[Pages H2838-H2842]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 3448, PUBLIC
HEALTH SECURITY AND BIOTERRORISM PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE ACT OF 2002

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 427 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. Res. 427

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider the conference report to accompany the
bill (H.R. 3448) to improve the ability of the United States
to prevent, prepare for, and respond to bioterrorism and
other public health emergencies. All points of order against
the conference report and against its consideration are
waived. The conference report shall be considered as read.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Dan Miller of Florida). The gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Linder) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter)
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose
of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 427 is a rule providing for the consideration of
the conference report for H.R. 3448, the bioterrorism bill. The rule
waives all points of order against the conference report and against
its consideration. It also provides that the conference report shall be
considered as read.
The Committee on Rules approved this rule last night, and I urge my
colleagues to support it so that we can proceed with an hour of debate
and consideration of this bipartisan conference report.
Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to applaud the
commendable work of my friends and colleagues on the Committee on
Energy and Commerce for the work they have done to bring this final
bill to the floor today. The gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), the
committee chairman, and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Burr),
along with the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), who is the
chairman of the Intelligence Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland
Security, all of whom played an instrumental role in securing the much-
needed $600 million in authorization for the

[[Page H2839]]

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to upgrade and enhance its
facilities over the next 2 years, which is one of the conference
report's most noteworthy proposals.
Among the many good things that this bill does, it included a bill
that I introduced in the first part of November that will allow the
reauthorization of the building-out of the CDC. Mr. Speaker, the CDC is
a group of world class intellects in a Third World facility. It has no
security. They have scientists working on computers that are covered by
polyethylene so that leaking roofs do not destroy them.
As the American people recover from the discovery of anthrax in our
mail system last year, we will continue to turn to the CDC for new ways
to confine and eradicate these dangerous threats to the public health.
This enhanced funding for the CDC to upgrade its facilities will be an
important part of that process, and I look forward to President Bush,
who visited the CDC with the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss),
myself and other members of the Georgia congressional delegation last
year, I look forward to him signing this measure into law.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
(Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend
her remarks, and include extraneous material.)
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Linder) for yielding me the customary half hour.
I rise in support of the underlying conference report. The
Bioterrorism and Response Act enjoys strong bipartisan support, having
passed the House by a vote of 418 to 2. Moreover, this measure moved
forward the consultations from both sides of the aisle, a practice all
too rare in the current Congress.

{time} 1030

Mr. Speaker, this bioterrorism measure represents the first
comprehensive effort to shore up our Nation's defenses against a terror
attack. This includes critical provisions calling for the stockpiling
of drugs and vaccines. It outlines initiatives to help prevent, detect,
and treat terrorism-related health threats, including the possibility
of a smallpox epidemic. Moreover, the legislation authorizes
substantial new spending to help State and local health officials
prepare for bioterrorism attacks. Grants would be made available to
help hospitals prepare for the treatment of victims. Funding for
research and prevention and treatment would also be increased.
Of utmost importance, the bill ensures that additional steps would be
taken to protect the food supply, including new authority for the FDA
to bar unsafe food from entering the country. Many of us have long felt
that the increased imports of food from countries outside the scope of
U.S. safety regulation posed a unique threat to our citizens,
especially with the advent of bioterrorism. The measure begins to
address this concern by providing needed grants to States to strengthen
food inspections and deal with outbreaks of food-borne illnesses. New
registration and recordkeeping requirements would be imposed and safety
improvements would be ordered at animal research labs.
Mr. Speaker, I would also like to highlight the provisions of the
legislation designed to protect our most vulnerable citizens in the
event of terrorist attack: our children. I was proud to join my
colleague from New York, Senator Hillary Clinton, in introducing the
Protecting America's Children Against Terrorism Act. The bill provided
Federal resources and coordination to ensure that our children's needs
are met in the event of a terrorist attack. I wish to thank the
chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), and the ranking member, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Dingell), for including the majority of these provisions
in this comprehensive measure.
The events of September 11 have illustrated only too clearly for us
the risks posed to our children by terrorism. Children perished aboard
the planes that crashed. Both the World Trade Center and the Pentagon
housed day care centers. Nearby schools had to be evacuated, and an
estimated 10,000 American children lost a parent as a result of these
atrocities, many of them losing their sole or primary caregiver.
In recent months, new concerns have emerged. With the threat of
bioterrorism and chemical warfare more prominent, we have realized that
the proper dosages of vaccines and antidotes for children is
incomplete. Few health care providers are trained to recognize the
early signs of smallpox or anthrax, which can mimic cold or flu
symptoms. The National Pharmaceutical Stockpile Program is not
necessarily equipped with the supplies necessary to administer drugs or
other treatment to large numbers of children.
Other needs have become evident as well. Many schools lack effective
evacuation plans or methods of moving children to an alternative safe
location. Networks do not exist for informing parents of evacuations
and the sites where their children may be found. Mental health services
are not always available for children traumatized by catastrophic
events.
The conference report includes our proposal to protect children
against bioterrorism by examining the preparedness of our Nation's
health system for mass casualties of children and youth resulting from
bioterrorism. It would establish an information network to collect and
disseminate information for health providers on how to prepare for a
biological terrorist attack and what steps to take to ensure children
get the health care they need in the case of an attack. Moreover, the
measure would ensure that the National Pharmaceutical Stockpile Program
includes inventories to meet the medical needs of children.
The events of September 11 have revealed to us the gaps in our
preparedness for a major disaster. We owe it to all our citizens to
ensure that we close these gaps before a future emergency, be it
terrorism, natural disaster, or other cause, requires that we take
action.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), the chairman of
the committee.
Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Committee on Rules for bringing
this rule to the floor today.
After 9-11, the Committee on Energy and Commerce began a series of
roundtables with the agencies under our jurisdiction and members of
both sides of our committee. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell),
leading the minority, and myself representing the majority, had
meetings with the agency officials under our jurisdiction to ask
several questions, the most of important of which was: tell us a little
bit about where your vulnerabilities are; tell us a little bit about
where you are not prepared; and tell us a little bit about how Congress
might enact new laws and new authorities to make you better prepared
for the things we might now expect, that indeed might now threaten our
country in ways we were never before threatened.
9-11 taught us a lesson, in effect. It taught us that we have to be
willing to think like evil people. And that is not our custom. We think
like good people in America. We do not think like evil people,
designing ways and means to kill and destroy and to disrupt the lives
of citizens who are innocent and have nothing to do with our cause. We
think literally so totally different from the kind of enemy we now face
in this terrorist situation that it was difficult for agency heads and
even Members of Congress to think about all the things that someone
with an evil mind might want to do to our citizens and our
constituents; what they might want to do to this country and to the
people that live here.
So as we began to have those discussions with agencies under our
jurisdictions, we suddenly realized how necessary it was to put
together a bioterrorism package. And here, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank
the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder) for the excellent work he did
in bringing to our committee ideas about how to make the CDC a much
more functional and a much more effective agency for our

[[Page H2840]]

country, in not only just studying the prevention and treatment of
diseases that are normal in our society, but now making sure we have
the vaccines and the research going forward to protect us against the
artificial insertion of biochemical and biological threats to our
people, as we have now learned is possible. I want to thank him for
bringing to our committee and to this bill the great ideas he had about
beefing up the capacity of the CDC to do that for our country.
But as we began to hear from these agency heads, we began to learn
that, indeed, we had a lot of vulnerabilities in our country; that we
did not have enough vaccine, for example, to make sure if anthrax were
introduced into our society to harm us we could vaccinate enough people
in our country. So we set to work immediately to make sure our health
department not only got the right amount of vaccine available for us,
but that our health agencies were all preparing to make sure that other
vaccines and other treatments were available to first responders in
case we had such an evil attack on our people.
We learned, for example, that we had to organize better the laws that
protected against people owning and transferring biological agents to
one another so that we might find the owner or the possessor of an
agent that enters our mail, for example, and begins to kill our people,
whether it is a domestic threat or a foreign threat; that we had to
make it illegal for someone to transfer the possession of some of these
agents, if in fact they were legally in their possession, to make it
criminally wrong for them to transfer it without authority, without a
permit.
We learned, for example, that our first responders were woefully
unprepared in the case of a biological or chemical threat to our
country to deal with the kind of casualties we might expect if
something like that happened. We learned that we needed, for example,
to beef up the capacity of our ambulance services and our nurses and
our hospitals to deal with those kinds of problems, if, God forbid,
they should happen in our country. This bill, for example, will provide
another $520 million to the hospitals of America, a special help in
grants, to make sure they are prepared for those kinds of emergencies.
We learned also that our drinking water supplies needed to be better
protected and safeguarded. We learned that, indeed, the incredible
ability of someone to damage our country, who thinks as evilly as some
of these people do, might find its way into threats against our water
supplies. Just recently, I think last month, people were caught filming
a water reservoir, I think in Connecticut. And we began to think, well,
maybe people might indeed want to threaten the safe drinking water of
our citizens, if they have such evil minds.
I was reminded in all these meetings of that aircraft that took off
from New York City, I think it was Egyptian Air; and instead of landing
somewhere at its final destination, some pilot dove that plane into the
ocean. I was reminded of when that happened and reminded that most of
us in America thought how awful it was that if this pilot did indeed
want to commit suicide, if that was really his purpose, why did he have
to take all these innocent people along with him.

It dawned on us, that is the way good people see an incident like
that. The way evil people saw that incident was, perhaps in a desert
somewhere or a cave somewhere in Afghanistan, he could have taken out
more people had he taken that plane into a building. That is the way
evil people think, how much more destruction he could have rendered had
he done something different instead of just crashing the plane into the
ocean.
So through these meetings, through all this work we have done on the
bioterrorism legislation, we have tried the awful exercise of thinking
as evilly as we could. What would the most evil person try to do to us
with biological threats, with chemical threats, with agents of
destruction? What would the most evil person do to disrupt our health
supply system or to disrupt our clean water system, to make sure we did
not have enough clean drinking water perhaps, to poison that system or
cause people death and injury? What would the most evil mind try to do
if they learned how to fly a crop duster or a mosquito spraying plane
and take that equipment somewhere and spread biological or chemical
agents upon our people?
We went through that awful exercise of trying to think like the most
evil person on Earth and then tried to write a bill to make sure the
agents of our government, those who are in charge of our health care
system, those in charge of building our vaccine supplies, those in
charge of testing biological agents, the first responders and those in
charge of our incredibly sensitive clean drinking water supplies, what
would we do in a bill to bolster our ability to meet those kinds of
threats?
So, last December, our committee presented to this body our
bioterrorism package, and this body approved it overwhelmingly, I think
430-some odd votes to 2, and sent that package on to the Senate. The
Senate, similarly, passed a bill that mirrored in many aspects the
House-passed version. It was passed unanimously in the Senate, and
Senator Ted Kennedy and I have worked since that date in December to
bring the best of those two packages together into a single package
that we might present to the House and get signed by the President so
that this country might be just a little safer from those evil minds
who threaten, or would try to threaten, our country.
This week we have learned about new threats. This week we have
learned that the level of communications among al Qaeda operatives
around the world is beginning to rise again, and that there are
conversations about hitting this country again. We have heard testimony
in the last few days that maybe it is not if, it is when. Maybe,
indeed, we have to think about the inevitability of some strike against
our people again. So we better have our first responders ready. We had
better have enough vaccines ready. We had better have enough treatment
facilities available. We had better make sure we protect the drinking
water of our people as much as we can. We had better make sure our
hospitals and our nurses and our ambulances, and all our firefighters,
all those heroes of 9-11, are as well equipped as we can make them to
respond as quickly as possible to the next set of threats that are
leveled against our country.
And so we have brought together in this conference the best of the
Senate bill and the best of the House bill. And I want to compliment
Senator Ted Kennedy and the Senate team for working so well with our
team on the House side. In the end, I think we present an excellent
package for the consideration of both bodies for the President to sign.
And I cannot think of a better week than this week, when everybody's
attention is riveted again on the new threats that are being talked
about in conversations around the world against our people, that we
pass this bioterrorism package and put it on the President's desk for
his signature.
We have included one extra thing of significant importance that I
also want to mention. Up this year for renewal is something called
PDUFA. It is an acronym for a policy that has allowed this country to
collect user fees from the drug companies, the big pharmaceutical
companies of America, and those user fees pay the salaries of people
who work at the FDA, the Food and Drug Administration.
That Food and Drug Administration set of personnel then do the
testing, the analysis, all the research, all the professional analysis
that goes into making sure that the pharmaceutical drugs that are
patented in this country are tested first before a pharmaceutical
company is allowed to sell them to your mom and your dad and your
relatives, and even to those of us who need those drugs to survive or
treat an illness.

{time} 1045

The importance of that program, that prescription drug user fee
program, is critical in America, and it is about to expire. It expires
in September. If we do not reauthorize it this year, immediately, we
begin laying off people at the Food and Drug Administration. So we have
included in this package the reauthorization of the Prescription Drug
User Fee Act which funds the work that goes forward to make sure that
new prescription drugs

[[Page H2841]]

are properly tested before the Food and Drug Administration authorizes
any pharmaceutical company to allow a doctor to prescribe them to the
citizens of this country.
And so we have brought you a good package that we think draws from
the best of the House and the Senate versions of bioterrorism and we
have added to it the reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee
Act. This package again represents this Nation's first line of defense
against bioterrorism at a day and at a time when all of us know now
that there are people who would love to disrupt this society by
attacking us with one of those forms. When you think about 9/11 again
and the awful consequences of 9/11 and you sit in a cave now in
Afghanistan and think about how much more damage you might do to this
country than you did on 9/11, bioterrorism is one of those areas we
have to be concerned about. This bill gives this country many more
tools to work with to defend and protect our people. It adds a whole
new arsenal of first responder capabilities to in fact respond if we do
get hit again, and it gives us the reauthorization of the Prescription
Drug User Fee Act, a critically important act for the continuation of
prescription drug protections for our country.
I again want to thank the Committee on Rules for doing such an
expeditious job last night late in bringing this rule to the floor so
we can pass it before the Memorial Day recess.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
Mr. KUCINICH. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, in the bioterrorism conference report, House leadership
managed to put in a new provision that would allow Medicare HMOs more
time to decide whether or not to continue offering health plans. This
would allow HMOs to delay for 2\1/2\ months telling senior citizens if
they will continue to offer health insurance to them. Is this not a bit
out of place? We are going to have a Medicare provision in legislation
that helps the country prepare for a bioterrorism attack. This is what
causes the American people to wonder what in the world we do here.
We have a bill on the floor dealing with bioterrorism and suddenly it
is also a bill that deals with Medicare HMOs. Here is a Medicare
provision in legislation that helps prepare the country for a
bioterrorist attack. Strange, because the Medicare+Choice program is
wholly unrelated to bioterrorism. This provision was not considered by
a committee. This provision was not considered in the underlying bill
in the House or the Senate. It was added to the conference report at
the very last minute. This is just another example of how the
leadership is able to circumvent the established process and of the way
business is done in this House. The only purpose, repeat, the only
purpose of this provision is to help the insurance industry by giving
HMOs more time to calculate revenue and estimate profits for next year.
Every year, the Medicare+Choice program drops seniors to the tune of
about a half a million seniors in the last year. Not only do senior
citizens lose their coverage, but HMOs in the program have increased
premiums, hiked up copayments, decreased benefits, and eliminated
coverage year after year. Now, under this provision, seniors will have
even less time to review their options for getting the health care that
they will need. Allowing Medicare HMOs a 2\1/2\-month delay is not good
for seniors. It certainly should not be added to the program. And most
of all, Mr. Speaker, it should not be in a conference report for the
Bioterrorism Preparedness Act.
I call upon all Members to take note of exactly what happened in
slipping this provision into a conference report on bioterrorism, and I
call upon all Members to remember the senior citizens in our districts
who are being thrown out of health care coverage by Medicare HMOs and
an insurance industry which does not give a darn about the senior
citizens.
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin).
Mr. TAUZIN. I thank my friend for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I wanted to read into the Record some of the names of
the incredible staff who helped finalize this important work for the
country. They include the head of our health team, Pat Morrisey, Brent
DelMonte, Amit Sachdev, Nandan Kenkeremath, Allan Slobodin, Tom
DiLenge, Steve Tilton; and of the legislative counsel, Pete Goodlow.
These are staffers who worked tirelessly day and night and, believe me,
all night, weekends, to make this possible. So many times we fail to
say thank you to them. I just wanted to say on the record, thank you,
team.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule so
we can begin the debate on this important conference report.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the
previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Dan Miller of Florida). The question is
on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
A record vote on the Journal will be a 5-minute vote immediately
following this 15-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 403,
nays 19, not voting 12, as follows:

[Roll No. 186]

YEAS--403

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Allen
Andrews
Armey
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Boozman
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Collins
Combest
Condit
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Frank
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Harman
Hart
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kerns
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kleczka
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Lynch
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller, Dan
Miller, Gary
Miller, Jeff
Mink
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver

[[Page H2842]]

Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reyes
Reynolds
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Sanchez
Sandlin
Sawyer
Saxton
Schiff
Schrock
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stearns
Stenholm
Stump
Sullivan
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Toomey
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins (OK)
Watson (CA)
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NAYS--19

Conyers
DeFazio
Filner
Hinchey
Kucinich
Lee
McDermott
Miller, George
Owens
Payne
Rangel
Sanders
Schakowsky
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Towns
Waters
Watt (NC)

NOT VOTING--12

Burton
Deutsch
Ehrlich
Emerson
Mascara
Meek (FL)
Murtha
Riley
Schaffer
Snyder
Traficant
Watts (OK)

{time} 1113

Mr. TOWNS and Mr. WATT of North Carolina changed their vote from
``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. MALONEY of Connecticut and Mr. HOUGHTON changed their vote from
``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. EHRLICH. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 186 I was inadvertently
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

____________________