)BuchananButterfieldCappsCapuanoCarnahanCarneyCarson (IN)Castor (FL)ChandlerCicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCohenConnolly (VA)CooperCostelloCourtneyCrowleyCuellarCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (IL)DeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDentDeutchDicksDoggettDonnelly (IN)DoyleEdwardsEllisonEngelEshooFarrFattahFilnerFitzpatrickFortenberryFrank (MA)FrelinghuysenFudgeGaramendiGerlachGibsonGreen, AlGrijalvaGutierrezHahnHanabusaHannaHastings (FL)HeinrichHigginsHimesHincheyHinojosaHochulHoldenHoltHoyerInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Jackson Lee (TX)Johnson (GA)Johnson, E. B.KapturKeatingKildeeKindKissellKucinichLanceLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)LaTouretteLee (CA)LevinLewis (GA)LipinskiLoBiondoLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLujanLynchMaloneyMarkeyMatsuiMcCarthy (NY)McCollumMcCotterMcDermottMcGovernMcIntyreMcNerneyMeehanMeeksMichaudMiller (NC)MooreMoranMurphy (CT)NadlerNapolitanoNealOlverPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaynePelosiPerlmutterPetersPetersonPingree (ME)PlattsPolisPrice (NC)QuigleyRahallRangelReyesRichardsonRichmondRoss (AR)Rothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRunyanRuppersbergerRushRyan (OH)Sanchez, Linda T.Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchillingSchraderSchwartzScott (VA)Scott, DavidSerranoSewellShermanSiresSlaughterSmith (NJ)Smith (WA)StarkStiversSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)TiberiTierneyTonkoTownsTsongasVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalz (MN)Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)WolfWoolsey
NOES--221
AdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAmashAmodeiAustriaBarlettaBartlettBarton (TX)Bass (NH)BenishekBergBiggertBilbrayBilirakisBishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBonnerBono MackBoustanyBrady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)BucshonBuerkleBurgessBurton (IN)CalvertCampCampbellCansecoCantorCapitoCardozaCarterCassidyChabotChaffetzCobleCoffman (CO)ColeConawayCostaCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCritzCulbersonDavis (KY)DenhamDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDoldDreierDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEmersonFarentholdFincherFlakeFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFoxxFranks (AZ)GalleglyGardnerGarrettGibbsGingrey (GA)GohmertGonzalezGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Green, GeneGriffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuintaGuthrieHallHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HayworthHeckHensarlingHergerHerrera BeutlerHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIssaJenkinsJohnson (IL)Johnson (OH)Johnson, SamJonesJordanKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)KlineLabradorLambornLandryLankfordLathamLattaLewis (CA)LongLucasLuetkemeyerLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackManzulloMarchantMarinoMathesonMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMcHenryMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMicaMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMulvaneyMurphy (PA)MyrickNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeOlsonOwensPalazzoPaulsenPearcePencePetriPittsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuayleReedRehbergRenacciRibbleRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRoss (FL)RoyceRyan (WI)SchmidtSchockSchweikertScott (SC)Scott, AustinSensenbrennerSessionsShimkusShusterSimpsonSmith (NE)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStearnsStutzmanSullivanTerryThompson (PA)ThornberryTiptonTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonWalbergWaldenWalsh (IL)WestWestmorelandWhitfieldWilson (SC)WittmanWomackWoodallYoderYoung (FL)Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--17
BachmannChuConyersDingellGiffordsHironoHondaMiller, GeorgePaulReichertScaliseShulerSpeierWatersWebsterYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1211
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
amendment no. 5 offered by mr. kinzinger of illinois
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois
(Mr. Kinzinger) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 269, noes 145, not voting 19, as follows:
AYES--269
AdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAltmireAmashAmodeiAustriaBachusBarlettaBarrowBartlettBarton (TX)Bass (NH)BenishekBergBiggertBilbrayBilirakisBishop (GA)Bishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBonnerBono MackBorenBoswellBoustanyBrooksBroun (GA)BuchananBucshonBuerkleBurgessBurton (IN)CalvertCampCampbellCansecoCantorCapitoCardozaCarneyCarterCassidyChabotChaffetzChandlerCobleCoffman (CO)ColeConawayCostaCostelloCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCritzCuellarCulbersonDavis (KY)DeFazioDenhamDentDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDoldDonnelly (IN)DreierDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEmersonFarentholdFincherFitzpatrickFlakeFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFoxxFranks (AZ)FrelinghuysenGalleglyGardnerGarrettGerlachGibbsGibsonGingrey (GA)GonzalezGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Green, AlGreen, GeneGriffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuintaGuthrieHallHannaHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HayworthHeckHensarlingHergerHerrera BeutlerHinojosaHoldenHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIssaJackson Lee (TX)JenkinsJohnson (IL)Johnson (OH)Johnson, SamJonesJordanKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)KissellKlineLabradorLambornLanceLandryLankfordLarsen (WA)LathamLaTouretteLattaLewis (CA)LipinskiLoBiondoLongLucasLuetkemeyerLujanLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackManzulloMarchantMarinoMathesonMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMcCotterMcHenryMcIntyreMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMeehanMicaMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMulvaneyMurphy (PA)MyrickNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeOlsonPalazzoPaulsenPearcePencePetersonPetriPittsPlattsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuayleRehbergRenacciReyesRibbleRichardsonRichmondRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRoss (AR)Ross (FL)RoyceRunyanRuppersbergerRyan (WI)SchillingSchmidtSchockSchweikertScott (SC)Scott, AustinScott, DavidSensenbrennerSessionsSewellShimkusShusterSimpsonSmith (NE)Smith (NJ)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStearnsStiversStutzmanSullivanTerryThompson (MS)Thompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonWalbergWaldenWalsh (IL)Walz (MN)WebsterWestWestmorelandWhitfieldWilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoodallYoderYoung (FL)Young (IN)
NOES--145
AckermanAndrewsBacaBaldwinBecerraBerkleyBermanBishop (NY)BlumenauerBrady (PA)Brown (FL)ButterfieldCappsCapuanoCarnahanCarson (IN)Castor (FL)CicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCohenConnolly (VA)CooperCourtneyCrowleyCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (IL)DeGetteDeLauroDeutchDicksDoggett DoyleEdwardsEllisonEngelEshooFarrFattahFilnerFrank (MA)FudgeGaramendiGrijalvaGutierrezHahnHanabusaHastings (FL)HeinrichHigginsHimesHincheyHochulHoltHoyerInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Johnson (GA)Johnson, E. B.KapturKeatingKildeeKindKucinichLangevinLarson (CT)Lee (CA)LevinLewis (GA)LoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLynchMaloneyMarkeyMatsuiMcCarthy (NY)McCollumMcDermottMcGovernMcNerneyMeeksMichaudMiller (NC)Miller, GeorgeMooreMoranMurphy (CT)NadlerNapolitanoNealOlverOwensPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaynePelosiPerlmutterPetersPingree (ME)PolisPrice (NC)QuigleyRahallRangelReedRothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRushRyan (OH)Sanchez, Linda T.Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchraderSchwartzScott (VA)SerranoShermanSiresSlaughterSmith (WA)StarkSuttonThompson (CA)TierneyTonkoTownsTsongasVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)Woolsey
NOT VOTING--19
BachmannBass (CA)Brady (TX)Braley (IA)ChuConyersDingellGiffordsGohmertHironoHondaPaulReichertScaliseShulerSpeierWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1215
Mr. HALL changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Dent
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 269, noes 150, not voting 14, as follows:
AYES--269
AdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAltmireAmashAmodeiAustriaBachusBarlettaBarrowBartlettBarton (TX)Bass (NH)BenishekBergBerkleyBiggertBilbrayBilirakisBishop (GA)Bishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBonnerBono MackBorenBoswellBoustanyBrady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)Brown (FL)BuchananBucshonBuerkleBurgessBurton (IN)CalvertCampCampbellCansecoCantorCapitoCardozaCarneyCarterCassidyChabotChaffetzChandlerCobleCoffman (CO)ColeConawayCostaCostelloCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCritzCuellarCulbersonDavis (IL)Davis (KY)DeFazioDenhamDentDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDoggettDoldDonnelly (IN)DreierDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEmersonFarentholdFattahFincherFitzpatrickFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFoxxFranks (AZ)FrelinghuysenGalleglyGardnerGarrettGerlachGibbsGibsonGingrey (GA)GohmertGonzalezGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Green, GeneGriffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuintaGuthrieHallHannaHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HayworthHeckHensarlingHergerHerrera BeutlerHinojosaHochulHoldenHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIssaJenkinsJohnson (OH)Johnson, SamJonesJordanKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)KissellKlineLabradorLambornLanceLandryLankfordLathamLaTouretteLattaLewis (CA)LipinskiLoBiondoLongLucasLuetkemeyerLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackManzulloMarchantMarinoMathesonMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMcCotterMcHenryMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMeehanMicaMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMulvaneyMurphy (PA)MyrickNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeOlsonPalazzoPaulsenPearcePencePetersonPetriPittsPlattsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuayleRahallReedRehbergRenacciReyesRibbleRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRoss (AR)Ross (FL)RoyceRunyanRuppersbergerRyan (WI)SchillingSchmidtSchockSchraderSchweikertScott (SC)Scott, AustinScott, DavidSensenbrennerSessionsSewellShimkusShusterSimpsonSmith (NE)Smith (NJ)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStearnsStiversStutzmanSullivanTerryThompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonWalbergWaldenWalsh (IL)WebsterWestWestmorelandWhitfieldWilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoodallYoderYoung (FL)Young (IN)
NOES--150
AckermanAndrewsBacaBaldwinBass (CA)BecerraBermanBishop (NY)BlumenauerBrady (PA)Braley (IA)ButterfieldCappsCapuanoCarnahanCarson (IN)Castor (FL)CicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCohenConnolly (VA)ConyersCooperCourtneyCrowleyCummingsDavis (CA)DeGetteDeLauroDeutchDicksDoyleEdwardsEllisonEngelEshooFarrFilnerFlakeFrank (MA)FudgeGaramendiGreen, AlGrijalvaGutierrezHahnHanabusaHastings (FL)HeinrichHigginsHimesHincheyHoltHoyerInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Jackson Lee (TX)Johnson (GA)Johnson (IL)Johnson, E. B.KapturKeatingKildeeKindKucinichLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)Lee (CA)LevinLewis (GA)LoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLujanLynchMaloneyMarkeyMatsuiMcCarthy (NY)McCollumMcDermottMcGovernMcIntyreMcNerneyMeeksMichaudMiller (NC)Miller, GeorgeMooreMoranMurphy (CT)NadlerNapolitanoNealOlverOwensPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaynePelosiPerlmutterPetersPingree (ME)PolisPrice (NC)QuigleyRangelRichardsonRichmondRothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRushRyan (OH)Sanchez, Linda T.Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchwartzScott (VA)SerranoShermanSiresSlaughterSmith (WA)StarkSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)TierneyTonkoTownsTsongasVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalz (MN)Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)Woolsey
NOT VOTING--14
BachmannChuDingellGiffordsHironoHondaPaulReichertScaliseShulerSpeierWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1220
Ms. BERKLEY changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Hastings) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 165, noes 254, not voting 14, as follows:
AYES--165
AckermanAndrewsBacaBaldwinBass (CA)BecerraBerkleyBermanBishop (GA)Bishop (NY)BlumenauerBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brown (FL)ButterfieldCappsCapuanoCarnahanCarneyCarson (IN)Castor (FL)CicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCohenConnolly (VA)ConyersCooperCostelloCourtneyCrowleyCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (IL)DeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDeutchDicksDoggettDoyleEdwardsEllisonEngelEshooFarrFattahFilnerFrank (MA)FudgeGaramendiGreen, AlGrijalvaGutierrez HahnHanabusaHastings (FL)HeinrichHigginsHimesHincheyHinojosaHochulHoldenHoltHoyerInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Jackson Lee (TX)Johnson (GA)Johnson, E. B.KapturKeatingKildeeKindKissellKucinichLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)Lee (CA)LevinLewis (GA)LipinskiLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLujanLynchMaloneyMarkeyMatsuiMcCarthy (NY)McCollumMcDermottMcGovernMcNerneyMeeksMichaudMiller (NC)Miller, GeorgeMooreMoranMurphy (CT)NadlerNapolitanoNealOlverOwensPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaynePelosiPerlmutterPetersPingree (ME)PolisPrice (NC)QuigleyRangelRichardsonRichmondRothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRuppersbergerRushRyan (OH)Sanchez, Linda T.Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchraderSchwartzScott (VA)Scott, DavidSerranoSewellShermanSiresSlaughterSmith (WA)StarkSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)TierneyTonkoTownsTsongasVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalz (MN)Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)Woolsey
NOES--254
AdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAltmireAmashAmodeiAustriaBachusBarlettaBarrowBartlettBarton (TX)Bass (NH)BenishekBergBiggertBilbrayBilirakisBishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBonnerBono MackBorenBoswellBoustanyBrady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)BuchananBucshonBuerkleBurgessBurton (IN)CalvertCampCampbellCansecoCantorCapitoCardozaCarterCassidyChabotChaffetzChandlerCobleCoffman (CO)ColeConawayCostaCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCritzCuellarCulbersonDavis (KY)DenhamDentDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDoldDonnelly (IN)DreierDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEmersonFarentholdFincherFitzpatrickFlakeFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFoxxFranks (AZ)FrelinghuysenGalleglyGardnerGarrettGerlachGibbsGibsonGingrey (GA)GohmertGonzalezGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Green, GeneGriffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuintaGuthrieHallHannaHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HayworthHeckHensarlingHergerHerrera BeutlerHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIssaJenkinsJohnson (IL)Johnson (OH)Johnson, SamJonesJordanKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)KlineLabradorLambornLanceLandryLankfordLathamLaTouretteLattaLewis (CA)LoBiondoLongLucasLuetkemeyerLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackManzulloMarchantMarinoMathesonMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMcCotterMcHenryMcIntyreMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMeehanMicaMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMulvaneyMurphy (PA)MyrickNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeOlsonPalazzoPaulsenPearcePencePetersonPetriPittsPlattsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuayleRahallReedRehbergRenacciReyesRibbleRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRoss (AR)Ross (FL)RoyceRunyanRyan (WI)SchillingSchmidtSchockSchweikertScott (SC)Scott, AustinSensenbrennerSessionsShimkusShusterSimpsonSmith (NE)Smith (NJ)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStearnsStiversStutzmanSullivanTerryThompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonWalbergWaldenWalsh (IL)WebsterWestWestmorelandWhitfieldWilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoodallYoderYoung (FL)Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--14
BachmannChuDingellGiffordsHironoHondaPaulReichertScaliseShulerSpeierWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1224
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
(Mr. Connolly) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 186, noes 232, not voting 15, as follows:
AYES--186
AckermanAndrewsBacaBaldwinBarrowBass (CA)BecerraBerkleyBermanBishop (GA)Bishop (NY)BlumenauerBoswellBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brown (FL)BuchananCappsCapuanoCarnahanCarneyCarson (IN)Castor (FL)ChandlerCicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCohenConnolly (VA)ConyersCooperCostelloCourtneyCrowleyCuellarCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (IL)DeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDentDeutchDicksDoggettDonnelly (IN)DoyleEdwardsEllisonEngelEshooFarrFattahFilnerFitzpatrickFoxxFrank (MA)FudgeGaramendiGerlachGibsonGonzalezGosarGreen, AlGrijalvaGutierrezHahnHanabusaHastings (FL)HeckHeinrichHigginsHimesHincheyHinojosaHochulHoltHoyerInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Jackson Lee (TX)Johnson (GA)Johnson, E. B.JonesKapturKeatingKildeeKindKissellKucinichLanceLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)LaTouretteLee (CA)LevinLewis (GA)LipinskiLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLujanLynchMaloneyMarkeyMathesonMatsuiMcCarthy (NY)McCollumMcDermottMcGovernMcIntyreMcNerneyMeehanMeeksMiller (NC)Miller, GeorgeMooreMoranMurphy (CT)NadlerNapolitanoNealOlverOwensPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaulsenPaynePelosiPerlmutterPetersPetersonPingree (ME)PlattsPolisPrice (NC)QuigleyRangelReyesRichardsonRichmondRoss (AR)Rothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRuppersbergerRyan (OH)Sanchez, Linda T.Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchraderSchwartzScott (VA)Scott, DavidSerranoSewellShermanSiresSlaughterSmith (WA)StarkSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)TierneyTonkoTownsTsongasVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalz (MN)Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)Woolsey
NOES--232
AdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAltmireAmashAmodeiAustriaBachusBarlettaBartlettBarton (TX)Bass (NH)BenishekBergBiggertBilbrayBilirakisBishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBonnerBono MackBorenBoustanyBrady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)BucshonBuerkleBurgessBurton (IN)ButterfieldCalvertCampCampbellCansecoCantorCapitoCardozaCarterCassidyChabotChaffetzCobleCoffman (CO)ColeConawayCostaCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCritzCulbersonDavis (KY)DenhamDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDoldDreierDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEmersonFarentholdFincherFlakeFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFranks (AZ)FrelinghuysenGalleglyGardnerGarrettGibbsGingrey (GA)GohmertGoodlatteGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Green, GeneGriffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuintaGuthrieHallHannaHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HayworthHensarlingHergerHerrera BeutlerHoldenHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIssaJenkinsJohnson (IL)Johnson (OH)Johnson, SamJordanKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)KlineLabradorLambornLandryLankfordLathamLattaLewis (CA)LoBiondoLongLucasLuetkemeyerLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackManzulloMarchantMarinoMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMcCotterMcHenryMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMicaMichaudMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMulvaneyMurphy (PA)MyrickNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeOlsonPalazzoPearcePencePetriPittsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuayleRahallReedRehbergRenacciRibbleRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooney Ros-LehtinenRoskamRoss (FL)RoyceRunyanRyan (WI)SchillingSchmidtSchockSchweikertScott (SC)Scott, AustinSensenbrennerSessionsShimkusShusterSimpsonSmith (NE)Smith (NJ)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStearnsStiversStutzmanSullivanTerryThompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonWalbergWaldenWalsh (IL)WebsterWestWestmorelandWhitfieldWilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoodallYoderYoung (FL)Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--15
BachmannChuDingellGiffordsHironoHondaPaulReichertRushScaliseShulerSpeierWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1228
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Chair, had I been present for the following rollcall Nos., I would have voted as follows: 728, yea; 729, yea; 730, yea; 731, yea; 732, no; 733, no; 734, yea; 735, yea.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas
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 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 346, noes 74, not voting 13 as follows:
AYES--346
AckermanAdamsAderholtAlexanderAltmireAmodeiAndrewsAustriaBacaBachusBaldwinBarlettaBarrowBartlettBarton (TX)Bass (CA)Bass (NH)BecerraBenishekBerkleyBermanBiggertBilbrayBilirakisBishop (GA)Bishop (NY)BlackBlackburnBlumenauerBonnerBono MackBorenBoswellBoustanyBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brown (FL)BuchananBucshonBuerkleButterfieldCampCampbellCansecoCantorCapitoCappsCapuanoCardozaCarneyCarson (IN)CarterCassidyCastor (FL)ChaffetzChandlerChuCicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCobleCoffman (CO)CohenColeConawayConnolly (VA)ConyersCooperCostelloCourtneyCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCritzCrowleyCuellarCulbersonCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (KY)DeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDentDesJarlaisDeutchDiaz-BalartDicksDoggettDoldDonnelly (IN)DoyleDreierDuffyDuncan (TN)EdwardsEllisonEllmersEmersonEngelEshooFarentholdFarrFattahFilnerFincherFitzpatrickFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFrank (MA)FrelinghuysenFudgeGaramendiGardnerGarrettGerlachGibbsGibsonGingrey (GA)GonzalezGoodlatteGrangerGreen, AlGreen, GeneGriffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrijalvaGrimmGuintaGuthrieGutierrezHahnHallHanabusaHannaHarrisHastings (FL)Hastings (WA)HeckHeinrichHensarlingHerrera BeutlerHigginsHimesHincheyHinojosaHironoHochulHoldenHoltHondaHoyerHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HurtInsleeIsraelIssaJackson (IL)Jackson Lee (TX)JenkinsJohnson (GA)Johnson (IL)Johnson (OH)Johnson, E. B.JonesKapturKildeeKindKinzinger (IL)KissellKlineKucinichLanceLandryLangevinLankfordLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)LathamLaTouretteLee (CA)LevinLewis (GA)LipinskiLoBiondoLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLucasLuetkemeyerLujanLummisLungren, Daniel E.LynchMackMaloneyManzulloMarkeyMathesonMatsuiMcCarthy (CA)McCarthy (NY)McCaulMcCollumMcCotterMcDermottMcGovernMcIntyreMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMcNerneyMeehanMeeksMicaMichaudMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller (NC)Miller, GeorgeMooreMoranMurphy (CT)Murphy (PA)NadlerNapolitanoNealNeugebauerNoemNugentOlsonOlverOwensPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaulsenPaynePearcePelosiPencePerlmutterPetersPetersonPetriPingree (ME)PlattsPolisPoseyPrice (NC)RahallRangelReedRehbergRenacciReyesRibbleRichardsonRichmondRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRoss (AR)Ross (FL)Rothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRunyanRuppersbergerRushRyan (OH)Ryan (WI)Sanchez, Linda T.Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchillingSchockSchraderSchwartzSchweikertScott (VA)Scott, AustinScott, DavidSensenbrennerSerranoSewellShermanShusterSiresSlaughterSmith (NE)Smith (NJ)Smith (TX)Smith (WA)StarkStearnsSullivanSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)Thompson (PA)ThornberryTierneyTiptonTonkoTownsTsongasTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalbergWaldenWalz (MN)Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWebsterWelchWestWhitfieldWilson (FL)Wilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoolseyYoderYoung (FL)
NOES--74
AkinAmashBergBishop (UT)Brady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)BurgessBurton (IN)CalvertChabotCostaDenhamDuncan (SC)FlakeFoxxFranks (AZ)GalleglyGohmertGosarGowdyGraves (GA)Graves (MO)HarperHartzlerHayworthHergerHultgrenHunterJohnson, SamJordanKeatingKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonLabradorLambornLattaLewis (CA)LongMarchantMarinoMcClintockMcHenryMcKeonMiller, GaryMulvaneyMyrickNunesNunneleePalazzoPittsPoe (TX)PompeoPrice (GA)QuayleQuigleyRokitaRoyceSchmidtScott (SC)SessionsShimkusSimpsonSoutherlandStiversStutzmanTerryTiberiWalsh (IL)WestmorelandWoodallYoung (IN)
NOT VOTING--13
BachmannCarnahanDavis (IL)DingellGiffordsPaulReichertScaliseShulerSpeierWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1232
Mr. TIPTON changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
amendment no. 10 offered by mr. whitfield
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kentucky
(Mr. Whitfield) 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 will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 234, noes 188, not voting 11, as follows:
AYES--234
AdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAltmireAmashAmodeiAustriaBachusBarlettaBarrowBartlettBarton (TX)BenishekBergBilirakisBishop (GA)Bishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBonnerBono MackBorenBoustanyBrady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)BuchananBucshonBuerkleBurgessCalvertCampCampbellCansecoCantorCapitoCardozaCarterCassidyChabotChaffetzChandlerCobleCoffman (CO)ColeConawayCostelloCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCritzCulbersonDavis (KY)DenhamDentDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDreierDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEmersonFarentholdFincherFitzpatrickFlakeFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFoxxFranks (AZ)GalleglyGardnerGarrettGerlachGibbsGingrey (GA)GohmertGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Griffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuintaGuthrieHallHannaHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HeckHensarlingHergerHerrera BeutlerHoldenHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIssaJenkins Johnson (IL)Johnson (OH)Johnson, SamJonesJordanKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)KlineLabradorLambornLandryLankfordLathamLaTouretteLattaLewis (CA)LongLucasLuetkemeyerLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackManzulloMarchantMarinoMathesonMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMcCotterMcHenryMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMeehanMicaMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMulvaneyMurphy (PA)MyrickNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeOlsonPalazzoPaulsenPearcePencePetersonPittsPlattsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuayleRahallReedRehbergRenacciRibbleRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRoss (AR)Ross (FL)RoyceRyan (WI)SchillingSchmidtSchockSchweikertScott (SC)Scott, AustinSensenbrennerSessionsShimkusShusterSimpsonSmith (NE)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStearnsStiversStutzmanSullivanTerryThompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonWalbergWaldenWalsh (IL)WebsterWestWestmorelandWhitfieldWilson (SC)WomackWoodallYoderYoung (FL)Young (IN)
NOES--188
AckermanAndrewsBacaBaldwinBass (CA)Bass (NH)BecerraBerkleyBermanBiggertBilbrayBishop (NY)BlumenauerBoswellBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brown (FL)Burton (IN)ButterfieldCappsCapuanoCarnahanCarneyCarson (IN)Castor (FL)ChuCicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCohenConnolly (VA)ConyersCooperCostaCourtneyCrowleyCuellarCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (IL)DeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDeutchDicksDoggettDoldDonnelly (IN)DoyleEdwardsEllisonEngelEshooFarrFattahFilnerFrank (MA)FrelinghuysenFudgeGaramendiGibsonGonzalezGreen, AlGreen, GeneGrijalvaGutierrezHahnHanabusaHastings (FL)HayworthHeinrichHigginsHimesHincheyHinojosaHironoHochulHoltHondaHoyerInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Jackson Lee (TX)Johnson (GA)Johnson, E. B.KapturKeatingKildeeKindKissellKucinichLanceLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)Lee (CA)LevinLewis (GA)LipinskiLoBiondoLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLujanLynchMaloneyMarkeyMatsuiMcCarthy (NY)McCollumMcDermottMcGovernMcIntyreMcNerneyMeeksMichaudMiller (NC)Miller, GeorgeMooreMoranMurphy (CT)NadlerNapolitanoNealOlverOwensPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaynePelosiPerlmutterPetersPetriPingree (ME)PolisPrice (NC)QuigleyRangelReyesRichardsonRichmondRothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRunyanRuppersbergerRushRyan (OH)Sanchez, Linda T.Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchraderSchwartzScott (VA)Scott, DavidSerranoSewellShermanSiresSlaughterSmith (NJ)Smith (WA)StarkSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)TierneyTonkoTownsTsongasVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalz (MN)Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)WittmanWolfWoolsey
NOT VOTING--11
BachmannDingellGiffordsPaulReichertScaliseShulerSpeierWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1235
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Latta
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 227, noes 192, not voting 14, as follows:
AYES--227
AdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAmashAmodeiAustriaBachusBarlettaBartlettBarton (TX)BenishekBergBiggertBilbrayBilirakisBishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBonnerBono MackBorenBoustanyBrady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)BuchananBucshonBuerkleBurgessCalvertCampCampbellCansecoCantorCapitoCarterCassidyChabotChaffetzCobleCoffman (CO)ColeConawayCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCulbersonDavis (KY)DenhamDentDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDreierDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEmersonFarentholdFincherFitzpatrickFlakeFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFoxxFranks (AZ)GardnerGarrettGerlachGibbsGibsonGingrey (GA)GohmertGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Griffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuintaGuthrieHallHannaHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HeckHensarlingHergerHerrera BeutlerHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIssaJenkinsJohnson (IL)Johnson (OH)Johnson, SamJonesJordanKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)KlineLabradorLambornLandryLankfordLathamLaTouretteLattaLongLucasLuetkemeyerLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackManzulloMarchantMarinoMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMcCotterMcHenryMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMeehanMicaMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMulvaneyMurphy (PA)MyrickNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeOlsonPalazzoPaulsenPearcePencePetersonPetriPittsPlattsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuayleRahallReedRehbergRenacciRibbleRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRoss (FL)RoyceRyan (WI)SchillingSchmidtSchockSchraderSchweikertScott (SC)Scott, AustinSensenbrennerSessionsShimkusShusterSimpsonSmith (NE)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStearnsStiversStutzmanSullivanTerryThompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonWalbergWaldenWalsh (IL)WebsterWestWestmorelandWhitfieldWilson (SC)WittmanWomackWoodallYoderYoung (IN)
NOES--192
AckermanAltmireAndrewsBacaBaldwinBarrowBass (CA)Bass (NH)BecerraBerkleyBermanBishop (GA)Bishop (NY)BlumenauerBoswellBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brown (FL)Burton (IN)ButterfieldCappsCapuanoCardozaCarnahanCarneyCarson (IN)Castor (FL)ChandlerChuCicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCohenConnolly (VA)ConyersCooperCostaCostelloCourtneyCritzCrowleyCuellarCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (IL)DeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDeutchDicksDoggettDoldDonnelly (IN)DoyleEdwardsEllisonEngelEshooFarrFattahFilnerFrank (MA)FrelinghuysenFudgeGaramendiGonzalezGreen, AlGreen, GeneGrijalvaGutierrezHahnHanabusaHastings (FL)HayworthHeinrichHigginsHimesHincheyHinojosaHironoHochulHoldenHoltHondaHoyerInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Jackson Lee (TX)Johnson (GA)Johnson, E. B.KapturKeatingKildeeKindKissellKucinichLanceLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)Lee (CA)LevinLewis (CA)Lewis (GA)LipinskiLoBiondoLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLujanLynchMaloneyMarkeyMathesonMatsuiMcCarthy (NY)McCollumMcDermottMcGovernMcIntyreMcNerneyMeeksMichaudMiller (NC)Miller, GeorgeMooreMoranMurphy (CT)NadlerNapolitanoNealOlverOwensPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaynePelosiPerlmutterPetersPingree (ME)PolisPrice (NC)QuigleyRangelReyesRichardsonRichmondRoss (AR)Rothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRunyanRuppersbergerRushRyan (OH)Sanchez, Linda T.SarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchwartzScott (VA)Scott, DavidSerranoSewellShermanSiresSlaughterSmith (NJ)Smith (WA)StarkSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)TierneyTonkoTownsTsongasVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalz (MN)Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)WolfWoolsey
NOT VOTING--14
BachmannDingellGalleglyGiffordsPaulReichertSanchez, LorettaScaliseShulerSpeierWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)Young (FL)
{time} 1239
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 12 Offered by Ms. Richardson
The Acting CHAIR (Mrs. Emerson). The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Richardson) 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 237, not voting 15, as follows:
AYES--181
AckermanAltmireAndrewsBacaBaldwinBarrowBartlettBass (CA)Bass (NH)BecerraBerkleyBermanBishop (GA)Bishop (NY)BlumenauerBorenBoswellBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brown (FL)ButterfieldCappsCapuanoCardozaCarnahanCarneyCarson (IN)Castor (FL)ChandlerChuCicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCohenConnolly (VA)ConyersCooperCostaCostelloCourtneyCritzCrowleyCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (IL)DeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDeutchDicksDoggettDoldDonnelly (IN)DoyleEdwardsEllisonEngelEshooFarrFattahFilnerFrank (MA)FudgeGaramendiGreen, AlGrijalvaGutierrezHahnHanabusaHastings (FL)HeinrichHigginsHimesHincheyHironoHochulHoldenHoltHondaHoyerInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Jackson Lee (TX)Johnson (GA)Johnson, E. B.KapturKeatingKildeeKindKissellKucinichLanceLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)Lee (CA)LevinLewis (GA)LipinskiLoBiondoLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLujanLynchMaloneyMarkeyMatsuiMcCarthy (NY)McCollumMcDermottMcGovernMcIntyreMcNerneyMeeksMiller (NC)Miller, GeorgeMooreMoranMurphy (CT)NadlerNapolitanoNealOlverPallonePascrellPaynePelosiPerlmutterPetersPetersonPingree (ME)Price (NC)QuigleyRangelReyesRichardsonRichmondRoss (AR)Rothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRuppersbergerRushRyan (OH)Sanchez, Linda T.SarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchwartzScott (VA)Scott, DavidSerranoSewellShermanShimkusSiresSlaughterSmith (NJ)Smith (WA)StarkSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)TierneyTonkoTownsTsongasVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalz (MN)Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)Woolsey
NOES--237
AdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAmashAmodeiAustriaBachusBarlettaBarton (TX)BenishekBergBiggertBilbrayBilirakisBishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBonnerBono MackBoustanyBrady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)BuchananBucshonBuerkleBurgessBurton (IN)CalvertCampCampbellCansecoCantorCapitoCarterCassidyChabotChaffetzCobleCoffman (CO)ColeConawayCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCuellarCulbersonDavis (KY)DenhamDentDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDreierDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEmersonFarentholdFincherFitzpatrickFlakeFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFoxxFranks (AZ)FrelinghuysenGardnerGarrettGerlachGibbsGibsonGingrey (GA)GohmertGonzalezGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Green, GeneGriffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuintaGuthrieHallHannaHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HayworthHeckHensarlingHergerHerrera BeutlerHinojosaHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIssaJenkinsJohnson (IL)Johnson (OH)Johnson, SamJonesJordanKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)KlineLabradorLambornLandryLankfordLathamLaTouretteLattaLewis (CA)LongLucasLuetkemeyerLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackManzulloMarchantMarinoMathesonMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMcCotterMcHenryMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMeehanMicaMichaudMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMulvaneyMurphy (PA)MyrickNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeOlsonOwensPalazzoPaulsenPearcePencePetriPittsPlattsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuayleRahallReedRehbergRenacciRibbleRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRoss (FL)RoyceRunyanRyan (WI)SchillingSchmidtSchockSchraderSchweikertScott (SC)Scott, AustinSensenbrennerSessionsShusterSimpsonSmith (NE)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStearnsStiversStutzmanSullivanTerryThompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonWalbergWaldenWalsh (IL)WebsterWestWestmorelandWhitfieldWilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoodallYoderYoung (FL)Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--15
BachmannDingellGalleglyGiffordsPastor (AZ)PaulPolisReichertSanchez, LorettaScaliseShulerSpeierWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1243
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended.
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Woodall) having assumed the chair, Mrs. Emerson, 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. 2401) to require analyses of the cumulative and incremental impacts of certain rules and actions of the Environmental Protection Agency, and for other purposes, and, pursuant to House Resolution 406, reported the bill back to the House with an amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment reported from the Committee of the Whole?
If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.
Motion to Recommit
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman opposed to the bill?
Ms. McCOLLUM. I am opposed to the bill in its current form, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Ms. McCollum moves to recommit the bill H.R. 2401 to the Committee on Energy and Commerce with instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith with the following amendment:
At the end of the bill, add the following new section:
SEC. 7. PROTECTING GREAT LAKES DRINKING WATER FROM TOXIC
SUBSTANCES.
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall plan and implement a strategy, consistent with the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, using existing authority as of the date of enactment of this Act, to control air pollution to be deposited in the Great Lakes, including toxic pollution, in order to ensure safe drinking water and protection of public health and the environment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, let me be clear, this amendment does not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If this amendment is adopted, the bill will immediately be voted on for final passage.
This amendment is about protecting the Great Lakes, one of America's greatest treasures and important natural resources. For those of us who represent these States adjacent to the Great Lakes, we know and understand that any harm done to our lakes threatens the economy and the health of our citizens.
Lake Superior, Lake Huron, Lake Michigan, Lake Erie, and Lake Ontario make up the largest freshwater system in the entire world. Our Great Lakes hold 95 percent of America's freshwater and 20 percent of the freshwater on the planet.
Over 30 million people rely on the Great Lakes for their drinking water. There is an estimated 1.5 million jobs that are directly connected to the Great Lakes, and these jobs generate $62 billion in wages.
Over 40 years ago, this critical ecosystem and economic engine was on the verge of collapse. Time magazine reported in August 1969: ``Lake Erie is in danger of dying by suffocation.'' The days when polluters dumped toxic chemicals into the air and water without consequence are over.
Because of the responsible cleanup policies like the Clean Air Act, the health of the Great Lakes has improved, but threats to the Great Lakes have not disappeared. Air pollutants like mercury are emitted from power plants and continue to fall on the ground, wash into the water, and build up in quantities that threaten the brain development of young children and place limits on the amount of fish that we can consume.
Rising mercury levels is one of the mounting threats that motivated an unprecedented coalition into action. Governors of the eight Great Lakes States, Republicans and Democrats, along with local officials and leaders from tribal nations, nonprofits and the private sector came together to save the Great Lakes.
Early last decade, they created a plan for environmental restoration and economic recovery of the Great Lakes. In 2004, President Bush responded to this bipartisan effort by issuing an executive order that called the Great Lakes ``a national treasure,'' and he directed his Cabinet to establish an interagency task force to report these State and local efforts.
Now, Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin and Governor Mark Dayton of Minnesota never agree about politics, and they certainly don't agree on football, but as members of the Council of Great Lakes Governors, they agree on the need to reduce air and water pollution in the Great Lakes. Years of planning and partnership in the Great Lakes region and in Washington are now making a difference on the ground through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.
{time} 1250
The initiative is protecting drinking water, it's restoring fish and wildlife habitat, and it's supporting the growth of small businesses that depend on healthy waters. The work under way is 300 projects across this region.
Now, my role as a legislator from the Great Lakes region is to do no harm to this effort. The TRAIN Act will make the enforcement of many of the environmental protections uncertain, and it will create confusion in the EPA about which public health efforts they can pursue.
And my amendment does not give the EPA any new authority. Instead, it directs the EPA to use its existing authority to do what Republican and Democratic Governors, mayors, State legislators and other elected officials in the Great Lakes have agreed upon must be done: protect drinking water and protect public health.
Our job in Congress is to protect the Great Lakes, not to undo the hard work of all these Governors and, yes, industry leaders. My amendment makes it clear that the TRAIN Act will not prohibit this work from moving forward.
Let me be clear, my amendment does not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If this amendment is adopted, it will immediately be voted on on final passage.
Regardless of your position on the TRAIN Act, this amendment makes the bill stronger. Regardless of how you feel about the TRAIN Act, I'm sure you agree Congress should protect the safety of drinking water and continue to ensure the viability of the economic interests of the Great Lakes.
Again, let me be clear. This amendment does not kill the bill. It does not send it back to committee. If this amendment is adopted, it will immediately be voted on for final passage.
Colleagues, let us work together, let us pass this amendment, and let us restore the Great Lakes. Let us protect America's public health.
Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WHITFIELD. I would say to the gentlelady that not only are we concerned about the Great Lakes, but we're concerned about every body of water in America, and we believe that the TRAIN Act protects that water, does not take away any authority from the EPA to deal with water issues.
The TRAIN Act is very simple. It asks the government commission to study 14 regulations of EPA. On 12 of them we do not delay them in any way. On the other two, we delay one for 1 year and the other for 3 years.
We have adequate protections in place. We simply think that we should examine the cumulative impact of the regulations from the most aggressive EPA in recent memory to determine what impact it is going to have on jobs; what impact it is going to have on electricity prices; what impact it is going to have on electricity reliability, and will it damage America's competitiveness in the world marketplace.
I would urge passage of this legislation.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of passage.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 180, nays 233, not voting 20, as follows:
YEAS--180
AckermanAltmireAndrewsBacaBaldwinBarrowBass (CA)BecerraBerkleyBermanBishop (GA)Bishop (NY)BlumenauerBorenBoswellBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brown (FL)CappsCapuanoCardozaCarnahanCarneyCarson (IN)Castor (FL)ChandlerChuCicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCohenConnolly (VA)ConyersCooperCostaCostelloCourtneyCritzCrowleyCuellarCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (IL)DeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDeutchDicksDingellDoggettDonnelly (IN)DoyleEdwardsEngelEshooFarrFattahFilnerFrank (MA)FudgeGaramendiGonzalezGreen, AlGrijalvaGutierrezHahnHanabusaHastings (FL)HeinrichHigginsHimesHincheyHinojosaHironoHochulHoldenHoltHondaHoyerInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Jackson Lee (TX)Johnson (GA)Johnson, E. B.KapturKeatingKildeeKindKissellKucinichLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)Lee (CA)LevinLewis (GA)LipinskiLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLujanLynchMaloneyMarkeyMathesonMatsuiMcCarthy (NY)McCollumMcDermottMcGovernMcIntyreMcNerneyMeeksMichaudMiller (NC)Miller, GeorgeMooreMoranMurphy (CT)NadlerNapolitanoNealOlverOwensPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaynePelosiPerlmutterPetersPetersonPingree (ME)Price (NC)QuigleyRahallRangelReyesRichardsonRichmondRoss (AR)Rothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRuppersbergerRyan (OH)Sanchez, Linda T.SarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchwartzScott (VA)Scott, DavidSerranoSewellShermanSiresSlaughterSmith (WA)StarkSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)TierneyTonkoTownsTsongasVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalz (MN) Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)Woolsey
NAYS--233
AdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAmashAmodeiAustriaBachusBartlettBarton (TX)Bass (NH)BenishekBergBiggertBilbrayBilirakisBishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBonnerBono MackBoustanyBrady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)BuchananBucshonBuerkleBurgessBurton (IN)CalvertCampCampbellCansecoCantorCapitoCarterCassidyChabotChaffetzCobleCoffman (CO)ColeConawayCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCulbersonDavis (KY)DenhamDentDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDoldDreierDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEmersonFarentholdFincherFitzpatrickFlakeFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFoxxFranks (AZ)FrelinghuysenGardnerGarrettGerlachGibbsGibsonGingrey (GA)GohmertGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Green, GeneGriffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuintaGuthrieHallHannaHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HayworthHeckHensarlingHerrera BeutlerHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIssaJenkinsJohnson (IL)Johnson (OH)Johnson, SamJonesJordanKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)KlineLabradorLambornLanceLandryLathamLaTouretteLattaLewis (CA)LoBiondoLongLucasLuetkemeyerLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackManzulloMarchantMarinoMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMcCotterMcHenryMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMeehanMicaMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMulvaneyMurphy (PA)MyrickNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeOlsonPalazzoPaulsenPearcePencePetriPittsPlattsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuayleReedRehbergRenacciRibbleRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRoss (FL)RoyceRunyanRyan (WI)SchillingSchmidtSchockSchweikertScott (SC)Scott, AustinSensenbrennerSessionsShimkusShusterSimpsonSmith (NE)Smith (NJ)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStearnsStiversStutzmanSullivanTerryThompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonWalbergWaldenWalsh (IL)WebsterWestWestmorelandWhitfieldWilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoodallYoderYoung (FL)Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--20
BachmannBarlettaButterfieldEllisonGalleglyGiffordsHergerLankfordPaulPolisReichertRushSanchez, LorettaScaliseSchraderShulerSpeierWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1311
Mr. MEEHAN changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. COHEN changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 249, noes 169, not voting 15, as follows:
AYES--249
AdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAltmireAmashAmodeiAustriaBachusBarlettaBarrowBartlettBarton (TX)BenishekBergBilbrayBilirakisBishop (GA)Bishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBonnerBono MackBorenBoswellBoustanyBrady (TX)BrooksBroun (GA)BuchananBucshonBuerkleBurgessBurton (IN)CalvertCampCampbellCansecoCantorCapitoCardozaCarterCassidyChabotChaffetzChandlerCobleCoffman (CO)ColeConawayCostaCostelloCravaackCrawfordCrenshawCritzCuellarCulbersonDavis (KY)DenhamDentDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDonnelly (IN)DreierDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEmersonFarentholdFincherFitzpatrickFlakeFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFoxxFranks (AZ)FrelinghuysenGardnerGarrettGerlachGibbsGibsonGingrey (GA)GohmertGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)Griffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuintaGuthrieHallHannaHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)HeckHensarlingHergerHerrera BeutlerHoldenHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIssaJenkinsJohnson (IL)Johnson (OH)Johnson, SamJonesJordanKellyKing (IA)King (NY)KingstonKinzinger (IL)KlineLabradorLambornLanceLandryLankfordLathamLaTouretteLattaLewis (CA)LoBiondoLongLucasLuetkemeyerLummisLungren, Daniel E.MackManzulloMarchantMarinoMathesonMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMcCotterMcHenryMcIntyreMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMeehanMicaMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMulvaneyMurphy (PA)MyrickNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeOlsonPalazzoPaulsenPearcePencePetersonPetriPittsPlattsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuayleRahallReedRehbergRenacciRibbleRigellRiveraRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRoss (AR)Ross (FL)RoyceRunyanRyan (WI)SchillingSchmidtSchockSchweikertScott (SC)Scott, AustinSensenbrennerSessionsSewellShimkusShusterSimpsonSmith (NE)Smith (NJ)SoutherlandStearnsStiversStutzmanSullivanTerryThompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTurner (NY)Turner (OH)UptonWalbergWaldenWalsh (IL)WebsterWestWestmorelandWhitfieldWilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoodallYoderYoung (FL)Young (IN)
NOES--169
AckermanAndrewsBacaBaldwinBass (CA)Bass (NH)BecerraBerkleyBermanBiggertBishop (NY)BlumenauerBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brown (FL)ButterfieldCappsCapuanoCarnahanCarneyCarson (IN)Castor (FL)ChuCicillineClarke (MI)Clarke (NY)ClayCleaverClyburnCohenConnolly (VA)ConyersCooperCourtneyCrowleyCummingsDavis (CA)Davis (IL)DeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDeutchDicksDingellDoggettDoldDoyleEdwardsEllisonEngelEshooFarrFattahFilnerFrank (MA)FudgeGaramendiGonzalezGreen, AlGreen, GeneGrijalvaGutierrezHahnHanabusaHastings (FL)HayworthHeinrichHigginsHimesHincheyHinojosaHironoHochulHoltHondaHoyerInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Jackson Lee (TX)Johnson (GA)Johnson, E. B.KapturKeatingKildeeKindKissellKucinichLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)Lee (CA)LevinLewis (GA)LipinskiLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLujanLynchMaloneyMarkeyMatsuiMcCarthy (NY)McCollumMcDermottMcGovernMcNerneyMeeksMichaudMiller (NC)MooreMoranMurphy (CT)NadlerNapolitanoNealOlverOwensPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaynePelosiPerlmutterPetersPingree (ME)Price (NC)QuigleyRangelReyesRichardsonRichmondRothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRuppersbergerRushRyan (OH)Sanchez, Linda T.SarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchraderSchwartzScott (VA)Scott, DavidSerranoShermanSiresSlaughterSmith (WA)StarkSuttonThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)TierneyTonkoTownsTsongasVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWalz (MN)Wasserman SchultzWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)Woolsey
NOT VOTING--15
BachmannGalleglyGiffordsMiller, GeorgePaulPolisReichertSanchez, LorettaScaliseShulerSmith (TX)SpeierWatersYarmuthYoung (AK)
{time} 1318
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 741 I inadvertently missed the final passage of H.R. 2401, the ``Transparency in Regulatory Analysis of Impacts on the Nation'' (TRAIN Act) on Friday, September 23. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''
____________________
Alerts Sign-up