te tina erncgrt prra i veeeirthd e poan oth pgm m dtrt, icle gur nt yofst heowr an a hrght ecotr geinpeleai o om jo- bba to wk uilas psie s cricly ioranfo feivomnie- afct cmutindorhe mmm llsuorth ogmansuorthi. ur moleagueso ve ye anyou, m. ear, a i yid cthbancf me mrco: tnk e ntma anyid ckhealce m ti. e aihgeledyro wor. m. ow: see. thchr:the gtlom rervs. t gtlanfr n jse thgtladfr n yk rerv. . elghse m pleu yeltw mutso e gelen ocafoiaor the urseof clluy mrcaert: m. aian elto t ntmafr

wainto m kme f t puosof clluy . ilr:ha f ppti ioanolie an pgrmsor e iq ndcas. r gi vueferalas nde erd ho a anesf e utestes mita. op ce keantrel thugouorstnd warwsnwa me re scncti aaar precd. th eirme rien a tmualxcuse. iavbe wrkg than agcs ueranthr missnscoer a ierts trerdohempt o ca mity t is atthsa te, heored tonsrehecan ghexa lwh ioms bl trch thou ts fft lrn e rkercend te vy meu nsifrely ths idifilto deta thimacof nisinhe

sonootr ancs d fera lds itomicesny biso ame sbl sutns inorroava ftas nrsio i wteohe cnc oenroenl aly mch ain tthewok wh th ancs inan ageae td eari d rorngheodf mityviio il iavbe nifd ey ar lkig toheatri loketohamaalrto suhath parti oprand soe is su m cve:t'myop wca moorarinherossnd cllgu a i c ctie wktoth wh e lentgeietoddss ts isusoisontien an ohe aou t ni c nnutonj tt e pk rve d teor lndha tofr wht cmpmising

mityeane. .ilr: hvi gwn uon e ompensa,i uneran utoe terdof t eirme aheavs goeihb. okoorwihllo ades isss a i yld bak. mr cve: yldac. thcirth gtlomro ne yk. s.loy:i'leedo yld o nus tthe gtla om cifni nkg mb onincierce mswatersha yer mh. .peeritrgl oos h. 34a llhan oy ai me ctil inesentsnuratn' fur b emitempta otctns fr erda meca. asaninmebeofhe naci srves cmte marcurlonrn tt r 34 mpes sh ve t othdertntf usg d ualan delmeth iwieslt inamli losg ei hsi

asstcendutnghe a ri romene. thbi tesomofheor prisns fm t rubcans onchcecth wl tu o eno t te cesprtis at cse einciriis one poviotasw t utri otonmer fincl pteiobuauo sp asi pacce bbas kewesar, ic rpe f reha 3ilonf s cuors otr osineplshe laboreptmntomnsse ru ttroec sisro coliteetemtadce fr ucruls naia vier e a sma gtto wll stetonwod tin cisasamar. ut ii'thrtm,r spke bt i steernd a ithmilef rra sso rits e dear d e repuicn adsh h nenoin pve te naon fodnsanroam

oexirng at e oth moh. puics he t ce cle dati oou dt d e oigio odo rvce mbe, tens seorant mt lnae onus ndusesrd,000 yongemra we ldha tirute a ithas hoil cgress. wemuppe isilanet orwh cgrs ou b doi. elba. e a:hgelen om w rs. mrfrinuyenmrchrm, m leed tyildwoines t ntmafrex, chirn rt, rheurs of a clouy thchr:heenem fm tess coiz. r.arr:ha y, m aian athiti, yldoy llgu m ptieror te rsef cloy. mrpiteerheoeasd

8 lln dasr li cgeo ndhemmia nes. mir hran hve te stn rt ontharin s dastebyurca mah. eufr blis idage inudg8,0 om ad 1900 businss. 8200peleav mde apiciotoe. .chrm, thghhe pka ssy eou ts rnnga fr rranhaey elf,cayou exaiowit lle soelpfulor huineah vctms iouikto aurmy nstntth cgrs ll spoheo-tmisaste li neds. yldo e ntmafr o tasnd aiaofhe hola sury bcmiee aroiaon mr cte tnkouor riinuph isu steeemwa fceto sic litis ras

stendriite fdi ormmdie favgfft inreoe hrine hv. eupementafuin bll th pseheou ts mni wl naee t lt esreriio ad rum ndgor lgerreve efrtsuh tsen rt ronandotr rtf r ti. gntma tth mr pteer a wcoid eliht ohurineary, i ff m tnoryta qrenttht eyecve fm e vataonf rrcaahe i ahhamaanofr ta gatuprtnd hama crt. d yield cky me. . arr:iid ck e aiheenewanro neyo. s.loy:esve mrfrlihuen yl t mite tcirn erlt

thgeleman om aba for e ppe aooq. e ai t gtlanro alba i rogzefotw mite mradho: tnkyo m. chrm. athiti, wld le t regnehegelen om - mr yngfoolloqu mr yng iise toy t pssy rpo f tul engyormeic pgr, e omssstae ogmn e biorene aisnc ogm d printh spdg rthe er ogam e pgrsremptt stendth stean edo lparrsorouc vellpatgos. es pgrs venaed rulusess oai naisstaensi

tt whasila pounietohre d vep weavudt csais d wre finth a e hama hado keou cio a hoo a ora aproho t aroiaon llani' tnkl bon ttubmtt. ri tarp,hehaman mmteoorwi m t ndltniv ose t de e sennghage i areatyo aenon. i el . eolr.hrm, r smphec he geleanrows ncns coerinth ruioinhe maaryngyroaminth fm bl,naicarhe ral ergfoamic roam thgeleanrio ia lu mbeofur sucoitende s stmtain vepi pts t erl bl d apreia sint. aumr cts ntnt

ou dision r i pgrs o aie e $ilon rectn. as dmeio ahe note inur llomtt mku i coiedo wki wh e nem fmowtoeehe wecodinalrniv fftsndeil contie ats meorr thk t gtlanor brgi tso rttti aihe o t for oth us. died ck eha:he gtlla fm neyo. mr lwe rer. r.rengys: w onudgerada, i coizepseate yo om fri f tee mut. mryoo:haoumr ear. i ha ciranrengysen r theoryohaon wh e prriio cmiee i seo eaabtwo imrtnt stinsf e fudiil tgrcuur

d atorgnpetis il supot eomtt'sor n adrsig velrual isesacgmeca riltalomtt. i coen t cmmte f exanngheo a ut ccneupy roh t sptiercathesd d eomtt's roitn rheric ctrutns att mkeinesndg ernc tea t nio's agcuur d ppti ptangent d seeesrc regneheiuscrni whhs vbltoheta o flids eno. th vaprrae re spoti taywi pvi preciofres d seasendnure noti olioo agrulrasss tute. rar tthste d foignpeatns

apopatnsudts wnt tthnkheoite or inudg anagth wll me thentnaol brdcti fdst ve n weth t evusea. iwilnse e aintrio h t aliy toineaheramiioto inrmio io rt ke ici ctil forerin suororimonun ut remendrein t roho nfmio i wt mtifoig sian a delpmt. toysononng predte itali a huniri cis aunth wldhi hsirt ipa o ounaon cuty e s.ovnnt stse evy dolr re efieny nddict. isppopatnbi tes imrntte i minit mo efeive. is iveme ifoigid ca yelgrt tus d ineae tdetre ats it n oyo mstatef ora erit spos er

5 lonobbuto t ti ste o oth 1ercear cotrs ha graduat fm s.oi aisncan 1 t5 ftet owng rksreorr ripen o ouid th stedertntnd.s delme aeneswo t vaemecs enic inre tt po ttak 1f meca18rii ecomanupor aut o fe eran js. e mt ok t cheup apy tte pgrshe pergorgn aisnc th wk bom enor feiv tn y,r.hama thchr: t gntmayields ba t bance ohiti. heenewanroneyo rsloy: rere. eha:heenem fm w rs. . elghse w chim w he eh se. m eped if thgelema is ppad yldac homu tmeo e ve

t cirhe genem om nejeeha 8/2 mut. e gtlla fm n yk s gine . rengys: ds e ntwonie bk? sloy: iied. mrflihuenios ll thchr:heelenro nejeeyiedsac. rsnto e rlethbi ha b nser f enenunr eivmite re a e eneninhe naref aubtite csienofheri died he rus mmitte pn 1-3 a e enenrte in pt ohoeept 1129 slleonded oed aoideds igina bl r e rpe fuhememes deth iv mute ru a sllbe coideds ad are thenypots ooer agns t bl fo wt purseoehe gelenro vrgiaee recoitn? iae pot oer

agnsthprisn giin wiheolnag27i a ctiinthugth wo cim opa2 le tul cmieeri beusit vlas ae 2f usul 2unerlae-b oful1, ovioth chgeextg waynobe rertd aenal prprtisil sti 5 oivsi c prvis% t aun aiab f oliti fm thdearenofusce cme icmsfubeadvaae o ii tb gerents. hi pviioteru bau ihaesexti lw. ere cmsctrode a stutryisiti rma oth cme vicms ndor ficaye0. secon 5 wldhage t rma. is stury fmu i

ualynth jiar coite d wullt ator fmu. ihefo iis omyoi oer . thcir t caifidsha e pvion - ovio upses estg w d e oi oorrs stn d e ovios rienro e ll y oerpot oergast thbi? r atursdohe gelen omex sk rogtn? . aian rae pot f deagns t fllin ovio oh. 5fo ile oomlyitclse 2 ofu 2 bennngitthsecon o pa 535, in 1 roh 1 u.c.90 sseiob- pge 5, in4. thsrosi ppos

an estg w yhgi e hokecatanays anreewegehi nstueseglaon ia aproiio bl iatn cusf l21 i koa li fm e a. e ai dsnymeer wh toe ard othoi o de th cirs ppado ul t cai fds t povio andxii l a i i vlaon o re . t pntf rd iuaid, erosis trkefr e bl. ar trenyth pn o orr ait e ll r atursdoth gtlafresis mrhearng is aoi oergast.r or faurtoomy th cus2 le1. th povio ppos aexiinlabyhai e or ruimeofhe exrtmpta. hiisnioti oclse 20re 2 a f ulg roth chr. hechrdo a oeremer

wh bhed t pntof rd? n, e ai ppad rul ehain tt e ctn en eisngawnd nstus lisatn oti o cus 2f le 21. orhapuo dshe gelen ek rogti? l fisthungnd thn 'lregneyofo be othe ru, t e l e pmp iusid,he seio i sicn om t ll fowht rpe eshe gelema fm lirn n ri? i ape t li t aini ekim tdete th - thcirhegelen . nsli: veoayhe apal t tle eha:hequti ishl heecio t cirta t dgntf e mtt? oee rogitnn e aeainhegetlon fm

lirn. mswarsthk u,r. spk. meeyispotebyhe siisr aemt inad hre d tstp critil puic-l andenfr isppprtis ll atwodhwtheilof erelng mori ibo us adunrmeheorof thjo catg eo-ior n fthndf 16 mys mor tnstis whn gratvue onely40 billiohae pedp t nkapov pele d cdi tth eiba i prvehe tnstis wlduprtorth 1,0 bsn enid at. e onrwe wai t gat e rk atheenng tnstis ilbeitra d src b o ren coeto d t gathe liliodha bsou he nhewe sptehe

unedtas wl ve ofshe. th ciranf einci rvce cmiee cimth ringhiamdmtod avuo,o dgar fe, qteunot, t i is hdl ta. rede tmpwuin ye01bgestmas at a llfutiaxpt-po 587 lgera miioinxcs fdsn he ntisl ar eha: e ntwon ll spd. e ba s t aeaan mu bcoind te qstn t cir liheer th sou bsuaidr ot nothutae t eme iel thgtlon stl regze t nfe yr mkssil tth stnmt t oecon . ts: wldi t ntueo pehru thchiri hrd tnk is inrdrn iwod k t

eaerou t rue b n ienrlg vlaon e ha:heutis al thdeisn t cirta t jgntfhe cmiee osinav s a. theppe n thay he i e eci othchr an asheudenofth omtt. fth andmenttohe bi amemes slle i deexpthortein pa bofhseept 1129 amdmntenbl dcbein usrolio00npr foamdmtsesib i seio 4f tt rolio ac ftr andntshl nser oyn herd indn e po, may

ofer olyy mmb digted inthept,ha e nser aea sl b detae t tepefi d-aye withawy e ppontt nyimbere aio treon. a nt sje t enenexepas ovedy ctn40 hseesutn 50ndha n bsuecto th ma f disn t eson inaln odeatnyimfo thchro caiofhe coite popatnsr s sieeo fe andnt oconstg fth enmes pntd pt of thrertotarerisse of amndntn loshle onded rd,ha b deatlefo20 mut, uayivedndonold byhe ciranrai miry mr tomite arriio, alnobe sje tamdmtsxpts odebyecon oth usreoli00a sll nobeubjecto ma f ig oth qstn. rg nserioofheil fomeme, e aian anngini mbeoth omtte prriio o eirepeiesne m ofrp 2prfoa

amdmtsac aanpotor e rpe dat iisow i odeo nser amdmt pnt ipa bf hoe po 1-2. r atpuo dshe gelenroalamse coitn? m cirn,urant ctn hse res 50,s degn hama engys, ri t ofe bcnuer apa oth nserioodisi f h. 54 thlist mendmtsncde ithnloiat thees d h bn red b bh sies

e ai te erwi esna t enen e ern ocumr codionysngfamdmts ,, 1 ,, 19an , ind pt o hseeptumr1595 fed m. erlt o aba e aiurantoou soti 5, e ntma fmlam m arht d heenem om geogi m isp,acilcotr 2 mut. eha rogzeth ntmafrm aba. . eol iesrve th ban o mtie. e ai te ntma rerv. hgelen rogegi anyo i ntd ne f ccns wi eminhen oc amndnt i'n oongt ti nt toay wnommaer n e eneyhe

gentleanro fri ratg o rsechhe ienis i efcttoarrkomtive sec gnt mr bho tt rllis -n r uda fd a reah intiivisnef eels inuril have i u fdi r erti ad zlsl precd y eor b ngstosawh reah i anisnound. he ancinhageth tialnite r foodan aicteas cpl inerl rosan did ars os a as efr pital inerree. foo heetinrebit w mt ttaicmagg th pce a sciin rearh eaan ouss he anendo. oecoeris ttuin thagcuuraetg sevi b2 lln noa wi oi.

nyay, a.fishe te gi tt ul of ctil mportae an mbr obo sesf e slishis ro iveseg e niol gac ogmnd e scityroprra silly ohegelen' rcamndn wt pnt ouhacti tnaon agcuurtast ss s t aenenwod disot a gd ea its's stiti - remierstiscsgey. stiscsrextme pota tarr rchs aninst. itroceinrmioon pduio ad ic f virtuayve cp owin thniedtasndhe mor lisckcagoes hoiltela vs d e cpur uge on rm ths a ioangecyha

nes erpny tate ve . pnyhae vit thmemes lango warsd d ooprenon ertisanspiayop emrsn sis t ale foute me rduioo e fie ofenalouil anthchfcomi. tve iorntas d agn il io ot oos t bcmeme, do wt o kthe in. thth irervthbanc ofyim e ai t ntma sees th gtlanroalam mradho:t isim ullio coizmr ras f uian thchr:or h lg? . erlt f fe nus. e ai t gtlan i regnzef vemite. .wre tnyor. chrm. i antthkhegelen omlamandhe gntma omewery r ei hp. th cot lisanha exerncdhallenrsf e la ser das,vytng othofgtheisssp

rirysmhrghev t p.ilpi a n iase nstr ca o sef e vetio icstousia. enoudd uthumate imcto satloabt 2,0 sarmis cst th's,0 sar mesha eu omecoa crch un. has 00sqre meshe ouromniesreucmo lnae hrineane aralseite hawi rran hveju hti r satanes d urca ia crentlyead wa t inndf e untestes anen tatasgrd a pt isn ocacge tnsrs $0,0 r dmisateccnto reah rogh asso u race. slen imasodli ama su btt csi sar mis ddiol aslos

inosia atak o mmits atmuh r ulrae. i antoha t gtlma omlam t gtlanro nejesefothr aian clinoumeme od. ais gog eurth w carear ts,hawean fi asoti ah wca brote d pve ddialondadtial sat heoa o lisna wi at elba. thchr:hgelen om gegi mr bho ahiti, . hama'mplse t--et menqre ou te he fonea se? e ai t gtlanro geg hs /mite mrbiop tnkou athiimi'li t yiel o neso t gntla om wcsi m mre the chr:hegeledy i coiz f t mnus. msmoe:ha y, r. isp,ha u,mrspke endmenou ptehe naolchl ncac

ncsmi. kw att'li tbeot hugr a aam aun me bau h lchon. i ulsi ou, oun' itunlocchkedang atasheayheid dn li ian wldete t eiunnd od i daas mmb ocore m sakg aituh shin wicshoulnocc t uit ste of aria. derinuh amg ou t cui emrrsi tti t ho miisatrsikmain t ilwh aun meyta erng tm aolchse sawh ite o aoma oremrklydeinth food beusth heoon. nyg ilefos denilyhibue d

gltndhechlisic dnth wlehirear i teicuoddungchl hos. codn d athingabt th il b iro t beayngha ts acce mund mdmteiors rrt awhatas,uo, er shl nohycaeggaio oririnaon ait y il egie r feluh ededrice lchor sl thee yve idtiicioofny cldy spia tenoricts i nt trenfcewh i aladonheoo. wod ge aptn tis enenan illwe i thk isodsulgo fuhe aakup.r 01 spsoedy clegu prente ja gsh o nemecowhhaseeth rssteoan te acce ofun smi.

eeot r imeme. hechrthgelen om alam m arht: iie bk isim e a: t gtlanies. eenem fom gora. mrbiopiie t mus this meo eenely frm tas.aconee thcirthenemafrm xai coiz f t mit. . ckon le ihakh ntmafr fmeoiaor h ldehi aaneof thppprtisros ant srt dcuioof y rcur ene a i thk clegu f t amenen bng cledn e enlowiho ainenong eevtaon i t gf as ri a thene tt he llsctof reve ad lloo fwa

aefcte iveme f thlo ul mymedmtonibes toh asecndh i tt e amdmt mes de $5,0ncastohe naonlnstef odn rilte, reah d uti aivieacou. enttf e enens tonaeh t iree fuingto ititis wch ar ndra cles t ppt uciol sechnd hoari thmemt pdobyn ofeof $4,0 hehi foatn aou. i bg ntrndedes tlsy mli. o isarcur enen spos hewo ot tna itiutoffon rilte mina mes crse that wl lpuran gnt clesanwi hp einhe cte ohe

coriti o, to a bte unrsanngf od der, bte uderstainof exndgprtits r sechecomc alis xtsin gh eduti dt lle ppti o lleshainma itaes empteby nul dists. he hu he enearsn agcuurear. d kn mef e lles reomofholg tt 'mepsein - . sp: yld e mut . ckn e:so o t lge wl mor corito heonptf exndd fd ccs oran o our foounie thk te ntmafo exnnghe me thamdmt a god enen a wl mime e poenalorarinacvy inho areas wreresce isimedr ndndud.

heomnaonf aictu ghnggansfoests icmcotien a facing after hurricane harvey, it is an important extended impact that will be helpful as i go forward. and i thank my colleagues for my colleagues' support. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from georgia. mr. bishop: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from georgia yields. the question is on the amendments offered en bloc. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the en bloc amendments are agreed. now in order to consider amendment number 10 printed in 295. b of hort report 11- mr. cicilline: i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment number 10 printed in part report of

115-295 offered by mr. cicilline of rhode island. the chair: the gentleman from rhode island, mr. cicilline and a member opposed each will control five minutes. mr. cicilline: i thank my who are co-sponsors of this amendment. this would strike the harmful provision that prevents implementation of the national ocean policy. it has helped guide ocean policy for seven years. it develops commonsense tools. the council pool resources and strengthen the voices of business owners and facilitate coordination. the national ocean policy helps agencies to implement federal implementation and have a say in the ocean planning process.

my home state of rhode island, the ocean state, has benefited greatly and i want to acknowledge the extraordinary leadership of my colleague, senator sheldon white house, who has championed this effort. with help from the national ocean policy, the block island wind farm project was completed and it is powering 17,000 homes. the northeast depends on clean water for fishing, shipping. narragansett bay, buzzard's bay and long island sound need action. it is a terrible idea to undermine good ocean policy. the national ocean policy does not create any new regulations or modify any agency's established mission, jurisdiction or authority. it helps to coordinate the implementation of current regulations by federal agencies to establish a more effective

and decision making process. t gives life to stewardship to thoughtful implementation and coordination to protecting our treasured oceans. ill-advisedike this provision. and i reserve. mr. aderholt: i rise in opposition to the amendment. the executive order on national ocean policy is an obama administration policy. it lacks clear statutory authority. instead of streamlining federal management, it adds layers of additional bureaucracy and federal overreach. the national ocean policy has the potential to harm both economic values by affecting agriculture, fishing, construction, manufacturing, oil, gas and renewable energy among others. this body has taken the position in the past to pause the

implementation of the executive order on the national ocean policy. as an this uncertainty continues, how it is implemented and the unintended consequences. the policy was developed by the prior administration without involving or consulting with the congress. the national resources committee has expressed concern about the policy as did a letter signed by over 80 groups supporting the provision in the underlining bill. we're not saying that ocean policy in general does not make sense or is something that could not be supported. my home state of alabama is a coastal state. all i'm saying is we need to revisit this policy and take a bombs-up approach by working with stakeholders and have something work its way through the congress. working to resolve ocean management challenges should be a nonpartisan and something that this congress could achieve. therefore, i oppose the

amendment and i urge my colleagues to do the same. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from rhode island. mr. cicilline: may inquire how much time i have? mr. cicilline: -- he chair: three minutes. mr. cicilline: i yield to my colleague from rhode island. mr. langevin: once again, we are on the house floor debating ocean planning. comprehensive ocean planning works. we have done it in rhode island and we have done it throughout the northeast region. ocean planning is a success because it brings everyone to the table, everyone is part of the dialogue and the conversation. the process forces cooperation and compromise by opening dialogue among scientists, fishermen, bothers and others. there is an impression that ocean planning is a federal land grab of the ocean, which it is

anything but. it is local control something done at the regional aisle. now, mr. chairman, we can't turn back the clock by allowing this rider to remain in the bill. we've come too far. i commend the work of the sponsors of this amendment. and i also want to commend my colleague senator whitehouse who has done so much work to preserve the oceans and creating the national endowment for the oceans. mr. chairman, in the past, we have driven species to the point of ex tinching shon and driven our oceans to the brink. do not take us back to this era. please support ocean planning. i thank the gentleman for yielding and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from alabama. mr. aderholt: i reserve.

the chair: the gentleman from rhode island. mr. cicilline: i yield 45 seconds to the distinguished the gentleman from illinois. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. >> i rise today as a proud co-sponsor of this amendment. this amendment is significant not only to our oceans but to our great lakes. great lakes contain a fifth of the world's fresh water. they are critical to our economy and quality of life in my district and many states. the national ocean policy protects the integrity of the great lakes ecosystem. this bill would undermine the national ocean policy and ability of agencies to coordinate with states and governments. if we are sustaining our national, ecological and environmental health, its natural beauty and presenterous resources, we must protect the national ocean policy. i support this amendment and i urge my colleagues to do the same. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from alabama reserves. mr. aderholt: i reserve.

mr. cicilline: i yield the balance of my time to distinguished the gentleman from georgia. mr. bishop: i find it troubling that congress enacted laws and 11 departments and four environmental agencies now seems to oppose any effort to bring consistency to that process. usda has an extremely limited role and i wonder why the majority wants to stop it. we want usda's voice to be excluded from any policies. the farmers and ranchers be taken into consideration? i support the amendment and i urge a yes vote. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from alabama. mr. aderholt: i yield back. the chair: all time having expired, the the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from rhode island.

those in favor say aye. . those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 11 printed in rt b of house report 115-259 -295. >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the gentleman will uspend for a moment. it is now in order to consider amendment number 12 printed in art b of house report 115-295.

we're getting there. it is now in order to consider amendment number 14 printed in part b of house report 115-295. now, for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. dais: mr. speaker, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 14 printed in house report 115-295, offered by mr. rodney davis of illinois. the chair: pursuant tos relose 500, the gentleman from illinois, mr. davis, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois. mr. davis: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise today to offer this amendment which would prevent the inspectors stockers administration to use any funds to revoke exceptions in place before april 14, 2017.

at its core this amendment, supported by my colleague, congresswoman sheree bustos is about reinforcing -- sherri bustos is about reinforcing congressional attack which we must make due to failure. green handlers are assigned gsh grain handlers are assigned base on geographic location. to utilize official inspection service they must gho to their official inspection agency unless they apply for and receive an exception from gpsa. only with an exception may they receive services from an alternate inspection agency. tchirg drafting of the 2015 agriculture re-authorization act, one of my priorities was to provide more opportunity for these exceptions to be considered and granted. that legislation passed this chamber by a voice vote and included a provision which

created a new process by which grain handlers could pe fission for -- petition for an exception. when it was signed into law, i thought it provided them greater opportunities to utilize exceptions. n 2016, they refirm -- reaffirmed this when it stated agreements and will continue to honor those agreements. imagine my surprise and disappointment when in april of this year, they released a director opening a backdoor for official grain inspection agencies to revoke those 95 service agreements. as a result of this directive, an official inspection agency can now unilaterally request that they revoke a service agreement with neither the grain

handler nor the alternate inspection agency having a say in the process this runs contrary to the original intent of the legislation which was to provide grain handlers with greater opportunities to utilize exceptions, not less. by supporting my amendment today, we can temporarily halt this misinterpretation. as it stands, the interpretation of the law has cause maryland grain handlers to lose their service agreements even though these grain handlers have operated under these exceptions for year. this includes my constituent, scott cookerity who has been using the same grain inspection service for more than 20 years when g spmbings a sent him a notice giving him less than 30 days to prepare far change in service. the issue at stake is a prime example of bureaucratic failure. in our current inspection process, the grain handlers are the customers yet they are not given a say under the new directive, not granted enough time to plan they are disruption and are the last to find out

about this drastic change in service. they deserve better, mr. chairman. by supporting this amendment, we can reclaim congressional intent, prevent gpsa from revoking the agreements in place, an outcome congress never intended. their interpretation of the law may be wrong but i do want to thank the usda for working with me to ensure my amendment is not misinterpretted and accomplishes what i sought to do. that is to prevent gpsa from revoke regular main serg vis agreements. i look forward to working with them on finding a more permanent solution. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment and reserve the balance of my time. the chair: does anyone claim time in opposition? if not, the question -- the gentleman from illinois has reserved. mr. davis: i --

yield my -- mr. davis: i yield my colleague such time as he may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. >> i agree it aneers grain inspections packers and stock forwards administration is not currently implementing a provision if the 2015 grain standards act re-authorization. despite the efforts of my colleagues to try and work with the usda to correct this interpretation, the agency continues down a path of unraveling a long standing agreement that have allowed a designated official grain inspector to carry out inspections in another geographic area. i hope this amendment sends a clear message to the department that they are not following congressional intent and they should reverse course. i thank the gentleman for his continuous work on this issue and i urge my colleagues to upport this amendment. mr. davis: i would like to thank chairman aderholt for his

support and yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from illinois. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed. o -- is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 15 printed in ouse report 115-295. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa running quickly down the aisle seek recognition? mr. king: i have an amendment at the desk made in oorder by the rule. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: ealt number 15 printed in part b of house report 115-295, offered by mr. king of iowa. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 500, the gentleman from iowa, mr. king and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa. mr. king: thank you, mr. chairman. i would yield myself such time as i may consume. and this is the amendment that doesn't a i lou federal funding

to support any project that is -- that enforces davis-bacon rules. davis-bacon rules have, actually it's the last remaining jim crow law left on the books in america. and it was established by a couple of republicans in new york back in about 1932 or 1933 when they realized that there were a few construction projects going on in the great deprerks there was an alabama contractor that underbit -- undered by the local unions in new york to build a building in new york that contractor that came out of alabama brought his labor out of alabama, african-americans oout of alabama. so they got together and decided let's pass a law to have trade protectionism between alabama and new york. we're going to control who is in the union and we'll control the wages and we'll control the benefits. i've been in the construction business as of last monday for 42 years. we paid davis-bacon wage scales

most of those year, if not all those years, and king construction understand what is this does. it inflates wages. the inflation of wages is dictated by a little board and committee that's supposed to be evaluating what's described as prevailing wage but it's not, it's union scale. it's a bunch of guys sitting around a table deciding that they're having trouble competing with the rest of the private sector and so they want to raise the wages of their construction workers so that they can get their pick, the cream of the crop of the construction workers to go to work for them rather than their competitor or another industry. that's how this has gone on for all these years and the -- in the private sector. the federal government deciding what wages and what benefits should be paid and now we're seeing benefits that are being paid in the fringe benefit category to people who have a health insurance program that is

funded by the taxpayers, premiums funded by the taxpayers under obamacare. so now davis-bacon is even worse. it pays wages and pays benefit tess sined to pay for health insurance benefits and they're double do you think on that and on the obamacare subsidy of their premiums. so these wages no longer reflect prevailing wage. they haven't for a long time. they've long and maybe always been union scale. the union sitz at the table with a few contractors and they make the deal. i have a private contractor, a mirror shop contractor, worked with us for 42 years, i've seen the inefficiency it's created in our company and competing companies as well. we like it when we can pay our labor the highest rates known to man. it make ours employees happy. and if i can look at our competition and we can sit down and say you know what, we would like to give our employees a $5 an hour raise or $10 an hour raise and make sure any other

industry can't compete with the wages they're playing -- paying because it doesn't come out of our pocket as contractors, it wage out of the pocket of payers. if utcht to build five bridge reshes peel davis-bacon. if you want to build four bridges, stick with the federal union scale, the legacy of jim crow. if you want to build, let's just say a usda build this esame formula applies. you can build five i wouldings or -- build organization four. build four store roirs build five. but we need to have competition in this u.s. economy, mr. chairman. and i urge adoption of my amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? mr. bishop: i rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. bishop: davis-bacon is a simple concept and a fair one. the davis-bacon act does is

protect the government as well as the workers in carry ought the policy of paying decent wages on government contracts. the davis-bacon act requires workers on federally funded construction projects be paid no less than the wages paid in the community for similar work. it requires that every contract for construction of which the federal government is a party in excess of $2,000 contain a provision defining the minimum wages paid to various classes of laborers and mechanics. the house has taken numerous votes on this issue and on every vote this body has voted to maintain davis-bacon requirements. in fact, most recently, during consideration of the f.y. 2018 security omnibus, the house firmly rejected a similar amendment 249-178. i hope that we will defeat the amendment before us today and move on to more substantive

matters. i'd also note that it's somewhat ironic that this amendment is being offered on the agriculture appropriations bill because the davis-bacon act specifically protects rural community work forces. it requires that prevailing wage determinations for rural counties be based on local work force cost. wage data from urban areas must be excluded. this requirement, i would note, came into force during the presidency of ronald reagan. i urge all members to vote no. i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from iowa. has one minute. mr. king: i thank the chairman and i'd like to now yield to the chame of the subcommittee, mr. aderholt. the chair: the gentleman from alabama is recognized for a minute. mr. aderholt: i rise to support the gentleman's amendment. each year the federal government requires davis-bacon provisions

on all sorts of constructions. as has been mentioned, roads, bridges, dam, buildings, and the taxpayers pay more. you do the math. according to recent study, davis-bacon inflates costs by 22% for construction cost. these added expenses come at a time when our nation is nearly broke. so therefore, i think it's time to put the taxpayers first and i encourage my fellow members to support this amendment. mr. king: reclaiming my time, mr. chairman, expending the balance of it, i would point out the ages tissue wages we're looking at here, laborers in indiana, $34 an hour. asbestos worker $46.35 an hour. there are many more here into the records. i don't think these are the kind of numbers the gentleman is talking about. i constantly hear the script read to us from the other side but never a response, i urge its adoption and i yield back the balance of my time, mr. chairman. the chair: the time has expire

thsmed esquone the amendment offered by the gentleman from iowa. those opposed, no. those in favor say aye. mr. bishop: mr. chairman, i'd like to ask for a recorded vote on cha. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the entleman awill be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 16 printed in part b of house report 115-295678 for what purpose does the gentlewoman from missouri eek recognition? mrs. hartzler: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will port the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 16 pointed in house report 115-295, offered by mrs. hartzler of missouri. the chair: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from missouri.

mrs. hartzler: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. hart ler: i rise today to offer an amendment to return local control to the national school lunch program. far too long, washington imposed burdensome and unnecessary mandates on local schools this misguided regulation created a wire contractic nightmare and mountains of paperwork for local school lunch administrators who want to spend their time focused on providing healthy meals for our children my seament simple. it stops a federally mandated formula called the paid lunch equity program that requires all schools to raise their school lunch prices to an arbitrary level sit here in washington. this amendment does not address the actual nutritional content of lunches, although i believe this is a policy area that should be addressed. but this amendment only stops regulations set log call school lunch pricefuls. local officials know their schools best and should ultimately be responsible for

setting school lunch prices in their calf fearas. many schools are forced to raise school lunch prices each year just to meet this federal mandate this pushes families struggling to make ends meet off the school lunch program and leads to more hungry students and higher costs for hardworking families. it's time to get washington out of the local school lunch pricing business and return more control to our local schools. i ask my colleagues to join me today in supporting this commonsense amendment to return more control to local schools. again i ask my colleagues to support, and i reserve the balance of my time. . the chair: does anyone claim time in opposition? if not, the gentlelady from missouri. harts hart yes. i would like to -- mrs. hartzler: yes. i would like to yield such time as he may consume to chairman aderholt. the chair: the chairman from alabama is recognized. mrs. adams: thank you. i rise in support -- mr. aderholt: thank you. i rise in support of this amendment. intellectual schools should have more local control in

operating their meal program, including establishing the price families must pay for the schools. school meal prices differ from one community to the next. and they take into account local food and labor costs and what families are willing and able to pay. i think it's always best to let the local schools make those decisions and i would urge my colleagues to support the gentlelady's amendment. mrs. hartzler: i reclaim my time. so thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate your support. and in closing i would urge all my colleagues to support this commonsense measure to restore local control of our school lunch pricing. this exact language was passed in the house version of the child nutrition re-authorization act last year, but that bill has not passed and we need to address this right now. so, i encourage my colleagues to support this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from missouri. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair,

the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to report amendment number 17 printed in part b of house report 115-295. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. carter: mr. speaker, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 17 printed in part b of house report 115-295 offered by mr. carter of georgia. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 500, the gentleman from georgia and a member opposed will each control five minutes. mr. carter: i rise today in support of my amendment to h.r. 3354rk the fiscal year 2018 appropriations bill. my amendment would withhold funding from the food and drug administration to implement a memorandum of understanding that redefines key terms in the health care industry. distribute and dispense. distributing and dispensing in the health care field are commonly understood to be unique and distinct activities.

distributing is understood to mean the sale or transfer of a drug without a prescription. like between a wholesaler and a manufacturer. dispense something commonly understood to mean a medicine going specifically toward a patient. the f.d.a.'s attempt to redefine these key terms would be especially detrimental to compounding pharmacies. compounding pharmacies are desperately needed to combine or mix medicines to meet the unique needs of particular patients. in the food, drug and cosmetics act, the f.d.a. has given limit -- is given limited regulatory authority over how much a pharmacy is allowed to ship across state lines. more specifically, over how much a pharmacy can distribute across state lines. but since the f.d.a. is now attempting to redefine the word dispense, the agency is attempting to gain more control over these pharmacies and now limiting the amount of medicine that can go directly toward patients. with the f.d.a. redefining the word dispensing, the agency is

now also limiting how much a state can dispense across state lines, creating an unnecessary patient access problem. especially for patients served by pharmacies near state lines. this amendment is necessary to convey to the f.d.a. that they do not have the authority to go against the intent of congress and redefine key terms in agency documents that are directly against what congress laid out in the statute, and the commonly understood meaning of the industry itself. the amendment will also enforce the drevetives in congress' last two appropriations reports that have been ignored by the f.d.a. mr. speaker, i want to repeat that. the amendment will also enforce the directives in congress' last two appropriations reports that have been ignored by the f.d.a. as well as language in the new f.y. 2018 appropriations subcommittee report. as the only pharmacist in congress, i have seen firsthand how important access to medications are for the people who need them.

i've also seen how important compounded medications are for the individuals who rely on uniquely tailored medicines. it would be a tragedy for the f.d.a. to limit these patients' access to medications because they redefined a term for which they would like to have more control. i urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment that is crucial for patient access. to important medications. and stop the f.d.a. from overreaching and going against the intent of congress. mr. speaker, i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. does anyone claim time in opposition? the gentlewoman from connecticut. ms. delauro: mr. chairman, i rise to claim the time in opposition to this amendment. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. five minutes. ms. delauro: thank you. mr. chairman, i oppose this amendment because it undermines the drug quality and security act, which we passed here in 2013. to protect patients from contaminanted compounded medications which are drugs

that are tailored to the specific needs of an individual patient. by the way, i am not the -- there are -- there's bipartisan opposition to the carter amendment. myself, congressman fred upton, congresswoman debbie dingell and congressman michael bishop. this is bipartisan opposition. let me be clear. the intent of the law was not to go after local compounding pharmacies, but rather the larger compounding pharmacies who act as big drug companies. traditional pharmaceutical companies that make vast quantities of drugs are held to robust safety standards. if these large compounding pharmacies intend to manufacture large quantities of drugs, like a traditional pharmaceutical company, ship them across state lines, then they should be held to a

similar safety standard. this amendment would change the law. and put patients at risk. some people can potentially die. this is not hyperbole. given that a meningitis outbreak in 2012 was caused by unsafe compounded drugs. that was less than five years ago. and i am astonished that we would entertain further undermining of the law. the meningitis outbreak associated with the new england compound center in 2012 led to 64 deaths. and more than 750 illens across state lines. -- illnesses across state lines. there are inherent risks with compounded medications and particularly with medicationses shipped across state lines -- medications shipped across

state lines. that's why we passed the drug quality and security act. by prohibiting the f.d.a. from implementing this law, this amendment exposes patients to a potentially life-threatening catastrophe. again, as we saw in 2012. this amendment also takes away incentives for pharmacies to register as an outsourcing facility, gives these facilities no reason to raise their quality and safety standards, and to submit the -- to the f.d.a. for inspection. we owe it to the american people to not put their health nd their safety at risk. 64 people died. i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. carter: mr. chairman, at this time i'd like to recognize the gentleman from alabama. the chair: the gentlelady from alabama is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, all.

i rise in support of the gentleman's amendment which has gained bipartisan support in our full committee. i'm very sympathetic to the gentleman's concerns and i trust his judgment and his experience as currently the only pharmacist that is serving in the house of representatives. mr. aderholt: this bill language is similar to the language in our house report. while the underlying bill did not go as far as limiting funds to be spent on the finalization, implementation or enforcement of the proposed memorandum of understanding between the f.d.a. and the states, our committee report language is conditional in that f.d.a. should not finalize the proposed rule if it fails to distinguish between distribution and dispensing a compounded product to a specific patient. dispensing is not defined in the drug quality and safety act, and f.d.a. should not unilaterally take it upon themselves to start regulating the practice of pharmacy, since

this sfunks regulated by the state -- function is regulated by the states under the state legislatures. therefore i support the intent of this amendment, until f.d.a. clarifies its policy, and i recommend the amendment's approval. i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from connecticut. ms. delauro: yes. how much time do i have? the chair: you have two minutes. ms. delauro: i yield one minute to the gentlewoman from michigan, mrs. dingell. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for a minute. mrs. dingell: thank you. while i have great respect for my friend and colleague from georgia, this misguided amendment would undermine f.d.a.'s work to enforce critical patient safety protections that were passed in the drug quality and security act in response to a deadly meningitis outbreak that killed 22 people in my home state of michigan. passing this amendment could ultimately lead to another crisis like what we saw. this amendment would prohibit the f.d.a. from finalizing a draft memorandum of

understanding that outlines when and in what quantity traditional compounding pharmacies can distribute a compounded drug across state lines. hamstringing f.d.a.'s ability to ensure that interstate shipments are only made from pharmacies and states that are exercising oversight over that could create a gaping loophole and would turn back the clock to the days when bad actors were free to ship products and murder people across the country without oversight. it's completely unacceptable. we should be standing up for the strong patient protections and de-access rather than turning back the clock. mr. carter: mr. chairman, at this time i'd like to recognize the gentleman from arizona. the chair: the gentleman from arizona is recognized for 30 seconds. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it's frustrating understand egregious this amendment is -- and egregious this amendment is actually necessary but it is. the f.d.a. has ignored

congressional direction to respect the statutory difference between distributing and dispensing of compound medications. as a dentist and health care provider, i can tell you from my professional experience how harmful this overreaching guidance from the f.d.a. is to patients. i often used specially compounded patients. i relied on the expertise of my pharmacist colleagues to ensure these medications were available to patients as appropriate. as a congressman, i support this amendment to ensure the f.d.a. follows congressional intent. as a doctor, i support this amendment because it means better care for patients. i thank the gentleman from georgia and i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and that's doctor's orders. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from connecticut. the gentlewoman from connecticut. ms. delauro: yes, mr. chairman. mr. speaker, why are we afraid of safety standards? the safety concerns with this amendment are also exacerbated by the fact that many states do not exercise appropriate oversight over compounding pharmacies.

a recent study revealed that nearly half of all states surveyed do not track the number of pharmacies that perform the compounding in their state. they make proactive state oversight impossible. do we really want to allow these facilities to go unchecked? that's exactly what this amendment allows. the f.d.a. is a regulatory agency. it needs the ability to regulate large scale shipments of compounded drugs across state lines, especially in certain states that have minimal if any safeguards for drugs compounded in pharmacies. i was concerned that this law as weak to begin with. and this amendment would further weaken and threaten the safety of patients. 64 people died, 22 of them in michigan. we should ensure that any legislation passed by this body is not weakened. the safety of american children and our families and our kids are at stake. i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. this is not a road, a bridge, a

helicopter or anything else. these are people's lives. and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. all time having expired, he the question is on the amendment -- the question is on amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. delauro: mr. chairman, i ask a roll call vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 18 printed in house report 115-295. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? mr. king: i have an amendment at the desk made in order by the rule. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 18 printed in house report 115-295rk -- 295, offered by mr.

king of iowa. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. king: this is the amendment that requires that new hires under this appropriation act are verified under e-verify before they can go to work. it ensures those funds made available in this appropriations bill will not be use for new hire unless they use the e-verify program as a responsibility the federal government relies as a matter of law. the federal requires e-verify to enhance the law. however it has been brought to my attention it is not consistent across different departments. it is in response to those concerns that i offer this amendment. to describe e-verify, it's that employers who have a prospective employee, conditional to the hire, may go on board the federal internet site which is the e-verify site, and type in

the valid information or perhaps the presented information of the prospective employee that's been offered a job, should they clear e-verify, you punch in what i just euphemistically call name, rank, and serial number, a short piece of da tai -- data that includes birth date and name and often birth place. it go into the internet site. it comes back to you and lets you know if you can legally hire the individual identified in this data. that's e-verify. the froth, hopefully in this congress, will pass an e-verify mandatory for private sector employers hopefully we will can d that in this congress. but the federal government needs to address this and do so with our own employees. that's what the king amendment does. it ensures that e-verify is used by our own employees and i reserve the balance of my time.

the chair: does anyone claim time in opposition? for what purpose -- the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. bishop: since president bush ordered federal agencies to comply with this in 2007 this amendment if it only applies to hiring at federal agencies will do absolutely nothing. i'm not aware by any effort of the trump administration town do president bush's order so it's a needless use of the house's time. i believe the gentleman's language would also require every one of the local county employees, our local folks, to be e-verified. wouldn't this add another burden on f.s.a. when it has to implement the new farm bill? if so i'd like to ask the gentleman what he expects would happen in an emergency such as the experience from hurricane harvey when us d da may need to bring on employees quickly? they would have to wait for e-verify clearance. i'd also submit that it's not

clear whether the language also covers every single person who receives any of the funds in this bill as a grantee. i think it's unclear and would risk requiring every single one of the thousands of grantees to go through e-verify. then you would impose a truly undue burden on many small farmers and ranchers and businesses that receive grants in this bill. i strongly oppose that. i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from iowa. mr. king: mr. speaker, i'd like to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from geam, the chairman of the subcommittee. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. aderholt: i rise in support of the gentleman's amendment here. i support what the gentleman is doing with this amendment. i also appreciate his willingness to make a slight change to the amendment in order to maintain support from staff

in embassies across the world that help usda staff open markets to u.s. goods. so with that being said, i would like to urge my colleagues to support his amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from iowa. mr. king: reclaiming the balance of my time, thanking the gentleman from alabama, i would add for clarification that the provision the gentleman referred to is section 40 , foreign service act of 19 0, which exempts those employees in foreign countries that surely would not want them encumbered under e-verify. in response to the gentleman's objection i have tried to fool e-verify by punching data into it. the longest delay i could create is six seconds. as far as undue burden, six seconds wait, i don't think is extreme at all. s the right thing for the federal government to at least exercise the laws we pass and want to impose on the rest of the country and upon ourselves. so it's a clarification amendment, mr. chairman. i urge its adoption and yield back the balance of my time.

the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from yea. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair ayes have it. the amendment is agreed. -- s now in order

for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. chairman, pursuant to section 3 of house resolution 500, as a designee of chairman frelinghuysen, i rise to offer enblk number 2 as part of the consideration of division of

h.r. 3354. the list of the amendments included in the en bloc is at the desk and has been agreed to by both sides. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendments en bloc. the clerk: en bloc number 2, consisting of amendments number 22, 24, 40, 41, 42, 445, 46 and 0 printed in part b of house report 115-295, offered by mr. diaz-balart of florida. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 500, the gentleman from florida, mr. diaz-balart, georgia, ntleman from mr. price, each control 20 minutes. mr. diaz-balart: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from orth carolina.

mr. price: mr. chairman. i would yield one minute to the gentlelady from california, mrs. torres. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. fores re: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to offer two amendments in this en bloc package to this appropriations bill. these two amendments will finally provide the authorized funding levels of $12 million for the regional infrastructure accelerator demonstration program. section 1441 of the fast act and 10 million for the transit oriented pilot program, section 3016 of the fast act. this funding will finally allow these two important programs to move forward, improving infrastructure projects and transportation options in my district in the inland empire and throughout our country. i appreciate, mr. chairman, and the ranking member's support and yield back the balance of my

time. the chair: thank you. mr. diaz-balart. mr. diaz-balart: i reserve. the chair: mr. price. the gentleman from north arolina. mr. price: reserve. the chair: reserve. somebody actually want to talk about this now? the gentleman from florida. to iaz-balart: i'd like recognize the gentleman from california at this time. for three minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. thank you, mr. speaker, i rise in -- >> thank you, mr. speaker, i rise in support of my amendment. back home in california's 25th district, cdbg funds are awarded to nonprofit organizations that do significant and far-reaching work for our constituents. they reach citizens of the city of santa clarita through programs like bridge to home, home rehabilitation services and summer youth development

programs. cdbg funds address community needs for street maintenance in low-income neighborhoods, emergency shelter for low-income individuals and others. my constituents dramatically benefit from cdbg funds and i'm sure many of my colleagues can attest to the sarme. that's why i was alarmed to see the president's budget request unfunded this program. i'm thankful to chairman diaz-balart and his staff for understanding the importance of this and restoring it to the bill. my amendment keeps this amount consistent with the 2017 level. i urge my colleagues to support and yield back the remainedmoifer time. the chair: the gentleman from north carolina. mr. price: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: i also yield back. the chair: the question is now

on the amendment offered en bloc by the gentleman from florida. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 21 fingerprinted -- printed in part b of house report 115-295678 for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. lipinski: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment the clerk: amendment number 21 offered by mr. lipinski of illinois. the chair: the gentleman from illinois and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois. mr. lipinski: i rise in support of this amendment that will provide the national highway traffic safety administration $9 million in order to do critical work on self-triing cars. earlier today we passed the self-drive act which expanded

nhtsa's authorities in this area. this amendment supplies the initial financial resources needed to carry out the direct i of this bill. this includes validating the safety of self-driving cars, defining new testing protocols as the technology advances and partners with -- partnering with industry along with state and local governments to conduct oversight of these new vehicles. nhtsa will play a key role in adopting this technology that promises so much. expanded mobility, safer roads, decreased energy usage and emissions and less congestion. i will yield. >> if the gentleman would be all right, i'd be willing to agree to his amendment as long as we can move the process quickly i would right now agree to move -- to agree with the amendment. mr. lipinski: i thank the gentleman for supporting it and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from florida

yields back? mr. diaz-balart: i yield. the chair: it is now -- the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from illinois. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 22 printed in part bmbing of house report 115-295. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> thank you. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: does the gentleman have an amendment? mr. mitchell: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 22 printed in house report 115-295, offered by mr. mitchell of michigan. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 500, the gentleman from michigan, mr. mitchell, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the gentleman is recognized. mr. mitchell: our nation faces a dire fiscal situation. we have reached our debt ceiling

once again. the path we're on is not sustainable. it jeopardizes our future, our children's future and our national security. we must get our fiscal house in order and take this problem seriously. paying lip service to the problem will not solve it. we must be responsible now before it's far too late. the reality is that we can make cuts to our government without impacting essential program. the right cuts will grow our economy by stopping over-eager burecrats who often seem dedicated to federal mandates and massive regulations. we need to be focus odd on growing and protecting main street, not an already-bloated federal government. the amendment i propose today makes a cut to the bureaucracy, the administrative cost to the department of transportation, housing and urban development. the cuts focus on administrative expenses salaries. this modest 10% cut saves and ad-- $2222 million

saves taxpayers $222 million and admitly is a small step. i understand that accountability requires ongoing small steps. my amendment combined with others will yield big savings for taxpayers without cutting projects or essential programs. i urbling my colleagues to seriously consider my amendment as we work to secure our fiscal future. thank you and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. is there anyone who claims time in opposition? the chair: the gentleman from florida. . mr. diaz-balart: let me thank the gentleman for his hard work. i claim time in opposition. i apologize. let me thank the gentleman for bringing up this amendment. he's worked awfully hard and i'm a huge admirer of his. here's a problem. in the committee we have actually gone line by line to identify cuts in salaries and expenses at h.u.d. and d.o.t. and as a result most administrative accounts are at

or below the 2017 levels. and so by the way, that's one of the ways we achieved $1.1 billion in savings. again, below the 2017 budget. when you do it across the board, it could effect safety programs, it could actually hurt -- have unintended consequences. so why -- while i am grateful for the chairman's hard work, i would urge a no vote at this time. and i will look forward to continuing to work with the gentleman to make sure that his concerns are addressed in this bill and in future bills. the chair: mr. mitchell. the gentleman from michigan. mr. mitchell: mr. chairman, thank you, sir. i respect the work of the committee, certainly the chairman. as i said earlier, i come from the private sector. where frankly, a 10% cut in administration is not uncommon. i worked at chrysler corporation back in the original loan guarantee days. if you can't cut 10% of your budget, find a new manager. we had made cuts. we made more substantial cuts

than many other agencies. we made significant cuts in, for example, the e.p.a. back to levels of twiveb-2016 -- 2005-2006. i believe we can make these cuts and still maintain the safety and security of our nation, maintain operations and programs and while we may disagree, i'll work with the chairman and the committee to continue working on getting our house in fiscal order. with that i yield back. thank you. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina rise? >> i rise to join the chairman in opposition. mr. diaz-balart: i yield the gentleman. the chair: the gentleman from florida yields to the gentleman from north carolina. >> thank you. the amendment would decimate the salaries and expense accounts at the departments of transportation and housing and urban development. there are broad consequences for this but i want to focus on one consequence. cybersecurity. mr. price: the inspectors general of both democratics have indicated that both agencies have a lot of work to do in addressing cyberthreats. the c.i.o.'s at d.o.t. and h.u.d. have been working to address these challenges. they have had issues in hiring

and staffing cybersecurity professionals in what's a very competitive labor market. the bill would make these challenges even more difficult, by reducing the salaries and expenses of the c.i.o. offices by 10%. we owe it to our constituents to have a safe and secure transportation system and to safeguard personally identifiable nfing. this amendment would make it harder -- information. this amendment would make it harder for these departments to do this and i urge its defeat. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time yielded back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 25 printed in art b of house report 115-295.

for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. mcclintock: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: the -- the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 25 printed in house report 115-295 offered by mr. mcclintock of california. the chair: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from california and a member opposed will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. mcclintock: thank you, mr. chairman. this amendment eliminates the $15 0 million of dis-- $150 million of discretionary spending wasted on one of the least essential programs in the entire united states government. the so-called essential air service. that's the program that subsidizes empty and near-empty planes to fly from small airports to regional hubs that are usually just a few hours away or less by car. this was supposed to be a temporary program to allow local communities and airports to readjust to airline deregulation back in 1978. last year the essential air

service cost a total of nearly $300 million between direct taxpayer subsidies and fees, to fly near-empty planes to underused airports. 150 million of that is in our control and this amendment zeros it out and puts it toward deficit reduction. we're often told that we now have a $200 per person cap on the subsidies, as if that wasn't bad enough. that's only for flights under 210 miles. it continues unlimited subsidies over that distance, and actual subsidies per passenger can be over d 1,000 per seat. year after year we're promised reform and year after year the cost goes up. by the way, essential air service flights are flown out of merced airport that serves my district. a tiny number of people actually use them. and the alternative is hardly catastrophic. they're less than an hour's drive from fresno air terminal. but i can assure you that every

person in my district who hears about this waste of their money is outraged by it. rural life has great advantages and great disadvantages. and it's not the job of taxpayers who choose to live elsewhere to level out the differences. apologists for this wasteful spending tell us it's an important economic driver for these small airports and i'm sure there's so. whenever you go -- that's so. whenever you give away money, the folks you're giving it to are always better off. but the folks you're taking it from are always worse off to exactly the same extent. indeed it's economic drivers like this that have driven europe's economy right off a cliff. four years ago one member rushed to the microphone to suggest this was essential for emergency medical evacuations. it has nothing to do with that. this program subsidizes regular scheduled commercial service that practically nobody uses. if it actually had a passenger base, we wouldn't need an effect to hand out wads of $100

bills to the few passengers who use it, would we? the same present holds true for governments. "the washington post" is not known as a bastion of fiscal conservatism, but i cannot improve upon an editorial a few years ago when it said, ideally e.a.s. should be zeroed out. and the $200 million we waste on it devoted to a truly good purpose, perhaps debt reduction, military readiness or the social safety net. if congress and the white house were capable of making such choices we probably never would have had sequestration in the first place, end quote. there are many tough calls in setting fiscal priorities, but this isn't one of them. if the house of representatives were all appropriation --, -- representatives, where all appropriations begin, where the republican majority pledged to stop wasting money, can't even agree to cut off this wasteful program, how can it be expected to be taken seriously on the

much tougher choices that lay ahead? i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. mr. diaz-balart: claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. this essential air service program ensures that small and rural communities have access to the national air transportation system. the program is vital to small businesses and farming communities and rural communities and rural entrepreneurs. so amendment would cut off air service to many rural communitieses. and would put economies -- communities. and would put economies of many of our small towns potentially at risk. i thank the gentleman for his passion but i urge a no vote and i would reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mcclintock: the gentleman is correct, it would cut off air service to communities that are usually just an hour or so drive from a major regional airport where they can obtain air service. this is the kind of cut of all, eliminating a temporary program

established 39 years ago that's become a poster child for wasteful federal spending. our national debt's nearly doubled in eight years. american taxpayers who pay $269 billion this year just in interest costs on that debt. you're an average family paying average taxes, it means $2,200 of your taxes this year will accomplish nothing more than renting the money we've already spent. continuing to pay for this obsolete and wasteful program with money we don't have is simply obscene. it makes a mock riff any claim that we've cut spend -- mockery of any claim that we've cut spending to the bone. i urge adoption of the amendment and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california yields back. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: i yield back, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.

in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. mcclintock: mr. chairman, on that i'd ask for a roll call vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california will e postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number -- printed in art b of house report 115-295. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. kildee: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 26 printed in part b of house report 115-295 offered by mr. kildee of michigan. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 500, the gentleman from michigan, mr. kildee, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. kildee: thank you, mr. chairman. my amendment's quite simple. it would add $100 million to

the home investment partnership program, which is a really important initiative that supports home ownership, supports housing opportunities for people living in america's communities. it literally put a roof over the head of many americanses. 35% -- americans. 35% of low income renters right now are unable to find affordable housing. this is not a time to cut this eseng program. since 2004, congress has cut this program in half. cutting over $1 billion. we really need to focus more of our attention on how we create more stable communities, more stable neighborhoods and housing is essential to that and the home program is essential to housing. too many communities, too many cities and towns are struggling to held themselves together. this is one really tangible way that the federal government can help those communities. i've spoken to the chairman of the subcommittee, mr. diaz-balart about a lart, and i know he -- mr. diaz-balart, and

i know he support the home program and he's agreed to work with me to ensure that the final bill has robust funding for the home program. so i greatly appreciate the opportunity to work with him and would yield to mr. diaz-balart for any remarks that he might have. the chair: the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: i want to thank the gentleman for bringing up this. this is something that i have to give a lot of credit to the ranking member as well. this is a program that we are very familiar with. i look forward to working with the chairmanwork the member from michigan, on a program that i think a lot of us support. clearly i support. the ranking member supports. i want to thank him for bringing it up. mr. kildee: mr. chairman, i'll close. i know the chairman and the ranking member support this. i urge all my colleagues when this eventually comes back before us to support robust funding. with that, i will withdraw my amendment and count on the fact that we will work together to make sure that this program is fully supported. with that, i yield back. the chair: without objection. he amendment is withdrawn.

it is now in order to consider amendment number 28 printed in art b of house report 115-295. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. woodall: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. tchoip the clerk will designate the -- choim the clerk will designate the amendment -- the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. woodall of georgia. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 500, the gentleman from georgia, mr. woodall, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: thank you, mr. chairman. this is an amendment to provide maximum flexibility to states that are being asked under this bill to rescind $800 million in unobligated budget authority. as you know, mr. chairman, we put money in a lot of different pots and send it out to a lot of different places to do a whole lot of good for a whole lot of people. but when you have a bill that's going to ask the states to pull back some of that money, historically we have limited

the ability of states to make those decisions. with all due respect, anyone's hometown team, i will tell you no one knows more about how to take care of the safety of the citizens of georgia than do the citizens of georgia and our local elected officials. what this amendment would do is allow our local departments of transportation, our state department of transportation, maximum flexibility in meeting this federal mandate, to rescind those $800 million worth of unobligated funds. i ask my colleagues for support to provide that flexibility. and i reserve. the chair: any member seek time in opposition? mr. price: i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. price: i commend the gentleman for offering the amendment and i'm compeled to oppose it because our

authorizers have expressed reservations on our side about this amendment. and no one disagrees with giving the states flexibility. but we and the authorizers in particular have some serious questions about how the gentleman's amendment would go about providing that flexibility. -- in the des have bill do reflect the agreement in the fast act and therefore, we need floor legislating on this. we need to be clear about how this would work and whether it does violate the premises of the fast act and other questions based by our colleagues. i suggest we return to this and deal with it later once some of these questions might be cleared up. with that, i yield. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. woodall: i yield myself such

time as i may consume. i will make myself available for anyone who asks questions on that committee and i yield to my cardinal. the chair: the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: this is something he has done a lot of work on and he knows this issue very, very well. this is a well written amendment. and i welcome the amendment. and i support it. mr. woodall: i thank my friend again. i want to provide maximum flexibility on what is a very difficult job and that is claiming those obligated funds from each one of our districts back home. the question is will we trust our local first to make the best decisions or will we structure how those decisions are made here. i trust our local engineers, local builders, folks in charge of our public safety. with that, i encourage my colleagues to support this amendment and i yield back.

the chair: the gentleman yields ack the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the amendment s agreed to. the chair understands that amendment number 29 will not be offered. it is now in order to consider amendment number 32 printed in 115-295.ort part b the clerk: amendment number 32 printed in part bmp of house report 115-295 offered by mr. budd of north carolina.

the chair: pursuant to house resolution 500, the gentleman from north carolina, mr. budd, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. mr. budd: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise today to oppose a $900 million earmark to the tunnel between newark and new york city. this earmark is a downpayment. the project is supposed to be $29.5 billion. my amendment would do two things. it would cut spending by $474 million and would take $400 million and would add it to national transit funding. mr. chairman, new jersey canceled a project due -- doing the same thing in 2010 and that's when it cost $8.7 billion. now the federal version of this costs $13 billion. this is what the governor's office said to defend the

decision in reference to comments made by senator lautenberg. perhaps he can explain to toll payers fund 70% of a project while billions in federal funding pour out of washington for high-speed rail lines which will pay 20% of the project costs. here we are, billions are about to pour out of washington. if this earmark stands, we send a clear message to the states and that is short change your infrastructure and washington will bail you out. i urge support. and i reserve. the chair: any member seek time in recognition? the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: i rise in strong opposition to the amendment. let's first get one thing straight. this is a cut in infrastructure investment. authorized by the fast act, which was passed by this body by a vote of 359-65.

it is an authorized program in the fast act. this is not any stretch of the imagination an earmark. this amendment proposes a cut from the federal rail administration of good repair program. this program was created to address the state of good repair backlog in our inner city rail -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized in opposition for five minutes. mr. diaz-balart: that backlog estimated to be at a whopping $38 billion. now, this program replaces or frankly recollects any probably owned or amtrak-owned infrastructure and will ensure rail service is safe and ready to support economic and population growth. it is not by any stretch of the imagination an earmark but an

authorized program. let me address the funding shift. and i respect the gentleman and i oppose what the gentleman is proposing. we have allocated significant resources to the program, which i support consistent again with the president's request. and chosen to allocate funding to other projects consistent with the will of congress with this house with the fast act that benefit commuter and passenger rail. and makes significant returns on investment for our country particularly for our economy. so we are funding transit infrastructure to get our economy moving literally. and as a nation we have to address our critical infrastructure assets. this was authorized by congress in the fast act. and this amendment would undermine that effort. i would urge a no vote to the gentleman's amendment. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from florida reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina

seek recognition? >> i would allocate to the chairman as much times as he may consume. mr. price: i join him in opposing this amendment. million. educe $474 the main criticism of this bill is that we ought to be doing more investment in infrastructure, not less. this amendment would make the bill shortcomings even worse. the federal-state partnership can be used for grants along the northeast corridor, the chicago to detroit corridor and publicly owned rail infrastructure throughout the nation. these include many of the passenger rail bottle next and this would take away dedicated funds from passenger rail service. we should be finding ways to invest in infrastructure, worthy new projects, expand mobility and opportunity. this amendment moves in the

opposite direction. i urge its defeat and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from florida reserves? mr. diaz-balart: reserve. mr. budd: mr. chairman, a couple of things, i look at this and this still allows funding of existing projects and reduces the deficit toorks. it is obvious from the beginning of the time line that the new hod son river tunnel project was a way of getting around governor chris at the's project. and the new tunnel would be under the aegis of amtrak. this is about funding for a single project in new jersey that the state wouldn't fund in 2010. amtrak funding for the northeast corridor, it remains untouched. we are talking about amtrak

funding for a single project. as the chairman has said, a significant portion of the $328 million in the northeast corridor account will go to amtrak. this is 300 times the size of an average earmark when we had earmarks. we have an earmark ban in place and there is debate over this but it's not fair that champlee gets huge earmarks and the rest of us are banned. there should be one rule that applies to everyone. 1/6 of the nonaviation d.o.t. bill is going to gateway. and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from north carolina reserves. mr. diaz-balart: how much time do i have left, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman has two minutes remaining in opposition. mr. diaz-balart: i recognize mr.

lance for two minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lance: i thank the chairman for permitting us to speak. this is not an earmark. the northeast corridor is an economic powerhouse and is home to 20% of the nation's gross domestic product, more than 51 million people and four of the 10 largest metro areas in the united states. it's a money maker for amtrak and the federal government, serving more than 750,000 people every day. in inner city trains. passengers and freight is critical to the economy of the entire country. if one of these tunnels were to fail, the negative implications would ripple to connecticut, delaware, georgia, maine, maryland, massachusetts, new hampshire, new jersey, new york, ohio, pennsylvania, rhode

island, south carolina, north carolina, vermont, virginia and west virginia. according to the northeast corridor commission underinvestment already cost the economy $500 million annually. and the gateway project is a mall priority. i urge a no vote on this amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: as the designee of the chairman, pursuant to section 3 of resolution 500, i move to offer a pro forma amendment for the purpose of debate. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. diaz-balart: mr. nadler is here and he is recognized for one minute. the chair: the gentleman from new york. the gentleman from florida may

not yield a block of time. mr. diaz-balart: excuse me, mr. chairman. mr. diaz-balart: i yield to the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i rise in opposition to this amendment which would eliminate funding for the gateway project. it includes work on the portal bridge is widely recognized as one of the highest priority projects in the country. we should have expanded in the northeast corridor long ago, but the damage to the existing tunnels has brought a new urgency. if the tunnels were to go down as they will in the next 10 years, wute the project there will be no rail between new york and new jersey it would disrupt the corridor. 20% of the economy would be disrupted. this amendment cuts funding for the project and eliminates $500 million sending it to the

account. it does not restore funding and reduces national infrastructure funding. i urge my colleagues to reject this extremely shortsided and punitive measure. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: i recognize the gentleman from new york, mr. king. mr. king: thank the chairman for yielding, the gateway program will have greater resiliency against future potential storms and disasters while enabling repair capacity and reliability investments for the operations for the next 30 to 50 years. without repairs service reliability is likely to deteriorate due to the ongoing damage from salt water incursion from superstorm sandy. eventually forcing a shutdown of

one of two tunnels. mr. lance pointed out, the northeast corridor is not just the northeast and serves the entire nation and serves an economic purpose and essential we stand this. this is essential infrastructure spending. i support mr. frelinghuysen and the ranking member and this is a bipartisan effort, something that is absolutely essential. and i urge defeat of the amendment. . mr. diaz-balart: i yield to the gentleman from indiana. the chair: the gentleman from indiana is recognized. >> i appreciate the chairman yielding and i rise in strong opposition to the gentleman's amendment and would associate myself with the chairman's remarks. the gentleman indicated that there is deficit reduction involved in his amendment. i would emphasize to all of my colleagues in this